Anyone else enjoy being single?

BBFAN

Raelynn Pitiful Minion wrote: »

Exactly the opposite is true, in fact. Marriage is correlated with many economic, physical, and social benefits. Married people report higher levels of happiness and satisfaction, and married men live longer on average than men who are single or divorced.

Where did I say the majority??

Think you're jumping on the defensive there for your own reasons.

I said so many end up unhappy, I didn't say the majority.

Interesting though that you mention the statistics for men and not women. :D:D:D:D

Talk about bias.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

BBFAN wrote: »

Where did I say the majority??

Think you're jumping on the defensive there for your own reasons.

I said so many end up unhappy, I didn't say the majority.

Interesting though that you mention the statistics for men and not women. :D:D:D:D

Talk about bias.

I didn't say anything about "the majority."

The benefits and advantages of marriage are confirmed in many studies.

There's also no bias. There are just no observed health and longevity benefits for married women over single women, but there are for married men over single men.

BBFAN

Raelynn Pitiful Minion wrote: »

I didn't say anything about "the majority."

The benefits and advantages of marriage are confirmed in many studies.

There's also no bias. There are just no observed health and longevity benefits for married women over single women, but there are for married men over single men.

So you can't deny my assertion that so many end up unhappy then? Fair enough, what was your point. You used your statistics as a contradiction of my point which it certainly wasn't. Are we agreed there are still a lot of unhappy married people?

The fact that there are no observed health and longevity benefits for married women over single women versus married men over single men would surely suggest that one party benefits more than the other no?

Or do you not agree with the statistics all of a sudden?

This is it

It's hardly a ground breaking revelation that some married people are unhappy, I'm lost as to what point, if any, is being made or you're just stating something obvious.

I don't believe in a "soulmate" for what it's worth. I do believe you can meet someone who's perfect for you though, and that there can be multiple perfect people out there, be it the girl next door or half the world away.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

BBFAN wrote: »

So you can't deny my assertion that so many end up unhappy then? Fair enough, what was your point. You used your statistics as a contradiction of my point which it certainly wasn't. Are we agreed there are still a lot of unhappy married people?

Another poster stated that "Most adults want to settle down eventually" and you responded: "And that's exactly why so many people end up unhappy."

In short, you suggested a correlation between marriage and unhappiness.

Most studies, however, find that married people on average report higher levels of happiness and satisfaction, showing that the correlation runs opposite to what you suggested.

Naturally, that does not mean that all married people are happy or that all single people are unhappy.

BBFAN

Raelynn Pitiful Minion wrote: »

Another poster stated that "Most adults want to settle down eventually" and you responded: "And that's exactly why so many people end up unhappy."

In short, you suggested a correlation between marriage and unhappiness.

Most studies, however, find that married people on average report higher levels of happiness and satisfaction, showing that the correlation runs opposite to what you suggested.

Naturally, that does not mean that all married people are happy or that all single people are unhappy.

Settle was the crucial word I highlighted. That was my point, I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. I never said the majority and I never quoted statistics. I just said that lots of people are unhappy which is a fact we can all agree on.

You seem determined to prove otherwise for your own personal reasons I presume.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

BBFAN wrote: »

Settle was the crucial word I highlighted. That was my point, I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand. I never said the majority and I never quoted statistics. I just said that lots of people are unhappy which is a fact we can all agree on.

The dictionary definition of "settle down" is "to begin to live a quiet and steady life by getting a regular job, getting married, etc."

Settling down is generally understood to encompass marriage.

Lots of people may be unhappy, but married people have a higher chance of being happy than single or divorced people.

You seem determined to prove otherwise for your own personal reasons I presume.

I'm not determined to prove anything. I'm just stating facts.

This is it

Settling in relationship and settling down, which was the phrase used, are not the same thing.

BBFAN

Raelynn Pitiful Minion wrote: »

The dictionary definition of "settle down" is "to begin to live a quiet and steady life by getting a regular job, getting married, etc."

Settling down is generally understood to encompass marriage.

Lots of people may be unhappy, but married people have a higher chance of being happy than single or divorced people.



I'm not determined to prove anything. I'm just stating facts.

Okay.................................................................

BBFAN

settle in. — phrasal verb with settle us ​ /ˈset̬· əl/ verb. to arrange yourself and the things you own so you feel more comfortable in a new place

See, we can all find a definition of settle that's a fact.

To me, what it now means after having a lot of life experience is to put up with what's most comfortable.

