Women, dating, failure, unrealistic expectations.

[KinAZ]

No, I grew up with European parents who had common sense. I don't know what your background is. I didn't grow up in an inner city ghetto, so I cant relate to kids without shoes, or murders, or dropping out of school, missing parents, etc. We obviously come from 2 different cultures within the same country.

 

There are children of European parents who grow up in the ghetto too. I, however, was not raised in the inner city. So, no... we're not from two different cultures, I'm just more aware of everything that's outside of what I'm used to.

 

You made that comment like there are no poor white people. LMAO No white children are ever killed? No white children come from single parent homes? Are you insane? Yes? Must be...

 

All of my friends parents were blue collar, mom stays at home. No debt, No credit cards, no borrowing. They just weren't married to princesses who threw money away. Nobodies education suffered. None of their dads made more than 30-40k.

 

Ummm yeah, 30k in the 80s was a lot of money. It's peanuts today. LOL, do you know what minimum wage was back then???

 

As I said, were I live, 60k is just barely enough to get by, and you will go into debt. And no, obviously, I don't live in the inner city.

 

And MONEY has nothing to do with education. Kids in the Ukraine where teachers get paid with bottles of Vodka, blow American kids away. Its culture.

 

MILLIONS of Americans are RETARDED when it comes to budgeting, or saving, or spending. Don't tell me you need 75k or your kids wont have shoes.

 

OK... go back to the Ukraine if the US is so bad. Other than that, you have no clue what money has to do with education.

 

I'm telling you what life here is like hun. I live in a nice quite middle class suburb with a good school system. IN the city, you have to send your children to private school, or make sure they can test into a magnet school, if you want them to get a good education. Funding has a lot to do with the quality of education, and everything to do with money. Because if you can't afford to send your child to a private school, then you need to be able to afford to live in a place that has good public schools... OR, their education will suffer.

 

Like I said, 60k HERE = debt... on 75k, the house might not be any bigger, but going into debt wouldn't be necessary.

 

Go get a wife and a couple of kids... then come back and tell me how much it costs to live comfortably.

[FleshNBones]

Kinaz, if you could formulate a coherent post, I would be glad to address is.

 

Obviously you STILL DON'T GET THE MAIN POINT.

 

Fine.. All women should seek men to marry that are high income earners. I guess just 5- 10% of all women will ever get married then.

 

Or do you have a way to magically make all men earn at least 75k so there are enough to go around?

You should consider a European woman from the old country. An honest, frugal, and strict diciplinarian would be nice.

 

You can look at it this way. The all American woman could be an evolutionary dead end.

 

I think most of these women are after a certain lifestyle. You know, champaign wishes and caviar dreams.

 

I think I understand the Woods. I think he was daring some people to be open and honest about an issue instead of offering gestures. The problem with gestures is they only serve to mystify rather than clarify. In the end, everybody loses. Why have a lose-lose situation when we can have a win-win situation?

 

woods, I recommend a show called "Foolproof Equations for a Perfect Life" on the Science Channel (Maybe Discovery Channel). In it, they cover human decision making which includes logic, emotion, and even intuition. They assert that human beings are generally bad decion makers, and explain how to become a better decision maker. You might find some of the answers you are looking for.

One human tendency is to cover up a bad decion, and interpret it as a good decision.

Another tendency is to act out of emotion which is usually wrong.

 

 

And that remark about every woman dating a millionare...

I believe all women are being stalked by a creepy guy.

[Kamille]

 

I just found the link to the study and, dear Woods, thank you. That study proves our point: women don't base their selection of males on financial criteria. Please allow me to cite the article from the link:

 

if we take youth as our crude measure of beauty, it doesn't seem like men are being able to exchange their money for younger women, so we don't know what's differentiating which older guys are able to marry very young women.

 

And I checked the references. They seem legit to me, there is a Paula England who studies gender, family and inequality at Stanford. She however says that the age difference thing is the result of social conditionning - and a higher second-marriage rate, not a natural given.

