I am a woman born 1949 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:

The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

132. The Dinner Question

The Dinner Question

On some dating sites, they ask the question, with whom, alive or dead, one would like to have dinner.    I just made my choice: Epicure.   I already explained in entry 131, why I agree with his philosophy and that I see him as a hypoanimalistic man.

According to, Epicure was in his way of life  unconcerned by any gods, and that is at least as good as an agnostic of today.  He had no children.   He was an egalitarian in his attitude to women and slaves.  He was a skeptic and in favor of scientific methods.   He was in favor of a fair deal of giving and receiving and of avoiding to harm others.  

Unfortunately, he lived about 2300 years too early.   He would be my kind of guy.   He was never married.  Maybe because I was not around then....    And he was a very attractive man, as his statue shows:

I put his core quote here again:  "....agreeing 'neither to harm nor be harmed' ..."
'neither to harm nor be harmed'

This sums up one of my own most important goals.    It is very important also in my choice of a partner.   What someone refrains and abstains from doing to me is more important than what someone does for me.   I am looking for a partner, who is determined not to harm me, and that means especially, not to hurt me.   Nothing a man could ever promise, intent or attempt to do for me has any value, as long as not hurting me is not his primary goal.  

If someone is a jerk, a brute, a fool, immature, bonding-disabled, not matter what reason, and he is unable to avoid hurting me, he is unsuitable.   To protect myself, I keep away from persons, who would harm me.  

When someone is unable to refrain from hurting me, I cannot blame him for doing so, I am responsible myself to keep out of his reach, not to expose myself, where I would get hurt or where I have already been hurt in the past.     

When I do not know someone, I am motivated to give him the benefit of the doubt, to find out, if he will harm me or be beneficial for me.  But once I have experienced someone's hurting me, I have learned my lesson and I will not expose myself to more harm from the same person.