From what i see in dating sites, girls tend to limit their interest in a guy of their age or older, where as guys tend to be interested in girls younger than their age.

Is it ok for girls to date a younger guy and possibly marry? what's your position on this issue? how about guys? is it ok to date older woman and possibly marry?

IMO a man wouldn't have drastically different interests or be in a completely different life style than a 38 yr old woman simply because he is 5-7 years younger than she is. I think this would be more likely to be true if the age difference was larger.

The parenting example can be a bit misleading. I have a young child at home. Many older parents do. Many younger parents have children who have already left home or are soon to be. But that points to the compatibility issue I mentioned before. Much has to do with where someone is in their life, rather than the age they are. For me, the issue is to find someone who is not wary of starting over with a small child. They, likely, have finished raising children and have embarked on the empty nest part of their lives.

In the last three years I have dated as old as 74, and as young as 21.

The 74 year old was a retired doctor - his brain was to die for!!! I have never had more intelligent, educational conversations in my life. He collected live chickens from around the world to study their evolutionary pattern. We only dated once - I couldn't give him a good night kiss. We did remain friends until he passed away about a year and a half ago.

The 21 year old was traveling through the U.S. from Germany. I have a strong interest in other cultures. His brain, yup, was amazing as well. His knowledge of european history was incredible! Yup, we only dated once. We still keep in touch via email. He has since moved back to Germany and will soon be working and traveling in Switzerland. He even asked me to marry him - I said no by the way.

74...wow!


The oldest I have dated was a 56yo. He is a chaired professor at a college in upstate NY and also teaches part time at Yale. He is BRILLIANT, and that REALLY rocks my socks. He is sweet, spoils me when we get together, but I don't have a lot in common with him. Our time together is pleasant and enjoyable but I wouldn't call it all that fun. We rarely laugh together, and he is not goofy at all, like I tend to be. I really value his friendship, but can't see it ever going anywhere.

74...wow!


He is BRILLIANT, and that REALLY rocks my socks.

I really value his friendship, but can't see it ever going anywhere.

Can socks actually be rocked if a relationship has zero potential?

I just askin'.

I love Baltimore! I love that part of the country.

All those brilliant minds and all that history all rolled into a beautiful part of the US.

I do agree that generally, people are more compatible the closer in age they are because of the shared life experiences. I can remember John F. Kennedy's assassination and not just from archival footage. I saw the Patridge Family when it was first run and not just in reruns. I have found that my humor doesn't always translate well in a much older crowd...or for that matter in a much younger one.

But for me, I'm looking beyond that. I'm more looking for someone who can share and understand my life experience now.


edit to add:


YES!

You seem to think there is some virtue in refusing all sustenance until the pheasant under glass arrives.

As long as one is not deceiving the other, how can you cry foul?

Socks can be rocked without even having another human being present! I love information - some subjects, I can't get enough. So, when I went on my Manhatten Project kick - my socks were rocked by the books I read! Having your socks rocked has absolutely nothing to do with a relationship, dating, etc.

You seem to think there is some virtue in refusing all sustenance until the pheasant under glass arrives.

As long as one is not deceiving the other, how can you cry foul?

It might if you are receiving this sock-rocking directly from another person.

People can masturbate (I apologize for the crude analogy), yet they will still use others for sex.

It seems (to me) very similar in concept.

I might argue that receiving that sustenance under false pretences (Him assuming a relationship) is [in fact] deceitful.

The assumption is you believing that either of those receiving sustenance want a relationship. They both may just be there for the meal.

If one is indeed leading the other on, then yes, that is deceitful.

I can have my socks rocked by one who can put a sentence together correctly. I can have my socks rocked by one who uses the word pedantic. Having your socks rocked is not only about the physical. You are evidently equating it only with orgasm. I can feel figurative waves or hit, well, make that a literal one, too, just by interacting with someone who is intelligent and can make me think.

Not being deceitful includes doing one's best to discover what the other person wants. If they want something more than what one is willing to offer, the thing to do is call it off. I said As long as one is not deceiving the other. And a man who withholds his 'hopes' of having a relationship from someone who has been clear in not desiring one - or one with him- is being . . .


wait for it . . .



deceptive.

You are evidently equating it only with orgasm.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Hardly.

The premise was.........if you are accepting something of worth from someone else and they are only giving you this "sock-rocking" because they assume you will have a future relationship with them, is it acceptable to do so otherwise.

He rocks your socks because he wants to "be" with you.

You let him because you like it, but also let him think you will be with him even though you won't.

Deceit.

Isn't this argument supportive of players as well?

"She didn't try to discover my wants so I used her and it's her fault......not mine.........she didn't try to discover my wants."

Now, I know you're not being serious. You assume that I will use someone only to get my socks rocked. You assume that he only talks with me in order to get his socks rocked. So by that standard, are we both being deceitful? Well, then no harm, no foul.

So men don't talk unless there's a reward, and women hold out the carrot of relationship so they can get rocked.

Do you find it so unusual that sometimes people talk only for the sake of conversation? Or that they feel the connection of like-minds? Or that men and woman can be friends without needing it to be 'going somewhere'?

You may be fun in a bar debate...loser buys rounds.

Yes, you assume deception. You take it as a given. You also seem to think selfishness and blaming are the norm, and expect that it will figure into any relationship - whether committed or not - sooner or later; that if it does not show up immediately, it will certainly come out later.

I and others here are talking about honest interactions with others.

You can't see that.

Sorry you've never known a forthright person.

Not my fault, though.

lol.......hardly.

Your accusation is that people never use other people.

My premise is that they can.

To support the using of another person under false pretenses is bad.

That's obvious.....that's what this thread is about.

Sorry you won't admit that.