Re: old power, Short Vectors Versus Long Vectors

On 5/2/2024 3:14 PM, MitchAlsup1 wrote:

BGB wrote:
 

On 4/30/2024 8:22 PM, John Levine wrote:

>

 

Sometimes seems odd in a way that people can manage to find wives, with as many difficulties and prerequisites there seem to be in being seen as

 

"worthy of attention", etc...

 

Then again, it seems that there is a split:
   Many people seem to marry off between their early to mid 20s;
     Like, somehow, they find someone where there is mutual interest.

 More than ½ of whom end up divorced within 7 years.
 

This does seem to be a pattern.
Divorcees seem to be fairly common in the 30+ age range, but don't seem to be a good bet... Many seemingly have few interesting or redeeming qualities, and often seem to be the bitter / judgy ones (the ones who are not bitter and judgemental, tend to be the ones who don't get divorces).

   Others, not so quickly, if at all.

 You mean the lucky ones ?!?
 

Possibly.
One can debate the merits of waiting until later, vs remaining single indefinitely.
Arguably, remaining single is probably the easier option, but if one wants a family, well, this is the only real option (well, at least excluding a future where people can clone themselves).

   On the female side, it seems there are several subgroups:
     Those who are waiting for "the perfect romance".
     Those who want someone with at least a "6 figure income", etc.
     Then there are the asexual females.
     And also lesbians.

 If you don't know what you are looking for, how do you know when you find it ?!!!

In my case, I more know what ones I am *not* looking for.
   Sadly, they tend to be the most common ones...
So, the romance-seeking ones apparently fail to find any guys that live up to their fantasy expectations, or if they do find someone, apparently it is often someone who feeds them a line of crap to get them into bed, and then leaves again. This type seemingly often falling into a pattern of occasional short-lived flings (though many also seem to remain alone).
This type most often has interests in things like "classic literature", like if (unprovoked) they start talking about "Jane Austen" or "Pride and Prejudice" or other things of this sort, one has likely encountered one of them...
The next group is a bit different, their interactions usually start with information gathering, usually the kind who will ask indirect questions aimed mostly at trying to figure out someones job title, relative income, etc, often phrased in a way similar to stereotypical interview questions.
Usual strategy with them is to be semi-reluctant, and then imply like I am totally broke and don't have crap (which, granted, isn't too far from the truth), and if they immediately lose interest, one has their answer.
A lot of the "aroace" group are more often the ones where their interaction style is to go into a monologue about whatever they are interested in (often math or physics, sometimes astronomy or mineralogy or other similar topics; though entomology is a bit pushing it, ...).
Seemingly, programming is a less common interest for females (though, a lot of the math and physics nerd types also have at least some programming abilities).
Though, sometimes they may not go into monologues, but will often have other indicators (in the form of vocal indicators and "stims"), and seems to have a non-zero overlap with autism (though, it is not a direct equivalence, as many in the "romance seeking" category may also identify as autistic).
Though, between the groups, there does seem to be a division in vocal patterns:
The romance-seeking subtype more often speaks in a shrill or excessively-inflected way, whereas the latter will more often tend towards reduced or flat inflections, with inflections (when used) tending to be more abrupt.
Though, I have seen exceptions, and also intermediate patterns between these groups.
Though, often, they are not so much interested in relationships so much as wanting someone who will listen to whatever their topic of interest is. Many are openly disinterested in things like physical intimacy, and if interested in a relationship at all, more in the context of someone providing things like transportation and a place to live and similar (granted, these seem like reasonable goals).
Granted, I can sort of relate, more or less falling into the same general category (seems like a relationship might be more stable if neither party is particularly interested in physical intimacy, vs a scenario where this is unbalanced between the parties; mostly depending on things like whether the relationship is mutually beneficial, etc).
I guess, contrast being, however it works for "normal" people.
They are, however, less common; and tend to often have similar functional difficulties to myself. Say, if neither person in a relationship can drive a car effectively, this is not ideal (presumably, at least one of them needs to be able to drive, etc).
But, say, finding a single nerdy female who can also drive a car, is seemingly its own case of hunting for a unicorn (seemingly the ones who can drive are also much less likely to be single).
Granted, it is possible that, if/when self-driving cars become commonly available, it could change this social dynamic somewhat (though, not sure whether it would make relationships more or less common).
...
Can note though that dating sites are borderline useless here...
General site design seems to prioritize appearance and categorization based on physical features and similar (IOW: mostly the stuff I don't care all that much about).
Most profiles tending to have very little beyond maybe 1 or 2 sentences of self-description (if anything). So, no real information as to "why" it might be worth my time to bother trying to write anything to them, and almost invariably, it is not.
...