We got it all wrong that's why we're hurting

[looking4 green grass]

You read "How Not to Date a Jerk" didn't you? You pretty much just quoted the whole book.

 

That's what I was thinking. It's the RAM in action.

 

I do really like the book though. It has a lot of valid points.

[BookerT]

You read "How Not to Date a Jerk" didn't you? You pretty much just quoted the whole book.

 

Yup;)

 

It makes sense though. Basically what our grandparents would teach us, but in structured form.

[penny.lane]

i'm dating a jerk.

 

arranged marriages are looking pretty good right now!

[TheLoneSock]

Sex last? Boo to that

[Soulmind]

So basically what you are saying, is that ignorance is bliss.

 

 

Maybe. This reminds me of a book I've read (The paradox of choice), it states that that that unlimited choice produces genuine suffering. The more choices we have to make, the less certainty we seem to have...

 

(this could apply in the dating world in our times ~as opposed to arranged marriages)

[stepka]

I hope you do realize that the evolutionary model supports polygamy, hence why polygamy was also the most frequent form of human mating practice.

 

The strong male has a lot of females and the weak males have zero. Very similar to other animals, just watch any nature program.

 

The problem is we live in a society that supports monogamy, and thus simulated polygamy would mean cheating, or swinging, which is unacceptable to most people.

Mmmm, I disagree that this is the evolutionary model. This is a model that is common to societies where there are fewer men than women, due to dangerous occupations or frequent warfare. When you have an excess of women, they either don't marry and thus don't have children, or they marry someone else's husband. (Yeah sure she could get pregnant out of wedlock, but isn't that kind of like sharing someone's husband?) It doesn't sound like much fun for the women, but if your only choices were to live w/o a man and children or to share your husband, most women would choose the latter.

 

This is why the Mormons polygamy was so unpopular in the American west in the early days--b/c there were fewer women in the west, and the imbalance couldn't be supported--can you imagine some goldminer who'd been lusting for a woman for months but there aren't any decent ones to be had, and then comes Brigham Young with how many wives! But we live in a society where the numbers for both sexes are evenly distributed, so polygamy ain't gonna fly here. Yeah, if you're into economics, think of it as supply and demand.

[stepka]

I don't want to get too philosophical, but unhappiness is part of the human condition. People who are truly happy are the exception, not the norm. That's how it always was. A peasant living a thousand years ago may not have been terribly stressed out about relationships but he had lots of other things to make him unhappy. Nowadays, we don't have many of the problems our medieval ancestors had, but we have other sources of stress, including dating.

 

The bottom line is that happiness is an internal state of mind. If you are a happy person, you will find positive things in the surrounding environment and use them to reinforce your happiness. Conversely, if you are an unhappy person, you will always find something to be unhappy about (i.e. look at all the rich and famous types who commit suicide or abuse drugs and alcohol).

 

Happy and unhappy people approach dating and relationships in totally different ways. Happy people generally don't get hurt much by rejection, failed relationships, betrayal, etc. They just shrug it off and move on. On the other hand, unhappy people dwell on the smallest of things and succumb to their insecurities.

 

All of this is a long way of saying that the current dating scene has little to do with why so many people are unhappy and hurt. They would have been unhappy in their lives in any event.

Those are all excellent points.

[BookerT]

Mmmm, I disagree that this is the evolutionary model. This is a model that is common to societies where there are fewer men than women, due to dangerous occupations or frequent warfare. When you have an excess of women, they either don't marry and thus don't have children, or they marry someone else's husband. (Yeah sure she could get pregnant out of wedlock, but isn't that kind of like sharing someone's husband?) It doesn't sound like much fun for the women, but if your only choices were to live w/o a man and children or to share your husband, most women would choose the latter.

 

This is why the Mormons polygamy was so unpopular in the American west in the early days--b/c there were fewer women in the west, and the imbalance couldn't be supported--can you imagine some goldminer who'd been lusting for a woman for months but there aren't any decent ones to be had, and then comes Brigham Young with how many wives! But we live in a society where the numbers for both sexes are evenly distributed, so polygamy ain't gonna fly here. Yeah, if you're into economics, think of it as supply and demand.

 

Well, the vast majority of human cultures have also been polygamous. Mongamy has only been expanded globally because it's a Judeo Christian thing and when Europeans attacked and colonized a lot of countries they Christianity spread. Especially the Spanish that forced the Aztecs and Myans to convert or die (both were polygamous cultures)

 

Islamic countries still practice polygamy. Even China practiced it till last century.

 

The reason why monogamy even exists is because of the reasons you proposed. The Jews thought it would decrease social imbalances if they pushed for 1 man 1 wife. Otherwise there would be disgruntled men.

 

Monogamy actually benefits weaker males. But for much of human civilization stronger males could control weaker males through dictatorships and hierachies where leaders had more wives.

[BookerT]

Maybe. This reminds me of a book I've read (The paradox of choice), it states that that that unlimited choice produces genuine suffering. The more choices we have to make, the less certainty we seem to have...

 

(this could apply in the dating world in our times ~as opposed to arranged marriages)

 

Well, that's because the book basically reversed Buddhist principles. The more desires we have the more unhappy we will be, that's why Buddhist try to remove desires through meditation.

 

I still prefer the balance.

[Johnny M]

Actually, laid back is no1 for getting happiness. Stress creates lack of happiness, often even if income levels go up. Actually when I looked it up a lot of European countries have high scores along with countries with a tropical climate. Not surprised since a lot of Europeans have a more laid back and relaxed lifestyle than Americans, Japanese or more competitive cultures.

