I'm 48 and in good health and want to have sex everyday. It's been my experience that women my age don't seem to be interested in sex like I am. Is this true? If so why? How would I meet a 30 something woman who might want kids and more sex?

As you have used it in your question, "every day" is a two-word phrase. When it is one word, it would used as follows:

"I want to have sex on an everyday basis."

You're welcome.

• Report

by Randy D on June 12th, 2011

Hey Randy D, I just came across your response - thought I should take advantage of the wealth of expertise you bring to the table. Good job - I forgot the space - I stand corrected. How are you at correcting calculus? I'm working on a theorem for predictive modeling of combustion flow-fields (is it correct to use a hyphen in flow-fields? -most technical papers do); perhaps you could help with the math theory. Also, can you suggest an alternative to using pyrophorics in hypersonic propusion combustors to enhance flame speed and ignition rates and for what range of mach number would this be effective. Also - how would it affect overall acceleration and ultimate max mach number achievable? I'm also wondering if a coherent anti-strokes raman spectroscopy monitoring system can deliver enough energy to ignite a hydrogen molecule in a phi of 1 flow-field with residence time of approximately 1 nanosecoond. I can give you frequency and power specifications for the CARS system if your up to it. Or maybe you can just explain the different meanings of ensure, assure and insure to me. You can throw definitions for abstruse, obtuse (non geometric definition) while you are at it. As a self-proclaimed erudite vis-a'-vis your profile, I'm sure you can be quite podantic if you apply yourself. I await your anticipated diatribe. I'm sure you can find some trivial grammatic errors et al, or perhaps mis-spellings (typos) that you can point out if you like but I'd really like your help with the technical problems presented here because that would actually have value and what are we in this world if we don't have value? Well Randy, what value do you have? If I have opened your eyes a bit - You're welcome. Of course, depending on the degree of your self-obsession, if not full blown narcissism - that you dismiss in your profile as smart alecky wit which you project in spit-ball manner - you may be prevented from comprehending the message contained here. Oh by the way, English is my 3rd language but I'm getting better all the time - thanks (facetiously)for your help. I hope I have helped you in return (sacastically of course). I wish you well continuing to correct people's English on this site; I hope that provides the validation you seek for your intellect although it really is kind of petty and mean-spirited. Remember: "Vincit qui se vincit" you have some work to do.

• Report

by mrneglected on May 25th, 2011

Darn! grammatic is spelled with two m(s) - did you find that one Randy? oh I'm sorry I did use two m(s) ...nevermind

• Report

by mrneglected on May 25th, 2011

You don't have to thank so profusely; I already SAID you're welcome, lol.

Why does the term "thin-skinned" come to mind? I did not profess to be a degreed master in English; I merely pointed something out to you. If you took offense, that's your right. Nor have I ever professed to be an expert in calculus.

If you don't want unsolicited feedback on a completely public and open forum such as this, perhaps you shouldn't post anything here. That's the only way I can think of to keep it from happening.

Enjoy your time on AB.

