maybe this time I'll win

Your chance to pontificate on the subject of your choice. (Please keep it PG-rated.)
NerdGirl
President of the Lutheran Sisterhood Gun Club
Posts: 1810
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 6:41 am
Location: Calgary

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by NerdGirl »

And when I say you got married "young" at 26, I don't mean it in the sense that 26 is a really young age to get married at (it's actually not, statistically), I mean it in the sense that on the spectrum of young-middle aged-older-elderly, 26 is in the young category. :)
User avatar
TheBlackSheep
The Best
Posts: 819
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Salt Lake County

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by TheBlackSheep »

And, I imagine, knowing many men who want to be dads, they know that while they may be fertile that long, much of the "dad" stuff gets harder and harder to do with age. My super-fit grandpa played football with the grandkids into his 70s, but not everybody's up for that, for sure.
Cindy
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:09 pm

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by Cindy »

I don't know if many men are aware of this, but there also seems to be another biological reason for men to have children earlier in life. As reported in this New York Times article, research has shown a link between paternal age and an increased risk of autism and schizophrenia. As men age, their sperm is more likely to carry random mutations, many of which may be harmless, but some of which can cause developmental problems in the child. This is an interesting statistic:
The research team found that the average child born to a 20-year-old father had 25 random mutations that could be traced to paternal genetic material. The number increased steadily by two mutations a year, reaching 65 mutations for offspring of 40-year-old men.

The average number of mutations coming from the mother’s side was 15, no matter her age, the study found.
Vorpal
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 11:58 am

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by Vorpal »

NerdGirl wrote:I'm just using "biological clock" as a figure of speech. But since most guys tend to be interested in women who are close to their age, I think that for many of them, when they start to reach the age at which women's fertility starts to decline, they start to see their own chances to have kids slipping away. If a guy is single and getting close to 50, for example, he's still very fertile, but the women he's dating or interested in may not be.
Makes sense.
Cindy wrote:I don't know if many men are aware of this, but there also seems to be another biological reason for men to have children earlier in life. As reported in this New York Times article, research has shown a link between paternal age and an increased risk of autism and schizophrenia. As men age, their sperm is more likely to carry random mutations, many of which may be harmless, but some of which can cause developmental problems in the child. This is an interesting statistic:
The research team found that the average child born to a 20-year-old father had 25 random mutations that could be traced to paternal genetic material. The number increased steadily by two mutations a year, reaching 65 mutations for offspring of 40-year-old men.

The average number of mutations coming from the mother’s side was 15, no matter her age, the study found.
I, for one, was not aware of this.
User avatar
Whistler
Posts: 2221
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:17 pm
Contact:

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by Whistler »

my husband wants children and loves babies. I think he's better with babies than I am.
User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by vorpal blade »

Portia wrote:
S.A.M. wrote:Ha! Gets even better. That's when you will meet someone. My wife was so mad when she met me because after a couple of dates she was pretty sure we would get married and it wasn't in her plan at the time, she really wasn't interested in getting married at all. She sometimes jokes (really, she's just kidding, I think) that I messed up everything.
I have someone. Meeting guys is not the issue...
Why do some women have no problems meeting guys or having one boyfriend after another, while others (including some women readers of this board) have never had a boyfriend? What makes the difference?
User avatar
Whistler
Posts: 2221
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:17 pm
Contact:

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by Whistler »

um... romantic aggression?
User avatar
SmurfBlueSnuggie
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2013 12:47 am

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by SmurfBlueSnuggie »

vorpal blade wrote:Why do some women have no problems meeting guys or having one boyfriend after another, while others (including some women readers of this board) have never had a boyfriend? What makes the difference?
And sometimes you can't tell why. No reason, just no success.

Then, there are some great women who have just never managed to have something "click" enough for a relationship. They go on plenty of dates and are really involved socially, but they have a hard time finding someone who suites their personality. Not because of personality problems always. More like ... priorities. For example: while I care about certain aspects of a relationship, I'm often willing to let go of one or two or five important points at the beginning of a relationship, with the plan of developing them later. Things like common interests can be cultivated over time. Other girls aren't as willing to risk not being able to develop those elements. Whenever I go through a break-up, I look at that theory and think it is wise. But I'm learning a balance between the two methods. I hope that I am learning what points should be a pre-relationship deal breaker and which are able to be developed once we start dating.
It doesn't matter what happened to get you to today, beyond shaping your understanding. What really matters is where you go from here.
User avatar
vorpal blade
Posts: 1750
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 5:08 pm
Location: New Jersey

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by vorpal blade »

I've heard smart girls say that they don't get dates because boys are intimidated by them. I've heard tall girls say that it is because boys are intimidated by their height. I've heard successful women say it is because boys assume that she is only interested in a career. I've heard women who are less than the ideal in physical beauty according to the standards of the world say that men are shallow and only looking for a trophy wife.

I suppose there is some truth in all of this. It must be hard to never get asked out on dates, and they must wonder about women who complain about their boyfriends.
User avatar
Giovanni Schwartz
Posts: 3396
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 9:41 pm

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by Giovanni Schwartz »

I wish I could find a tall, smart, successful girl that liked me. Preferably a year or two older than me. Doesn't matter if she's not a looker. A genuine personality is much more important to me.

Too bad all the girls in my singles' ward are 18, 19, or living with their parents at the age of older-than-that. No one in the happy medium, really.
C is for
um Administrator
Posts: 2058
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:43 pm

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by C is for »

My friend Lexi Khan would tell you that if you want something bad enough you will make it happen.
User avatar
wryness
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 5:35 pm

Re: maybe this time I'll win

Post by wryness »

I don't think we can always MAKE stuff happen, but I think we should keep trying--and part of trying to make something happen is trying new ways to make it happen if the "old" ways aren't working. In regards to dating, I don't mean going to questionable bars to look for dates or getting a mail-order bride/groom or anything; I just mean taking time occasionally to evaluate our efforts and perhaps seek input from trusted peers. For example, I'm sure some people would have more success in dating if they were less picky about unimportant turn-offs or better at communicating their interest in someone or whatnot.

Hm, maybe I should take my own advice. :)

EDIT: But of course, if an approach ain't broke, then we don't need to fix it. We should just keep at it even if we don't see success. President Uchtdorf said some words about living the gospel that I think are also applicable here: "We have to stay with it. We don’t acquire eternal life [and finding one's eternal companion is part of that] in a sprint—this is a race of endurance."
I think we can continually improve, but that doesn't mean that we have to throw out our "technique" for a new one every day. Maybe just do variations on a theme.
Post Reply