From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Any Available Jewish Men Out There??
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 06:31:47 GMT

 
in <ewright.726277761@convex.convex.com>
    ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
 
] In <1993Jan5.230959.17783@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
]  writes:
]
] >Not quite--I've claimed that I know and meet few men and women who are
] >interested in exercise, fitness, and sports; since I have never claimed
] >that the set of people that I know and meet is a representative sample
] >of the US population as a whole, it is not possible to conclude from the
] >statements that I have made that there are few such people nationwide or
] >worldwide.
]
] Oh.  I see.  So, if the people you meet are not representative of
] the people others are likely to meet, what's your point?
 
Now, now; your statement assumes that the set of people a person is
likely to meet is a representative sample of the population as a
whole--which simply isn't the case.  People tend to "clump together" in
groups that have some number of characteristics in common--for example,
if you hang around at tractor pulls and "Monster Truck Rallies" you'll
probably meet people who, on the average, are different in one or more
respects from the people you'd be likely to meet at Mensa poetry
readings SIG.  (Granted, there may be some overlap, but there will be
differences in the averages of some characteristics between the groups.)
 
My point, therefore, is that sources of people who are, on the average,
more interested in science than in athletics do exist and are not
especially difficult to find.  It may take a small amount of effort to
tap into these sources, but less than you've already spent in this
conversation.
 
] >Well, if you think that is in any way relevant, go right ahead and do
] >the research to quantify these values.  If nothing else, you can use all
] >the time it'll take as a new excuse for why you can't actually do
] >anything that would be likely to involve you in a satisfying relationship.
]
] The way you spend your life making excuses about all the nerds
] you meet, instead of actually doing something likely to lead to
] your finding an exercise partner, huh?
 
A bit like that, at least as long not having a satisfying, potentially
long-term relationship bothers you as little as not having an exercise
partner bothers me.  (That is to say, extremely little.)
 
] If you really wanted to find someone, you would have by now.  After
] all, it only takes one.  Instead, you reject all my attempts to help
] you, and only answer, "Yes, but...."  Can't you see how self-defeating
] that is?  I can't believe you unable to find one dedicated jock in a
] city the size of Denver. ;-)
 
No doubt--indeed, I've met quite a few dedicated jocks, though that
seemed to happen mostly when I was going to a public gym, back before I
got around to buying my own gym.  Gosh, you don't suppose that the fact
that I run into people more interested in science than exercise might
have something to do with the fact that I tend to go to SF cons and BBS
parties (which offer me an immediate benefit that I don't gain from
being at home) instead of going to public gyms (which are often not
nearly as well-stocked and are much less convenient than my own)?
 
Seriously, I don't doubt that I could find a dedicated jock if I looked
for one--for starters, I could place an ad and then have to deal with an
influx of responses that would require more effort than the venture is
worth to me.  For the last couple of years, I seem to have gotten rather
bogged down in the business of running my corporations and have made
little (OK, virtually no) effort to meet people--not an immediate problem,
since I don't have any shortage of people willing to make the effort to
meet me, but at this point I'm starting to feel an urge to meet a
little greater variety of people.
 
So, I think it may be time for me to force myself to take some time off
from work, writing, buying stereo equipment, and all the other things
that can so easilly take all of one's time, and seek out some new
people.  I'd been thinking of some martial arts classes, but given my
current condition, that may have to wait a year or two; someone
mentioned fencing in a recent post, and that sounds like lots of fun
since it's something I enjoy and am quite good at, but am also terribly
out of practice at; also I've called "Colorado Free University" for a
course catalog--last time I looked, they had a few courses that I was
very interested in taking (and likely would have if I hadn't been
working 12-14 hours a day at the time), and now that my work demands
look like they might be a little more reasonable for at least a while,
perhaps I'll sign up for a course or two--and, in either case, if I meet
some new and interesting people, that'll be an added bonus.
 
] >I suppose that would be the case if it were my purpose--or even if I'd
] >ever so much as implied such a thing.  My claim is that I know more
] >science enthusiasts than fitness enthusiasts and that there are a fair
] >number of science enthusiasts out there.  That's quite different from
] >what you seem to think I'm claiming.
]
] More excuses and self-defeating behavior.
]
] What?  That argument doesn't apply to you?  You mean it's harder
] to find an exercise partner, whose age, sex, and marital status
] don't even matter, than it is to find a romantic partner?
 
Nope; actually it's not all that difficult to find either.  However, I
haven't had the time or motivation to seek out either for the past
several years and romantic partners are much more likely than exercise
partners to seek one out anyway, hence the illusion that finding
romantic partners is easier.
 
] For that matter, why are you posting in soc.singles?
 
Entertainment value and convenience--I enjoy the conversations I have
with people here, the electronic attention I get, and the interesting
and thought-provoking e-mail exchanges I get into from people who
spontaneously start sending me letters.  (The occasional envelope of
revealing photos of soc.singles readers showing up in my non-electronic
mailbox isn't exactly objectionable either.)  It's a terrific pastime--
when I am pulling one of those 14-hour workdays, I can take a ten-minute
break from work any time I want to and be entertained and kept company
electronically by the soc.singles brigade.  Soc.singles (and other
newsgroups, for that matter) is even there these days when it's the
middle of the night and I've given up on the idea of sleeping because my
leg goes into spasms every time I drift off.
 
] >True, which is not too surprising in a store that carries cement-filled
] >plastic weight sets and generally awful exercycles, which are also
] >children's toys
]
] Well, if children can lift those 100-lb weights, perhaps you should
] ask one of them to be your exercise partner... or your trainer.  At
] the very least, find out who supplies their steroids.
 
Pish-posh; I have individual dumbbells heavier than those entire weight
sets.  Remember that 100 pounds is the entire set, and that includes all
the bars, collars, and probably the packing material--and you can put
the pieces together to make weights that are five pounds as easilly as
you can put together weights that are eighty-five pounds (more than that
gets difficult, unless you start duct-taping the bars together).
 
I've got a 4,500-pound weight set (just considering the free weights and
ignoring the various machines)--are you suggesting that this proves that
I can lift 4,500 pounds in a conventional lift?
 
]  And any child
] large enough to ride those exercycles is going to grow into an 8-foot
] adult, so be nice to him. :-)
 
Look again--those things are adjustable and can be made pretty short.
(On the other hand, a lot of them can't be safely adjusted to a height
sufficient for a normal-sized adult like myself to use comfortably.)
 
Seriously, though, the point was that K-Mart exercycles aren't any more
"serious exercise equipment" than their Tasco telescopes are the
instruments of choice for comet-spotting.
 
] >I pretty much just hang around the lobbies and other "public" places at a
] >con rather than bothering with any of the events, I'd guess offhand that
] >I have at least twice as many women striking up conversations with me
] >than men.
]
] You see, that's your problem.  If you attended some of the events,
] you'd have an exercise partner by now. :-)
 
Better yet, if I'd gone to a public gym or taken a class in fencing,
martial arts, or something that would be likely to attract the type of
person who would be looking to become my exercise partner, I probably
would have had an exercise partner by now.  However, it's not a major
concern (indeed, it's only occasionally just barely a concern at all)
and I've had things to do with my time that I considered more important.
 
 
Trygve
--
The Tears They Painted Over, by Marguerite Doody.  Howdy Doody's biography
reveals for the first time the troubled soul behind the cheerful face of wood
that was all most of us knew of this stellar performer.  Howdy's widow,
Marguerite, tells of his heartache and pain, his fight with alcoholism and
termites, and the bitter backstage rivalry with Mortimer Snerd.
                                                Pub. at $18.95 / only $11.99