 

http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/20-most-happy-countries-in-the-world/

That study is complete BS. Some of the supposedly top 20 happiest countries also happen to have some of the highest suicide rates (i.e. Sweden and Norway). And if Canada is #10, how come America is not on the list? Canadians and Americans lead very similar lifestyles, so it doesn't make any sense.

 

As for the importance being laid back, just because someone appears laid back doesn't mean he's not stressed out. It's more of a cultural thing -i.e. Italians and Latinos often come across as more easy going and laid back but that doesn't mean they have less stress than anybody else. Likewise, North Europeans often come across as somewhat reserved for reasons that have nothing to do with stress.

[BookerT]

That study is complete BS. Some of the supposedly top 20 happiest countries also happen to have some of the highest suicide rates (i.e. Sweden and Norway). And if Canada is #10, how come America is not on the list? Canadians and Americans lead very similar lifestyles, so it doesn't make any sense.

 

As for the importance being laid back, just because someone appears laid back doesn't mean he's not stressed out. It's more of a cultural thing -i.e. Italians and Latinos often come across as more easy going and laid back but that doesn't mean they have less stress than anybody else. Likewise, North Europeans often come across as somewhat reserved for reasons that have nothing to do with stress.

 

Too bad you just pulled data out of your ass or made it up on the spot.

 

Sweden and Norway do not have high suicide rates. Where you get that info from? At least do some research first.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

 

Mind you on that list some of the countries at the bottom are at the bottom because they clearly don't even have any data for suicide or inaccurate data. In Western countries Swedern and Norway clearly have very low suicide rates. Also suicide rates is not an indication of overall population happiness.

 

As for Canada, Canadians have a much better standard of living. A lot of Americans moved to Canada in the last few years to get away from the stress and the US government.

Edited October 16, 2009 by BookerT

[Johnny M]

Too bad you just pulled data out of your ass or made it up on the spot.

 

Sweden and Norway do not have high suicide rates. Where you get that info from? At least do some research first.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate

 

Mind you on that list some of the countries at the bottom are at the bottom because they clearly don't even have any data for suicide or inaccurate data. In Western countries Swedern and Norway clearly have very low suicide rates. Also suicide rates is not an indication of overall population happiness.

 

As for Canada, Canadians have a much better standard of living. A lot of Americans moved to Canada in the last few years to get away from the stress and the US government.

I did not pull data "out of my ass". I remembered reading an article about high suicide rates in Scandinavian countries. It may have been from a few years ago, I'm not sure. In any event, even the the wikipedia page that you cited shows that supposedly "happy" Sweden, Norway, Switzerland and Canada all have higher suicide rates than "stressful" USA.

 

As for Canadians having a higher standard of living than Americans - absolute bunk. Have you ever been to Canada? I am Canadian and have spent a significant amount of time living in the U.S. I can tell you from first hand experience that Americans and Canadians lead very similar lifestyles. Sure, there are some differences - i.e. America has higher crime and Canada has lower per capita GDP - but overall, the two countries are so similar that a foreign tourist would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between the two countries.

 

And FYI, there's a significant brain drain of educated professionals (i.e. IT professionals, doctors) moving from Canada to the U.S. in search of better opportunities/higher income. Most Americans who moved up here in recent decades were Vietnam era draft dodgers. I don't know where you got the idea that a lot of Americans moved to Canada in recent years to "get away from the U.S. government"...I remember seeing something on TV about a few left-wing American celebrities pledging to move to Canada if George Bush was reelected in 2004, but thankfully they decided to stay home.

Edited October 16, 2009 by Johnny M

[BookerT]

I did not pull data "out of my ass". I remembered reading an article about high suicide rates in Scandinavian countries. It may have been from a few years ago, I'm not sure. In any event, even the the wikipedia page that you cited shows that supposedly "happy" Sweden, Norway, Switzerland and Canada all have higher suicide rates than "stressful" USA.

 

As for Canadians having a higher standard of living than Americans - absolute bunk. Have you ever been to Canada? I am Canadian and have spent a significant amount of time living in the U.S. I can tell you from first hand experience that Americans and Canadians lead very similar lifestyles. Sure, there are some differences - i.e. America has higher crime and Canada has lower per capita GDP - but overall, the two countries are so similar that a foreign tourist would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between the two countries.

 

And FYI, there's a significant brain drain of educated professionals (i.e. IT professionals, doctors) moving from Canada to the U.S. in search of better opportunities/higher income. Most Americans who moved up here in recent decades were Vietnam era draft dodgers. I don't know where you got the idea that a lot of Americans moved to Canada in recent years to "get away from the U.S. government"...I remember seeing something on TV about a few left-wing American celebrities pledging to move to Canada if George Bush was reelected in 2004, but thankfully they decided to stay home.

 

You're thinking of Finland.

 

Yes, a lot of Americans that moved to Canada were hardcore liberals.

 

Of course the Canadian and US lifestyles are similar. However I always felt my Canadian friends were a lot of chilled out for some reason.

 

Anyway, that wasn't the point of this thread. I wasn't planning on discussing suicide. The thread was discussing how the dating scene and how people pick mates just doesn't work .

[EricaH329]

Sex last? Boo to that

 

Ok seriously, if you aren't my ex, then we need to talk

[TheLoneSock]

Ok seriously, if you aren't my ex, then we need to talk

 

Haha, I'm down.

 

[email protected]

Edited October 16, 2009 by TheLoneSock

[EricaH329]

Ahhh sorry for hi-jacking this thread. Continue on...