I don't think that's right.

I've had it. Then woke up.

Why?

The real investor would know better. http://www.worthytoshare.net/this-pre...

I don't believe romantic love exists except as a kind of self-delusion.

I agree that there's a lot to learn about a person from their first impression, but so far I've only met and fallen for men and women who are very different from my initial evaluation. Perhaps I need to work on that!

Thank you, John. This does help quite a bit.

Circuit. This proves that women are sooo much easier to please... hence the simple criteria and only 3 categories! :-)

Up on the high-end of crazy you've got redheads, hairdressers, strippers, and any girl named Tiffany.

If all else fails you can be [evil grin] scientific about finding a lover and use the Universal Hot-Crazy Matrix for guidance in mate selection. https://youtu.be/hKWmFWRVLlU

vive la différence:-))

I agree with you. Isn't it wonderful we are different?

Mama you've hit on the essential difference between men and women. I'll wager that if we put this to the Gulchers, the overwhelming number of men would agree with my order, and, the overwhelming number of women would agree with yours.

Hello Blackswan:
Compare to others?
"If you compare yourself to others you may become vain or bitter, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself." -- Max Ehrmann. If you are honest with yourself and are tuned in to the real world, you won't need a comparison. You'll know. But if you're not a genius you can always be a hero.

Keep in mind that one is not born a Roark but evolves into it. Since we don't know Roark's pre-history, it's not possible to tell how he became what he was. In my case, I read The Fountainhead at age 14, but it wasn't until I was in my 30s and after Atlas that I was ready to truly espouse Objectivism. Up until then, I sort of accumulated it bit by bit until I realized that I was running with it full time. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy, but quite another to live by it.

There's an old saying, "Hitch your wagon to a star." You unhitched from a space rock.

I astonished the second woman of three to whom I proposed marriage,
in my life, when I was able to tell her -- a studiously self-controlled
person with whom I worked, in a seriously polite environment --
when she was about to have her period. . I knew, because
her breasts were ever-so slightly larger, just before. -- j
.

Sarah, I have fallen hard and fast only once in 66 years, with
the woman who introduced me to Ayn Rand, who is still a friend.
of mine -- and she was stunning in 3 ways::: mental power,
physical presence, and style. . the way she spoke to me in
conversation showed that she could think fast with precision.
finding that in a very attractive woman who "carried herself"
in a fashion which showed self-respect and self-confidence
just "got me."

the distinguishing factor with her was the coincidence
of these three factors -- which I had considered impossible.

we never got physical, and had only a couple of dates.
it was just a friendship, for her -- a strong one, but that
was all it was.

the friendship, however, is permanent. . my obsession over
her lasted 23 years. . I grew out of it.

I proposed marriage to three women, in my life, and two said yes.

these three also "hit me" with those coinciding factors,
but more slowly. . the first was unseen at first, playing a piano
behind a screen in the university student center. . the second
was a co-worker. . and one was a medical secretary
at my doctor's office. . strong mental impression, with physical
attraction, and style. . style suitable for a mountain-man
engineer like me, you know;;; not Style.

generalizing::: the mental match complemented by physical
attraction, supplemented by a style match does it for me.

if she hits the bull's eye, so to speak, I will lose it, over her.

it is all subjective, in my humble opinion. . and I am the older
of two kids (have a wonderful younger sister), but generally
a private kind of person. . I hope that this helps. -- john
.

Thanks; I'd forgotten that aspect... it's been a theory of mine for decades that the whole "instant liking or dislike" thing really reflects how the human mind works. I picture it as, the senses take in the overall picture and VERY quickly correlate it with pretty much EVERYONE you've experienced before in your life, ending up with that go-no-go final 'binning.'

Just my guess...

I've also noticed what seems to be similarities between overall facial features of husbands and wives.... shape, skin color, hair color, etc. Like choosing someone because you like what you see when YOU look in the mirror, so maybe it's a comfort-zone kind of thing? Whatever.

Early on, I noticed my wife and I had very similar skin coloring as well as very similar respiration rates! Gotta be a Ph.D. in that for someone, eh?


:)

Worked for me... on my second try, and her third... and now after 'only' 25 years worth of anniversaries, we're still going strong.

Yeah, she had a pretty face and nice tits. Still does, imnsho, but a common religious heritage (although I've gone atheist since marriage) and an affinity for pizza, chocolate, root beer... and appreciation of Atlas Shrugged (really!) helped build a foundation, too. I'm post-bariatric surgery now, down about 170 pounds, so pizza and soft drinks are pretty much off the menu for now (except chocolate...), some changes are to be expected, eh?

But getting married a bit later in life, and with some advice from a Wonderful Rabbi... finding someone willing to support You in the areas that are Important to You AND Being willing to support Them in the areas important to them...

Priceless.

and a great life makes lovemaking glorious!!! -- j
.

Please Do Stay;;; we need you, Neal !!! -- j
.

In a speech. He was just summarizing what Rand had always said.

Well said, Mamaemma. I'm glad he meets expectations! :)
(Sexual attraction, for you and for me, is a direct product of admiration of the person's mind/actions. It wouldn't be right, to me, to be attracted to a person for any other reason.)

Like Roark, I think that geniuses must be aware of their intelligence. As Peikoff said in a lecture, Roark takes into consideration others, but not like Keating does. The crucial difference is that Roark doesn't use the society's standards in judging his achievements. He holds himself to his own standards, and does not consider any others.