• Report

by Randy D on May 28th, 2011

Your "elegant" use of sarcasm is quite futile with me. I was previously surprised by your smug attitude of superiority so I read your profile and then realized that you were a self-obsessed individual (narcissist). You want to feel greater than others by seeking out those here who make mistakes so you can correct them and thereby raise yourself up. You refer to people who speak English as a second language as if they are from a lesser tribe. A self-professed erudite (SPE) is loathsome to everyone except another SPE but only for the mutual masturbatory possibilities. Your xenophobic nature is clear; if you are a misogynist as well you wear the triple crown. I will feel free to point out that you are a mean-spirited petty individual who enjoys pointing out others mistakes to try to feel superior. I hope you don't succeed in truly hurting other peoples feelings and as one who loathes your kind; I will fight back. Remember you sought me out as fodder for your self indulgent crusade. True to your narcissist tendencies you imply I shouldn't be here if I don't like your denigrating behavior. Perhaps you missed your time in history you would have fit right in as an inquisitor in the Spanish inquisition or perhaps even as judge/executioner in the French revolution - although I suspect you like to strike form the safety of shadows when you seek gratification. How dare you presume that people who don't speak or write as well as you should suffer your condemnation. Really, who do you think you are? Be sure and pick out my spelling and grammatical errors - pedant. All the world loves a critic! - oh - I'm sorry that's supposed to be "clown" - either way it works referring to you!
Do you mock me sir?
Well - I do bite my thumb my thumb at you.
Is that sophisticated enough? or should I go for the tried and true hahahaha.
How about in our next exchange we pursue your ego indulgence in
Spanish, French, German, Japanese or Mandarin? your choice. I know other languages like English; I'm just not as fluent in them but I'm willing to hobble along in your language of choice. I guess we can't do it here because this website lacks the engine for that. Is my hyperbole obvious to you?
How about a public debate? You would only accept if you knew you could win and you don't think you can because you didn't bring out your big guns when you responded - too bad. Now I'm just having way too much fun... ;-)
I anxiously await your harangue. Did you need your dictionary today? I can ramp it up. There is a whole world of subjects out there and learned scholars in all, perhaps you can correct their spelling for them - a valuable service no doubt... while they go on solving the worlds problems. Kind of make you feel small doesn't it?
You have brightened my day - oh I guess I did that for myself, never-mind. The best erudite can weave a tapestry of intellectual discourse and yet prefer to function on a simplistic level with the common man. Dare I go slightly historical on you and quote a famous man who said "walk softly but carry a big stick". Wise words, wise words and good advice - You should try it. Even if you are self-deluded you will in this practice follow a Hippocratic corollary and "do no harm".

• Report

by mrneglected on June 1st, 2011

Randy, my friend, I thought I'd tread a little on the ground that you profess to be so comfortable with.
I have included some of my favorite lines from your profile herein for review:
You wrote "I'm a highly opinionated, well-travelled, well-educated, proudly judgemental military veteran and red-blooded American male"
As a "red-blooded" American male you should know that "well-travelled" should be spelled "well-traveled" to be used correctly in the United States. "Well-travelled" would be correct if used in Great Britain. Unless you are writing this for a British audience, that would be - an error, ipso facto a misspelling. The word "judgemental" as you used it, is correctly spelled "judgmental". Ironic that you are judgmental of people who don't know how to spell and yet don't know how to spell the word. However if used as two words and hyphenated as in "judge-mental" it would be correct. How ironic is that? vis-a'-vis my usage of "everyday" vs. every day; oh the difference a little space or hyphen makes. Was that a typo on your part? This is so serendipitous to our discourse don't you think?
Finally, "forwarned" as you spelled it should be spelled "forewarned". I cant' think of any excuse for that one.
You wrote :"I'm adult enough to admit when I'm wrong, and mature enough to swallow my pride and give you the respect of having proven me wrong." I would suggest that grammatically "proved" would be better used than "proven"; "of having proven" is tense awkward in that sentence but - cada maestrito con su librito - even if you are wrong. Tense-wise "due to you for proving" is better still than "having proven". That way you are not mixing present and past tenses in the same sentence.

I await admission of your errors and your demonstration of respect to me and dare I say contrition and unconditional surrender or perhaps some profanity on your part is in order lol. Groveling would be appreciated because it would be good for your soul and the first step in maturation into a real human being. I don't know if a Roberto Duran impression i.e. "no mas, no mas" is going to cut it either. As your de facto pedagogue in this matter, I would accept a several page essay on why narcissism is counter product to world order and to the evolution of the human race in general in lieu of your formal apologies to me.

You wrote: "I love to argue" and... "Please be forwarned, however, that if you attack, I will respond, and I will go for the jugular. I won't let go until you do, and you will. In certain situations, I will attack first."
I think I have your jugular now or do you still think you have mine? Misspellings: How "living in a glass house" of you. tsk tsk.

• Report

by mrneglected on June 1st, 2011

Neglected, I'm not neglecting you, it's just that I've been away and now that I'm back, I have to catch up on a lot of things. I'll take up this discussion in a few days (everything in its time and place).

• Report

by Randy D on June 5th, 2011

Well, well, well. It appears we've come upon an impasse, my dear Mr. Bond.

