As far as advice, such as it is, I can offer this.

When you're single and looking, don't "serial date." I'm sure we all know that guy or gal who just dates the same person -- so to speak -- over and over.

All my girlfriends were very different from one another.

Also, I think single folks (whether for the first time, or divorced and looking to get back into the game) make the mistake of trying to find somebody "like" them. By that I mean, in having the same tastes, same hobbies, similar background, and so forth.

This tends to drive things toward the shallow end -- such as in ("Gee, I really like skiing, cheese fries and heavy metal. I've got to find me a gal who likes skiiing, cheese fries and heavy metal.")

But think about it, do you really want to marry yourself?

What wisdom I've gained tells me, look for somebody who shares the same core values that you have, but otherwise is as different as you can get. (Provided, of course, the differences are complimentary.)

My wife and I have incredibly different tastes, backgrounds, personality types -- you name it. But, we share common core values, and our differences -- or strengths and weaknesses -- compliment and boost one another. 

I'm still not sure this is meaningful. I'd have to read the study itself, and analyze their experimental design, methodology, and data analysis to see if the conclusion is justified.

Jan 17, 2013 -- 1:22PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

Jan 17, 2013 -- 12:37PM, d_p_m wrote:

I'm still not sure this is meaningful. I'd have to read the study itself, and analyze their experimental design, methodology, and data analysis to see if the conclusion is justified.

Most social or "soft science" studies are either worthless, or tell us things we already knew. 

You mean like the one with the shocking revelation that patients taking high doses of opiate pain killers were more likely to be in an accident if they were the driver, but not if they were the passenger?

Jan 17, 2013 -- 1:33PM, d_p_m wrote:

Jan 17, 2013 -- 1:22PM, mytmouse57 wrote:

Jan 17, 2013 -- 12:37PM, d_p_m wrote:

I'm still not sure this is meaningful. I'd have to read the study itself, and analyze their experimental design, methodology, and data analysis to see if the conclusion is justified.

Most social or "soft science" studies are either worthless, or tell us things we already knew. 

You mean like the one with the shocking revelation that patients taking high doses of opiate pain killers were more likely to be in an accident if they were the driver, but not if they were the passenger?

Yeah, or the ones that demonstrated that girls who don't have a close, loving father or other healthy male role model tend to grow up into women who make piss-poor decisions regarding how to get attention from men, and have relationships with them. 

Yeah, that sort of thing...