But of course that's only my opinion. If statistics say married people are happier jaysus I'd better get married again. :rolleyes:

This is it

"Settle in" wasn't used, "settle down" was.

BBFAN

This is it wrote: »

"Settle in" wasn't used, "settle down" was.

I specifically mentioned settle, never put any word after it? Posters after me decided to go looking for definitions so as to justify their life choices?

To use the word 'settle' on it's own in reference to who you are in a relationship with implies that you are just, well settling. Another way of putting it is that you could do better.
Now the phrase 'settle down' when referring to a relationship means that you've decided to build a life with another person, find a steady income, a home, maybe children.

That is how I see those words anyways.

mvl

BBFAN wrote: »

It really isn't the most physically intimate thing a person can do Gimme, think about giving birth in front of someone, ****ting yourself in front of someone, dying from cancer in front of someone.

Sex seems suddenly a trivial act in comparison.

Of course it can be, when the sacral chakra is balanced and there is flow. Not thinking short lived sexual encounters would give you that though.
- I would compare trivial sex with having junk food; some are happy with junk food, but the real thing is fine dining.
Then, not getting the comparison with giving birth in front of someone, for sure the doctors/nurses are there by default - what is intimate about that ? doesn't matter who's there imo, the only intimate connection is between mother and child.

PS: my comment is based on my experience.

Gimme A Pound

Settling *for* someone is totally different to settling down with someone. Nobody suggested settling for someone is something to resort to (although a lot of people do it, but Ginandtonicsky's posts indicate there is no way she would be so inclined).

Grayson wrote: »

Why not?

Sex is fun. Sex with loads of people is fun. Sex in a committed relationship is fun. It's just sex

That doesn't say anything Grayson - it's pretty inane to be frank. "It's just sex" - if sex was something to be so blase about, there wouldn't be laws around it when it comes to consent, age and incest

Getting naked with someone and actually being as one physically - of course this is a major thing to do with a stranger. People have become so conditioned for fear of looking prudish or whatever nonsense, that they block out the reality that this is no trivial thing.

Doing something far less intimate with a stranger would be seen as weird.

kowloon

Raelynn Pitiful Minion wrote: »

Researchers also find that people who frequently engage in casual sex have lower levels of self-esteem and higher levels of depression and anxiety.

There are anti-depressants for that, and for everything else there's Mastercard.

I wonder how these people stack up vs. long term singletons who don't do sex on people and relationships that are the same. I'm guessing the happy relationships skew the baseline.

dd973 wrote: »

Statistically there probably is 'someone for everyone' yet this overlooks the real chance that this person is in Chile or New Zealand or even just 150 miles away and you're never going to meet them.

I'm lucky in that respect, all the hot women live in my local area.

Widdershins

Tucker Hot Bell wrote: »

Settling *for* someone is totally different to settling down with someone. Nobody suggested settling for someone is something to resort to (although a lot of people do it, but Ginandtonicsky's posts indicate there is no way she would be so inclined).

That doesn't say anything Grayson - it's pretty inane to be frank. "It's just sex" - if sex was something to be so blase about, there wouldn't be laws around it when it comes to consent, age and incest

Getting naked with someone and actually being as one physically - of course this is a major thing to do with a stranger. People have become so conditioned for fear of looking prudish or whatever nonsense, that they block out the reality that this is no trivial thing.

Doing something far less intimate with a stranger would be seen as weird.

Best post I've read in a very long time . Well said

Tbh I regret not realising this sooner .

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Lads, what about settling up?! :eek:

lainey_d_123

Tucker Hot Bell wrote: »

Settling *for* someone is totally different to settling down with someone. Nobody suggested settling for someone is something to resort to (although a lot of people do it, but Ginandtonicsky's posts indicate there is no way she would be so inclined).

That doesn't say anything Grayson - it's pretty inane to be frank. "It's just sex" - if sex was something to be so blase about, there wouldn't be laws around it when it comes to consent, age and incest

Getting naked with someone and actually being as one physically - of course this is a major thing to do with a stranger. People have become so conditioned for fear of looking prudish or whatever nonsense, that they block out the reality that this is no trivial thing.

Doing something far less intimate with a stranger would be seen as weird.

