A good book and a Pepsi....

Can you hear me now?
No, because I don't exist;
"I think, therefore I think I'm not"
Cartesian circles retrograding
Escalating....

Tinfoil hats deflecting sensors
Hang the hangers from the ceiling
The dataghosts receive no signals
There's nothing there to trip the wires
Enervating....

Like sensory underload for the masses
A frozen, silent crash-n-burn
No molecular movement at absolute zero
Just a sense of unsenseness, end of the line
Ever waiting....?

The inevitable "I need a BAY-BEE!!" speech....

Mainly, I regret getting married. But I also regret all of the relationships I had before her and after her.

That's a beautiful picture, and I can see why they would want to use it!

Feels kinda good to see something of your own get published, huh?

Yes. My last gf was not like the (physical) type I usually find myself attracted to, but there were so many other positive things going on that I became very attracted to her anyway....

And now it seems I'm automatically attracted to anyone who looks like her....!

The first girl I met from a dating site turned out to be an arsonist. It went downhill from there....



There was a time when I believed that, too. Now I'm not so sure. I really don't want anyone (or society, or expectation, or tradition, etc.) to be in a position of deciding what I'm "meant" to do. If anyone is going to decide that, it'll be me.



...."if found" being the operative phrase here....!



But this interpretation of "crap on the core" assumes a possible scenario where there IS no crap on the core. I'm not sure the crap and the core aren't the same thing, in the end, i.e., it's impossible for them to exist as separate entities.



She knows, she has to know. I've made it pretty obvious. At least, I think I have. And she's smarter than I am, so I have no doubt about her ability to grasp the concept. If so inclined.

And you're right, it is what I want. I just don't think it's a very realistic desire, though.

Well, no -- I've only been attracted to one person in the last 3 years or so, and she is completely oblivious to my existence.

The kids thing, and the lying thing, are definitely disincentives, but it never actually gets that far. I'm never attracted to them in the first place.



In the past, I have run into this a LOT -- and I find this way of thinking to be very presumptuous and demeaning. If they think I'm so malleable, so easily duped, why would they want to be with someone like that in the first place?



I'm rarely attracted to anyone anymore, and I've realized that there are (historical) reasons for that. And I'm OK with it. The bottom line is that I don't really NEED anyone in my life -- all the things I have to do, I can do just fine on my own.

Not to say that it wouldn't be nice to have someone around to do things with -- but the trade-off, at least as far as I've experienced, is simply not worth it.



I keep hearing this, but it's what you might call "anecdotal accounts." I don't see it in the real world. I mean, if you go on YouTube, you can find hundreds of women doing videos about their childfree lifestyle, but it seems these women only exist on YouTube. It's like trying to find a Yeti, or an honest politician. There are rumors, there are veiled hints, but....



If I've learned one thing from dating sites, it's that sending out first e-mails is a waste of time. I've tried it here, I've tried it on other sites, the response rate is actually somehow in negative numbers, something like -22.9% of them ever reply.

Now, as a guy who has written eight books and several shopping lists, I think I know a little something about writing. Books and shopping lists, anyway. Clearly I know nothing about writing introductory e-mails -- but my assumption was that if it was humorous, well-written, referenced things from their profiles, and didn't come across as creepo-stalkerish, someone might reply.

But no.

My strategy was to establish a presence in the forums, and then they would write to me.

And it worked -- to some degree. I mean, I get lots of messages now. Scammers, older women who want to argue about the "no kids" thing, occasionally someone who wants to ask about the books, or about writing in general. The one thing I never get is a message from someone I could see as a legitimate dating prospect.

And that's not the site's fault -- I think it's more a function of dating site clienteles in general. My theory is that, on the whole, people don't resort to dating sites until they're at a point in their lives which is beyond the point when I would have been interested. So the "starting point" derails any compatibility potential.

For sure -- most of my life, I had more female friends than male. I mean LOTS more. Since I moved to Indiana, nada. Can't find a friend, a girlfriend, a llama, a decent beef sandwich, you name it. Romee, we need to go somewhere where women appreciate a decent guy, if there's any such place like that, with any such women!

Romee! Hey, my friend, let me tell you something -- you are one of the greatest people I've had the pleasure to get to know on here (and on FB!) and I cannot even begin to comprehend how you are still single....seriously, if women got to know you at all, you would be inundated with prospects....

Look, it's not about being "good enough" -- you're plenty good enough -- the real problem seems to be finding the right ones who can actually discern this!

(I have the same problem, I can truly sympathize with you!)

Well, this is absolutely true -- the only ones I ever hear from (outside of scammers) are the ones who have kids and who have made it their mission to tell me why I'm wrong to exclude people who have kids from my relationship preferences.

The only problem is -- I really, truly don't want anybody with kids. I'd rather be alone. There are lots of reasons for this, and I won't go into them here, but let me just say that my boundaries are in place for very good reasons (based on a history when the boundaries were few or none -- and learning from those experiences) and I'm not going to ignore all of that.

But there's another underlying fundamental problem here -- I'm not broken, and I don't need to be "fixed" or changed. And these women are taking it upon themselves to "fix" or change me. I see that as a total lack of respect and consideration for my beliefs, my preferences. And why would I want to be with someone who belittles and marginalizes my core values?

I haven't found that, though. In my experience, the older she is (and without kids), the more desperate she is to start having them.

The only girlfriend I ever had who truly did NOT want kids, knew from about age 15 she didn't want them. She's 27 now and still has absolutely no desire to ever have any. But she's one of a kind, in my experience.

Standard procedure when I meet someone is they TELL me they don't want kids, AT FIRST, as part of the plan. Once the relationship has been going for awhile (90 days) they do a flip-flop, and now they HAVE to have kids. It's as inevitable as the sunrise.

Everything gives me an idea for a book. That's the whole problem.

Yeah. There was one. In Uzbekistan. In the year 1529. Probably. And she probably liked NASCAR and "American Idol." Although those things probably didn't exist in the year 1529. History is not my subject.

Kind of both, actually. I don't want someone who is a parent or wants to be a parent, and no one is interested in a guy like that.

I won't ever try to cook anything again. Too many fires and nuclear incidents....which is why....

I won't ever write a cookbook.

I won't jump out of a plane.

I won't spend four months in a wispy little tent in Antarctica.

I won't eat broccoli. Might be the only thing former President Bush and I agree on.

I won't drink.

I won't work on cars.

I won't post a picture of myself holding up a fish....

That'd be fine, if there was actually someone around to take a chance on.....

Personally, I see it more as a romantic plot device for movies, books, etc., than as anything "real."

I'm guessing it stems from a basic root biological (animal) fact -- a man can get many women pregnant at one time, but a woman can only be pregnant by one man at a time (barring some sort of weird alien abduction scenario). The default setting is pro-reproduction, so the male would want to keep his options open.

This, then leading into a male-dominated culture for centuries....babies are ultimately the mom's responsibility, anyway, once they're born (from that archaic perspective), so, once technology reaches the point where birth control is feasible, let's leave that to the women, too. I'm not saying this is the right thing to do, just that this is how a male-dominant culture might justify it.

Very nicely written, although I would have to disagree with the last line! Self-awareness has a worth of its own....