Are all the good ones REALLY taken by 27?

Post Reply New Topic

27 years is just a blip in the passage of time. the longest life is likewise just a blip. the passage of time that amounts to many quintillions of years is as insignificant a blip in the spread of time as is a single beat of a hummingbirds wings.

people may think they have found their "lifetime" partner, and they presume subconsciously that they will be together forever, but the fact is that it is an insignificant pairing as is the transient pairing of 2 molecules that glance off from each other after a few valent bonds are satisfied during their intersection, so that each can be on their inevitable way with their respective needs resolved from the encounter.

i have always been interested in finding pictures from a very long (relative to my life) time ago of women that i find to be visually appealing in both their physical attractiveness, as well as their facial expressions. it is very hard to find a picture that is more than 100 years old of a young lady who is engaging to my wits in that manner, but i have nevertheless found many pictures of women who must be long dead who's facial expressions i found comfort in looking at.
"what a beautiful girl" i would have thought if i were alive when she was, but since the photo was taken in maybe 1860 or so, i realize that her remains would be almost indistinguishable from dirt now.

if i had been alive then and was involved in a relationship with her, then no matter how hot or tawdry or playful or whatever we were, we both would now be long gone and indistinguishable from dirt.

so to wonder if everyone over 27 (at this present minute) is not worth considering is to agonize over a question that is self defeating given a cosmic blink in time, for all who are under 27 will not be so for long.

all who will be born will die, and the last person to be born on earth (the youngest person who will ever exist) will be long gone in the fullness of universal progress.

who cares? temporariness to me equals non existence.
any finite quantity is reduced to nothing when divided by infinity (which is it's relative significance within the framework of all that is (and all that is not)).

anyway, 27 is a physical age i guess where most people have gone into someone else's orbit and it is all just a social merry go round as far as i am concerned.

I may be a "good one" in certain ways. I'm not sure, it all depends (at least I'm not a person who does things that are bad, illegal, irresponsible, or dangerously immature). But I'm old and not taken.

I'm 27 now, and I'm not taken. But I may be soon.......

_________________
LIONS-STAMPEDERS-ELKS-ROUGHRIDERS-BLUE BOMBERS-TIGER-CATS-ARGONAUTS-REDBLACKS-ALOUETTES

The Canadian Football League - What We're Made Of

Feel free to talk to me, if you wish.

Every day is a gift- cherish it!

"A true, true friend helps a friend in need."

You'll still be 25 by that time--still very young.

You will get the treat, just like that cat in your avatar.

It seems to me like where I live that all the good ones are taken by 25. The only ones I have come across that are single that are close to my age have something severely wrong with them like MR or something or they want to be single. I seem to have more in common with a college student anyway but most of them would take a look at me and tell me I am too old for them. I am lost and don't know what to do.

Yeah, they are. And they're usually taken by as*holes.

The late twenties and early thirties are actually a pretty good age bracket for singles. Many people at that age are divorcing or otherwise breaking up the relationships that they started in their early twenties.

Nope!

I know I already said no.. buuuut, I had a quick visit & shared a *hug* with my crush last night. He's 28 & most definitely not passed his expiry date.

_________________
No for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.

I'm not taken so YES!

Nope, the good ones aren't all 'taken' by 27 for a whole bunch of reasons:

(1) This business of 'putting a ring on' a guy/girl when you're pretty young (before the 'good ones get taken') is predicated on your ability and good judgement at, say, age 18 or 19 to select a spouse with characteristics that will make you happy when you're 25, 37 and 78.

(I don't know about you, but OMFG-he's-so-hot was my main criteria for selecting boyfriends until I was about 23. Any guy I dated before then? I don't think I'd be able to find things to talk about over a 20 min coffee. Marrying that young, for me, would've resulted in divorce).

(2) The average age of first marriage is bimodally distributed -- it's around 3-4 yrs after you finish your formal education, i.e. 21 for HS grads, 25 for college grads, way older for those who spend a billion years in grad school. So if you're still in grad school and still single, you are likely surrounded by many single people your-ish age who share your interests.

(3) The 50% across-the-board-divorce-rate -- even if some awesome person is taken/married before 27, there's a 50% chance they'll be single again within 5-7 years (point in a marriage when divorces are most likely to happen).

(4) The anecdotal but exceedingly high divorce rate among folks who get married at 21/22 all of 48 hrs after college graduation. 7 of the first 8 weddings I went to ended in divorce within 18 mos (the most spectacular flamed out within 3 mos). The moral of the story? If you're 21/22 and in college AND engaged? Be engaged for a year or two before tying the knot. Real life is almost NOTHING like college, especially if you lived in a dorm for four years and your parents paid your tuition.

(Though my college BF proposed, I said no and we shacked up in sin and it was the BEST DECISION EVER because we broke up 4 months later. Having an ex-live-in-bf is preferable -- and also about $25k cheaper -- than getting married and then divorcing 4 mos later).

I turned 32 the other day, and I'm not taken. Never have been.