Burento

If so, it's probably because people who wait are more likely to be religious (and thus against divorce).

I'm around 6'2", so I don't really have many choices, but it doesn't matter, because my ideal match would be somewhat shorter than me. It's not as much height as it is build. A lot of tall girls are too skinny for my tastes. That being said, I wouldn't say "never gonna happen" for 95% of people (so I wouldn't want to date someone who is like 4'5" or 6'6" or something extreme like that).

I look on OKCupid a lot since this is a very specific requirement of mine that I am really not willing to compromise on, and I think I would be open to the idea for a "short" length of time, i.e. less than a year. Any more than that, and I just couldn't do it, because I absolutely crave physical contact.

Depends what you mean by "settle". If you're not attracted to them, then there's no point in dating or marrying them, certainly. You should always have standards, but there may be some things you need to compromise on. The best match for you that exists as a real person might have something you otherwise would see as a major flaw. I used to not want to date anybody who was religious. Now I am willing to, provided they don't deny evolution or anything like that.

There is no perfect-for-me partner. There is probably somebody that I will meet who I will be happier with than anybody else, but there has never been a relationship in history where each person did not settle on something. I would never date or marry a slut, of course, but if somebody has had sex before within the confines of a relationship, then at the very least they place some sort of significance on it, and if they are willing to start waiting again until marriage, then I would be willing to accept that. This doesn't mean I am willing to date/marry someone that I am unattracted to or has different principles than I do, but we do not have to necessarily agree on every practical issue in life, provided she at least came to her conclusions through quasi-logical means and that we have mutual respect for these differences. But her base principles must be the same as mine. So, there are areas where I would settle, and areas where I wouldn't. I would never marry a leftist or somebody that I was physically unattracted to. Or somebody who didn't value education, or someone not willing to spend what I perceive as enough time with me (which is far more than most people, probably), etc. And I would never have sex before marriage, myself. There may reach a point where I cannot go on any further, though...

I'm sure somebody is going to come in and say that the friendzone doesn't exist because you aren't entitled to a woman's love just because you were nice and blah blah blah. That's all well and good, but that doesn't make the friendzone any less of a real and painful phenomenon. Just because the woman has the right to reject you doesn't mean it doesn't suck for the man. (Obviously it can happen to women as well, but I am speaking from my perspective.) I might have been friendzoned before, but then again, we weren't even really friends before or after. It's debatable.

An American dog, a Polish dog, and a Soviet dog were comparing their lives in their different countries. The American dog is talking all about how he can just bark and get meat. The Polish dog says, "what's meat"? The Soviet dog says, "what's bark"?

I think it depends on what language you are coming from. Many Europeans I have talking to (native speakers of e.g. German) have said English isn't that difficult, IIRC. The only major problem that I can think of is our overly-complicated spelling. So, maybe I would go with a more "difficult" language, just so that I can get it for "free", so to speak, and then just learn English afterwards.

I have only ever heard the term "grassy knoll" in reference to the JFK assassination.

I personally use "AFAIK" (as far as I know) and "IIRC" (if I remember correctly) pretty frequently.

Yeah, if you're going to say "date for 1-1.5 years and be engaged for 14-17 months", you might as well just say "date for 2.5-3 years".

Agreed on drifting without a final goal. I hope to have a good career in the future, be very academically successful/well-educated, have a nice home, become fluent in multiple languages, etc., but none of that is my end goal. When it comes right down to it, when I am laying in bed at night, trying to fall asleep, there is only ever one, single thing on my mind, and that is finding a girlfriend and future wife.

1. No, I'm an atheist. 2. My grandparents, who I was raised by, waited until marriage to have sex, but I don't know if that had any effect on me. Certainly, I did actually pay attention in school when I was told that abstinence was the only option that was completely safe, but my decision to wait until marriage has very little to do with the physical risks, i.e. STDs, pregnancy, etc. I suppose I just developed the desire on my own to wait, to have something completely special and reserved for my future wife. 3. It's not difficult to wait in the sense that I have never been in a relationship, and will unfortunately not likely be in one any time soon (as I find talking to girls that I am interested in brutally difficult), but difficult in the sense that it is tempting to just give in in order to end my soul-crushing loneliness, either by having sex or by marrying a non-virgin (the latter of which I may just have to do).

I am an atheist, but if I had to pick one, I would become a Mormon. I like the extreme emphasis in Mormonism on the family, and pre-marital sex is much less common among them. The LDS church also puts great emphasis on education.

Are there any places in the world I can go where abstinence is the norm? I can look up statistics all day for Indonesia and so forth, but I want to know where to go in the USA where it is the norm (over 50%).