[Kamille]

oh and let me add that Paula England is.... A feminist!

 

[Woggle]

Woods can speak for himself when he says men don't like to marry older women. I married a woman older than me and it is the best and healthiest relationship I have ever had in my life. I finally feel like I am with an equal and not a woman who either wants to crush my balls or wants me to take care of her like I am her daddy.

 

I do agree that there are many golddiggers out there and that is what prenups are for. If a woman won't sign one do not marry her. You can also tell within a year of dating a woman if she has an entitlement complex and/or no sense of accountability. If men stopped giving no good women the time of day things would change pretty quickly.

[stillafool]

Woods my husband is 7 years younger than me and we have been very happily married for 11 years. However, I am his second wife and he had already had his children before we married.

 

I don't completely disagree with you as most women do. My brother, cousins and brother-in-laws are all attracted to women in their early 20's. These guys range in age from 32 to 55. Mine you they date women of all ages but the one's who don't have kids say they will definitely marry a young woman.

 

I guess you can't blame a woman for wanting the best for her and her future children but they do have to be a bit more realistic. I hear women talk about their list of "must haves" in a future mate and most of these women don't even have a steady bf. I think mothers tell their daughters they are "little princesses" and deserve the prince. The problem is most of these women do not have "princess or supermodel looks" but expect the prince to chose them. I think that these guys who have it all can have who they want and many times when they do marry the woman has to put up with his affairs because women will still sleep with them whether they are married or not. Some other woman is constantly trying to take their place because there aren't enough of these men to go around.

[torranceshipman]

Woods, first you made up that 0.5% statistic!

 

Second, can we add 'not bitter' to that original list as that is the biggest dealbreakerof all! Woods, you need to get rid of that bitter side of you, as it shines through in this post and its the biggest turn off ever!

 

I've dated quite a few very wealthy guys, I've also dated guys with not much more than a cent, but as long as there is great chemistry and the guy is respectful and cares about me (and he'd get the same back) then its all good! We ALL deserve someone decent - man or woman - and wanting to be with a decent looking, financially secure, educated, confident and respectful mate is a GREAT thing to aspire to. Of course, what you are probably getting upset about is that some women are golddiggers and think they deserve way more than they do-I'm with you that these women are NOT cool! - or you've just had a coupla bad experiences recently and are tarring all womankind with the same brush as a result...which you shouldnt do (again, you come off as bitter).

 

I'm not apologising for saying I look for guys as described above, as that is the kind of demographic in the city where I live, and a lot of those types ask me out, and I feel I match quite well with this type of guy (and they clearly feel the same else they wouldn't ask me out)...so I'm happy aspiring to this profile as it's available in my neck of the woods. And if some guy comes along with no money but the most amazing chemistry ever, well, that guy is the one I want to date....at the end of the day what everyone is looking for is that elusive magical chemistry and that means a hell of a lot more than anything else relating to a persons' height/profession/income/etc etc.

[Haloandhorns85]

Here is the problem... Many women have become useless. Ironically I do quite well income wise, but i am trying to make a point.

 

People can live and be happy on much less than 75 or 100k. It is easy.

 

I can tell you how I grew up, and what i see today.

 

My mother never worked. My father did not make tons of money at all.

 

However, she cooked everyday. They didn't drink. They didn't have debt. The 4 bedroom house was paid off in a few years through SACRIFICE, before I was even born. They didn't buy new furniture every year. ETC. Money was saved.

 

At the end of the day, we were a happy family. I was very happy to play with a ball all day. I didn't have or need my own tv, 500 video games, etc.

But we had plenty of money for everything.

 

So today, woman goes to college. Graduates owing lots. Needs a new car. Needs to take vacations. Needs designer bags. Needs a fancy apartment or condo. Eats out almost nightly. Needs to have hair and nails done. Cant cook a thing. Needs nice furniture. On and on and on. Then also wants kids. So she quits working, and you just have all her debt as well. So yes, a man better make a lot to date this woman.