Sit tight; I'll explain. Not only in the above posts, but in the emails you've sent to me, and in other AB locations, you have also committed errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, syntax, and so on. Could any of that be a product of failure to properly proofread one's work, or are they indications of the extent of your best efforts at writing? You accuse me of hypocrisy, yet you are hypocritical yourself in doing so. Bad form, Mr. Bond; very bad form. Unless hypocrisy is one of your better traits, I am not the only one who owes the other acquiesence. If you require the errors be enumerated for your perusal, I will accomodate you. The point is this; you are just as fallible as I am, which I can only surmise derives from your being human. In your zest and zeal to display a vast vocabulary, you point out to me that in my zest and zeal to display a vast vocabulary, I have made certain mistakes. Aren't we two peas of the same pod then? The impasse takes the form of the pot calling the kettle black, to coin a colloquialism.

One point you made as if it were an accusation I actually took as a compliment: that you have diagnosed me as being narcissistic. My question to you, o learned one, is whether or not you meant it as a negative? I sincerely hope you not, because you and I exhibit the same symptons. Yes, that means that you're just as narcissistic as you claim me to be, and I do not mean that as a negative trait.

Some of my "errors" you named are subject to debate. 'Judgement/judgment,' 'traveled/travelled,', etc.

As for my point of view of those who are not native English speakers, you're outright wrong. Not only do I defer to such persons, I myself am a student of foreign language and an avid lover of things linguistic. I recognize and make allowances for those who are not native English speakers, and I challenge you to cite instances where I have done otherwise. What I do not do, is to investigate a person's pedigree, which has lead to instances where someone has informed me after the fact that English is not their first or best language. If you assume that I can or should be held accountable for information that has not been imparted to me, then you may want to re-evaluate how you arrive at such conclusions.

Furthermore, it doesn't escape me that in place of graciously accepting my innocuous advisal that you had used a word incorrectly (my original post), you decided it was necessary to carry on as you have. Fine. As I stated in my profile and various other ways, and as you pointed out in re-posting such information, I welcome whatever you have to offer. Let it suffice to say quite simply, I saw something and brought it to your attention. At no pint did I say that I was 100% right on everything I've ever said or ever done, nor did I claim to be smarter or better than you. You wrote something that was incorrect, and I had the audacity to say something. Lowly me, right? Is it your message that no one dare correct the vaulted and all-knowing Mr. Neglected? Has a mere peasant emerged from the hovels of the low-lands and challenged the almighty?

In case this post is too large for AB to accept whole, it may be broken up inot two sections; I will not know until I hit 'Enter'.

• Report

by Randy D on June 8th, 2011

Randy, going around correcting people spelling is nothing more than mental masturbation - it's all about you. Relative to my correcting errors in your profile - dictionary.com agrees with me in relative to those corrections. The excuses you use illustrate my perspective perfectly. I don't consider myself a narcissist and I consider being called one an insult, as should you. Maybe you need to look that word up. Your behavior is also nihilistic in nature so your response does not surprise me. You were not trying to help me when you corrected my typo this is made obvious by your sarcastic "your welcome" rendered in your most self congratulatory manner. I'm out of time as well. True to my assessment of you, you do not admit when you are wrong because clearly the mistakes you made are deemed as such by the English dictionaries of the world. I've had my fill in life of those who look down on others simply because they feel superior. Is this not a Hitler-esque perspective. I don't go around correcting people - you came to me patting yourself on the back - so I retaliated. Deep in yourself I'm sure you know your true motivations. Do yourself a favor and stop this behavior. Focus on the positive. If you want to educate everyone here then phrase questions for the site in that vein - you can reach many more people that way instead of putting you foot in peoples faces one at a time. I indulged in this whoop down of you because I knew it was only you and I that would be reading it. For myself I always defer to the artist, the critic does little for me.
You say you are a language enthusiast - pursue it constructively not destructively. For example throw a "question" out there that brings up the way the way the world uses ensure, assure and insure interchangeably. I grew up knowing the difference but clearly those distinctions have been lost. I have read corporate newsletters using insure in the sense of ensure.

• Report

by mrneglected on June 12th, 2011

It's "people's spelling", not "people spelling", unless you're from "the 'hood", where that venacular is acceptable.

It's not "in relative to to those corrections", it's "in relation . . ".

How can you cite behavior/actions that YOU consider to be narcissistic, then exhibit those exact same behaviors/actions, yet NOT accept that you're as narcissistic as your target. I correct you, I'm wrong. You correct me, you're the second coming! Laughable, dude.

I never stated at ANY point that I was trying to help you, so for once you've hit the nail on the head and we've found common ground.

You didn't place a semi-colon after the word "typo", itself an abbreviation, but we won't quibble.