Totally agree. Especially about people who challenge what seems to be the common view that sex is no big deal being seen as prudes. You're literally inside someone or have someone inside you - how is that not a big deal? And that's without getting into the consequences of sex, which can include unwanted pregnancy and disease transmission (some of them incurable and lifelong). People who don't see it as a big deal are kidding themselves, tbh.

kowloon

Ramona Shrilling Matchmaking wrote: »

Lads, what about settling up?! :eek:

You've lost me.

BBFAN

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Totally agree. Especially about people who challenge what seems to be the common view that sex is no big deal being seen as prudes. You're literally inside someone or have someone inside you - how is that not a big deal? And that's without getting into the consequences of sex, which can include unwanted pregnancy and disease transmission (some of them incurable and lifelong). People who don't see it as a big deal are kidding themselves, tbh.

It's a pity there's not an invention called a condom isn't it? :rolleyes:

mvl

rofl at the thought of what shape must a "magic" condom have if requiring to cover all areas that can be affected by STIs !!!

kowloon

lainey_d_123

BBFAN wrote: »

It's a pity there's not an invention called a condom isn't it? :rolleyes:

It's a pity you're not educated enough to know that condoms don't do a whole lot to protect you against certain STIs. Herpes, genital warts and cancer-causing HPV don't sound a whole lot of fun. And that's if the condom doesn't break and is used perfectly. If it does break (and that isn't overly uncommon), then you're exposed to everything the stranger you're shagging might have, including HIV.

Puts you in the mood, does it?

BBFAN

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

It's a pity you're not educated enough to know that condoms don't do a whole lot to protect you against certain STIs. Herpes, genital warts and cancer-causing HPV don't sound a whole lot of fun. And that's if the condom doesn't break and is used perfectly. If it does break (and that isn't overly uncommon), then you're exposed to everything the stranger you're shagging might have, including HIV.

Puts you in the mood, does it?

Don't do a lot to protect you?? Only 99.5%. Yeah, I'll take my chances thanks, lasted 50 years so far. :rolleyes:

I'm plenty educated thanks.

Pac1Man

I wouldn't go out with any of you.

Continuously arguing on the internet even when presented with facts that disprove your 'opinion', only to get the last word in is pathetic.

TerrorFirmer

BBFAN wrote: »

Don't do a lot to protect you?? Only 99.5%. Yeah, I'll take my chances thanks, lasted 50 years so far. :rolleyes:

I'm plenty educated thanks.

You're talking about pregnancy. The other poster is right, condoms don't prevent against certain STI's at all.

So if you're sleeping with a lot of people, you are still being exposed to much higher risk.

joeguevara

Tucker Hot Bell wrote: »

Settling *for* someone is totally different to settling down with someone. Nobody suggested settling for someone is something to resort to (although a lot of people do it, but Ginandtonicsky's posts indicate there is no way she would be so inclined).

That doesn't say anything Grayson - it's pretty inane to be frank. "It's just sex" - if sex was something to be so blase about, there wouldn't be laws around it when it comes to consent, age and incest

Getting naked with someone and actually being as one physically - of course this is a major thing to do with a stranger. People have become so conditioned for fear of looking prudish or whatever nonsense, that they block out the reality that this is no trivial thing.

Doing something far less intimate with a stranger would be seen as weird.

There is nothing in the post that you quoted that would infer that the poster meant anything but consensual and legal sex. To suggest otherwise is unfair and disingenuous. Everybody has a different value that they place on sex. To some it is a physical and emotional act with special importance and to others it is a purely physical act with no emotional attachment. Neither is right or wrong and it is purely dependent on the person. To argue that a persons opinion is wrong and use illegal and heinous acts as an explanation is mean. In my opinion all that was meant is sex is enjoyable whether with a partner or a one night stand and shouldn't be overthought.

Fifty grades of shay.

I'm not single, I wouldn't or didn't enjoy one bit of it. Being married or having a partner is only repressive if one or both don't trust the other.
It's fine to enjoy being single if that makes you happy too, but I think if you seek others company for any reason, then it's a sign that being single isn't all its cracked up to be.

B0jangles

I'm not a fan of extremely casual sex with many different partners, so I don't do that.

If someone else does enjoy that, more power to them - as long as they are being honest and upfront about it with their partners, and are being very careful about their own and their partners sexual health.

That's pretty much it.

I don't really get the whole 'I thought I loved casual sex in my twenties and thirties then I repented of my shallow slutty ways, saw the light and found my one true love in my forties' - story you hear so often.

Just because you liked one thing then and a different thing now doesn't mean you were wrong then and right now - you wanted different things at different times in your life, like about 99.9% of the population.