PUA Dilemma

[DAMKY]

DAMKY-

Did you mean that when you "get married" you just accomplish the most important "task" in people life: to settle down.

For many people, consciously or unconsciously, reproduction/children is/are the crowning achievements of their lives, and once they have them, they switch from risk-taking and adventurous to risk-averse and cautious, trying to preserve what they've achieved, and casting aside other concerns to focus on these.

So if that the most important "task" (contrary to your most important one) it make you less desire to fulfill yourself, because you already did. And as a result your productivity falls?

Essentially. The hungry man fights harder for the t-bone than the man with a full belly.

My "PUA Dilemma" is a bit different. (but maybe It's because I'm pretty young)
It's include the sentence of " Why settle for one, if you know you could get more" and "you know some time in the future statistically speaking you probably either going to divorce or live unhappy life. Or even may just live happy life but with lowered passion at best. So why do this if you can live happy with any girl?"

This is everyone's dilemma when young.

It changes as you age.

Yea, I can see my view changing a bit, despite marige can be too limiting.

I'll be 31 early next year. I view children as an important milestone to cross, if purely from a logical point of view. I've never had a strong emotional drive for children (and honestly, I've met few men younger than, say, 35 or so, who do), but for a variety of reasons, these days I view children as the ultimate logical goal of any committed sexual union, and think long-term relationships by older people that don't produce children seem a little silly and superfluous by nature (when you're younger, you need the experience of having relationships without the burden of children to learn about how relationships work and figure out how you want to run yours and what you'll tolerate from a partner and what you want; when you're older, the only reason to have long-term relationships without children is if you need the emotional support or lack the time or energy to meet attractive new women, neither of which seem like especially good reasons to me for an older man to stay attached - he's simply acting out his programming without fulfilling its end goal, which makes him appear rather impotent when you consider it in that light).

Chase

I kindly didn't really understand your answer.
One thing is that you don't wanna being married because "the need to stay motivated - which means testosterone, and which means new women - is of greater importance than a monogamous relationship" wihch I kindly understand, but still you have logical rationalization for a child "ultimate logical goal of any committed sexual union, and think long-term relationships by older people that don't produce children seem a little silly and superfluous by nature" as I understand too.

But that's too contradiction. (like: how you can live unconventional life after a marrige https://www.girlschase.com/content/being ... ional-life ?)
Or you talking about a child without the conventional marriage?

Thank you for your comment

 

[Chase]

DAMKY-

I kindly didn't really understand your answer.
One thing is that you don't wanna being married because "the need to stay motivated - which means testosterone, and which means new women - is of greater importance than a monogamous relationship" wihch I kindly understand, but still you have logical rationalization for a child "ultimate logical goal of any committed sexual union, and think long-term relationships by older people that don't produce children seem a little silly and superfluous by nature" as I understand too.

But that's too contradiction. (like: how you can live unconventional life after a marrige https://www.girlschase.com/content/being ... ional-life ?)
Or you talking about a child without the conventional marriage?

Thank you for your comment

You're coming from a mentality of "children = marriage = settled down = no life awesomeness", which is pretty ubiquitous, at least in the developed world, I think. My mentality is not the same.

I personally would never get married for the sake of marriage itself, since it's an institution I understand the cultural bearings of, and can appreciate its importance on a societal level, but don't have much personal use for. However, in the case of a girlfriend having a child, I'm fine marrying if she needs this for saving face. Most of my friends who are currently married travel as much or more than I do, because their businesses demand this, or they otherwise have pressing reasons they must travel. When I have been married, I've still traveled quite extensively, and continued leading an unconventional life. And, even if I chose to settle down for some period of time, if I did so, it would only be until whatever I was trying to accomplish in so doing was accomplished.

In other words, for me, children ≠ marriage ≠ settled down ≠ no life awesomeness. These things CAN be related, if I choose them to be related, or they can be unrelated, if I choose otherwise.

If you had to boil it down to brass tacks, you'd say, "Most people do things without knowing why they're doing them, and then get stuck because the other person has clearer objectives than they do. Chase does things because he decides to do them, has clear objectives he's trying to accomplish in doing them, and once those objectives are complete, he wraps the thing up and moves onto the next thing of import." I don't get sucked into situations I don't choose to be in, because I'm constantly aware of what I'm doing, why I'm doing it, and what the conditions are for when I'll stop doing it.

If you get married without knowing why you're getting married, or have children without knowing why you're having children, and then just start capitulating to the demands of the woman without knowing why you're capitulating or how long you're doing this for or what the conditions are that you'll break camp and leave are, you're putting yourself in a bad position where you're certainly going to be leading a more "conventional" life, this is true (well, shouldn't say bad - if you want that, it's fine; it's only bad if it isn't what you want).

It is, ultimately, about having the end in mind in all things. Most people don't want to plan for the end, or can't; they either jump into things and hope for the best, or stay clear away from things out of fear of jumping into them and having them not turn out well. I prefer the middle path, rather than the extremes of blind idealism or unblinking cynicism.

Chase

 

[Whizzy]

Hey Chase,

Out of curiosity, your last post on this thread made it sound like you had been married before? If so may i ask what ages you were married and what you thought of it

 

[Chase]

Whizzy-

Hey Chase,

Out of curiosity, your last post on this thread made it sound like you had been married before? If so may i ask what ages you were married and what you thought of it

I was married from 24 to 29, but it wasn't a conventional marriage and we were separated for much of that time, so I don't know how worthwhile my opinions on this would be. By and large, I'd say it's fine so long as you're in control, but both the institution itself and the woman once she's in it work together very hard to saddle the husband with a sense of settled down duty and obligation, and to conform to a certain standard of behavior and lifestyle. That's probably fine if what you want out of life gels with what a conventional marriage is, though - just a little grating for someone as freedom-focused as I am, and you're required to be constantly fighting society and reframing social convention even more than you are in unconventional non-married relationships.

Chase