I don't look down on you or any other person who makes an honest mistake and then has the maturity to say, "Oh, thanks, I screwed up." It's when people know and don't apply or when they don't know because they never allowed themselves to be taught properly, and then apply what they were taught, those are the ones with whom I take exception. Read it carefully, re-read it if necessary. I do not look down on them (you).

You're not being hypocritical again, are you? Let's review: I had an opinion (based completely on fact, by the way) about what you wrote, so I responded in the manner in which I thought was appropriate. You had an opinion about what I wrote, so you responded in the manner which you thought (think) to be appropriate. You and I have done, are doing and continue to do the exact same thing, Mr. Neglected. It's extremely hypocritical of you to accuse and find wrongdoing in others when you commit the same action.

I was hopeful when I reached your line, "I've had my fill in life . . . " because I thought perhaps you had made some decision about how you plan to "aviod" people like me in the future. We both know it's an impossiblity in my case, because you can't let go. You won't let go. You don't want to let go. So you and I will go back and forth for who knows how long until you finally stop beating the dead dog. Yes, I realize that means I'm beating it also, but I'm the one who promised to outlast YOU, not the other way around.

Your "Hitler" sentence is an interrogative, therefore it shouldn't end with a period, it should end with a question mark. Funny how that works out, isn't it? Hahahahah.

Come now, Neglected One. You never correct anyone? Please, let's at least be truthful here! Neither of our claims beyond this venue can be verified, but I'm sure there are people in your everyday life who roll their eyes either when they see you coming, after you've departed, or both. If you suffer from the illusion that you're deeply loved by everyone who's ever come into contact with you since the day of your birth, those medications are working far better than expected.

There was no need for "retaliation". I'll reiterate: you wrote something incorrectly and I pointed it out. That happened prior to me knowing you're a legend in your own mind who cannot be challenged by the commonfolk, and before I knew that you didn't have the humility to just take it and move on. YOU'RE the one who's made a federal case out of it, and I'm happy to oblige you.

Bad news: I won't "stop this behavior". If I wasn't going to stop prior to you coming along, do you actually believe YOU'VE inspired me to? That is so laughable that I won't even insult you with the long string of LOL that I had planned; I'll merely inform you that I'd be laughing in your face if you were to suggest that to me in person.

I've already focused on the positive, and with you, it began when I pointed out that you had written something incorrectly. That was a positive; yet you choose to see it differently, as a personal attack, possibly. Fine. You feel put-upon. Poor, poor Neglected. Here's a pearl of wisdom I learned many, many years ago: no one MAKES you angry; anger is always a choice. I use that as an example, not as an affirmation that you are angry.

• Report

by Randy D on June 12th, 2011

Once again, I've been so verbose that the remainder of my last comment was cut off at the point of entering it. Such a shame, too; I had at leas 3 or 4 GREAT paragraphs for you.

Well, it doesn't matter, because you never respond to my touchés, which is to say, when I score valid points against you, you usually just ignore them. Today's installment is chocked full of them, LOL.

I won't fret, however. I've given you enough material to respond to above, so we'll just see how well you can do with it. I do, however, remember quite well how I ended it, which I will repeat here:

Thanks. Your turn!

• Report

by Randy D on June 12th, 2011

Got to you did I? hahaha - good. I recommend you get professional help with your delusions of greatness and self-proclaimed narcissism. Therapy might help with your "lack of friends" issue as well. Anyone can be a critic - it takes talent to create. What have you created in your life? Are you a published author? You said I "won't end it" - just did.

• Report

by mrneglected on June 13th, 2011

BTW in parting I'll school you one more time hahaha - The word is veRnacular not "venacular". What is "aviod"? were you trying to spell "avoid"?
"impossiblity" is misspelled
"commonfolk" should be two words.
"at leas 3 or 4" should be "least"
"chocked full of them" should be "chock full" or "chock-full"
some typos, some ignorance
You're Welcome.

• Report

by mrneglected on June 13th, 2011

I stand corrected on the above-mentioned typographical errors that I committed in my post. You were right and I was wrong. The only exception is "commonfolk". In the context that I used it, it's not a hyphenated two-word phrase.

If "typos" = ignorance, as you stated, then you ARE ignorant, aren't you?

• Report

by Randy D on June 14th, 2011