Would you *ever* give up your ideal dreams/future/career for your perfect partner?

Aww.

It's guys like you that I like. Chase your dream and you may never know what girl is around the corner.

But chase the girl, will you get the "career"?

Is that true? That's quite interesting...

(I'll be happy to explain why I think that).

Let me tell you this, I doubt it will change your perceptions, but at least it might let ground you a little.

My dad died 2 years ago, I still can't get over it. I would give up my first class degree, my future, my friends, **** even an arm or a leg just to see him again for one single ****ing day. That's how much I miss him.

You don't realise until the people you care about are gone just how trivial "accomplishments" really are. Getting my degree meant nothing to me because my dad wasn't there to see me receive it. It's just a piece of ****ing paper.

I hope one day you come to understand that.

No, you could meet your "perfect partner" and 5 years down the line, they are not perfect anymore.

This thread is not about Cambridge.

How do you now if you get married you won't get divorce?

Who the **** marries just to divorce?

Your perfect man could EASILY change, and how would you know?

lolwut. Being social is an inherited trait? I think someone needs to go back to school.

Brilliant. I read that in the Law of Success by Napoleon Hill.

Imo, for SOME people family = happiness, for SOME people career = happiness.

How is it pseudo-biology? would you like to tell me? this is all darwin, and you can't make your claims of career success over family fit.


Certain traits make for evolutionary success, and those are the traits that will subsequently dominate the gene pool. The system only works if you are actually passing on your genes, otherewise everthing would die out. Therefore, there should be an intrinsic desire in creatures to have children.

Being social was a successful trait, so is passed on.

The conception of struggle for existence as a factor of evolution, introduced into science by Darwin and Wallace, has permitted us to embrace an immensely wide range of phenomena in one single generalization, which soon became the very basis of our philosophical, biological, and sociological speculations.

An immense variety of facts: -- adaptations of function and structure of organic beings to their surroundings; physiological and anatomical evolution; intellectual progress, and moral development itself, which we formerly used to explain by so many different causes, were embodied by Darwin in one general conception.

We understood them as continued endeavours -- as a struggle against adverse circumstances -- for such a development of individuals, races, species and societies, as would result in the greatest possible fulness, variety, and intensity of life. It may be that at the outset Darwin himself was not fully aware of the generality of the factor which he first invoked for explaining one series only of facts relative to the accumulation of individual variations in incipient species.

But he foresaw that the term which he was introducing into science would lose its philosophical and its only true meaning if it were to be used in its narrow sense only -- that of a struggle between separate individuals for the sheer means of existence. And at the very beginning of his memorable work he insisted upon the term being taken in its large and metaphorical sense including dependence of one being on another, and including (which is more important) not only the life of the individual, but success in leaving progeny.

I think this too, but you seem to be questioning everyone who thinks differently to your views, i.e. not wanting a career over a relationship.

If you want to persue a career and not have a family with a partner that is entirely your choice and I'm not going to judge, but I won't stand for people judging my choice to want a comfortable life with a partner over a high flying career.

I don't want to die alone.

Yes, if I truly loved the person and couldn't imagine my life without them. What's the point in having a really succesful job and lots of money if you don't have someone you know is special to share that with?

dont know if its true or not, its not a statistic or anything, just an observation. ive just found that men are more ambitious and will go after possessions, success and power, whereas women would prefer a decent relationship and to be happy