 

To support this lifestyle, seemingly no amount of money is enough. Women no longer want to sacrifice as they did in the past. They want whatever they want, and feel they just deserve a man who makes enough to support that lifestyle.

 

Unfortunately not that many men make enough to support this.(or want to when they can just have sex with FWB'S)

 

What is it you really bring to a man these days that would convince him to marry you?? I mean a tangible thing. Sex is mutual.(Actually now he is limited to one if married) Companionship is mutual. You expect HIM to be the provider. But what do you bring to counter balance that?

 

 

 

FYFI....I went to college and have started attending again to get my bachelors. I don't owe lots cuz I was smart and didn't require to go to the best university, community college works for me. I would have the same car I bought after my graduation if someone (a man) hadn't of pulled out in front of me and totaled it. So I have a measly Grand Am..not expensive at all. And the vacation I took this year was my MAN's idea. I have no designer purses...the most expensive purse I bought cost me $45. I own a mobile home..not a fancy condo, apartment, or house. I cook every single night. I only get a pedicure and hair cut maybe 4 or 5 times a year as a treat to myself for all the things you supposidly believe no woman does. My furniture is from Big Lots. Nothing fancy there. And yes, I want kids --oooh, such a crime for a woman to want kids! And guess what? I plan on still teaching when I have children, aka working. And that ain't all! I do the bills and handle all the finances. I do every bit of cleaning and laundry. I take care of the animals. I remind my bf to change the oil in the vehicles. Oh yeah, and if it weren't for ME and my credit, my bf wouldn't have the nice big new truck we just bought. I take care of him when he is sick. Did I mention that I clean? Everyday? And I cook? Every nite? And I am not uncommon. I know tons and tons of women who do the same shxt I do every day of their lives. How dare you blast us for being women? I don't see you creating the miracle of life inside your body and then shooting it out after NINE months. I don't see you bleeding and dealing with hormone fluctuations on a monthly basis in addition to dealing with dumbass MFers like you who want to put us down for being the better born gender. Its not our fault you were born with a penis...take that up with God or whoever you think created you. (BTW, to the LS ladies...I think I came up with a good reason why Woods hates us so much...ever heard of Penis envy? LOL...Think the opposite...Vagina-envy! Envy will always produce out hatefulness!)

[I Luv the Chariot OH]

lol woods...you are so hilariously bitter Of course you're right--woman, as a entirety of the gender, is incapable of logical thinking. :lmao:

 

Most of your silly points (his being straight, single, wanting a relationship, liking you reciprocally, et cetera) are necessary to actually BEGIN a relationship. As for the others (height and attractiveness requirements, professionalism, not creepy), why would any woman settle for less than that?

[KinAZ]

Times have changed, and I notice a shift.

 

In my parents day (and still common among immigrants), women chose a man with certain traits. Perhaps ambitious, hard working, loyal, etc. of course attraction was a part of it.

 

Now, it seems to have shifted to what a man makes, or what he has already.

 

The former group would get married earlier, sacrifice together, help each other, save together, etc.

 

The new way seems to be, stay single much longer, spend time looking for a "high earner" that has 100 other traits, and then expect him to marry you once you are finally ready.

 

In the new way, women live a longer single life, and acquire things. They acquire debt, their own home, get used to traveling, have credit card bills, have cell phones, cable, internet, a car payment, eat out often, etc.

 

So, a man they meet MUST be able to support all of these needs.

 

In the old days, women didn't have any of the above at an early age. They were happy to be married and build together. Thats why now they feel men MUST make a large income so they can still live the same, if not better, lifestyle.

 

If you marry a woman like this, it is EASY to flutter away 100k a a year.

 

Women still expect men to ultimately be able to support them and a family, yet also feel ENTITLED to all the same materialistic wants they had when single. Yes, this is expensive.

 

The above women have become consumers. Thats what they are best at. Do they know how to cook from scratch? be frugal? Are satisfied being married and taking a huge lifestyle hit? Usually the answers are no. Instead of exercising self control, they feel the answer is to find a high earner! Thats will solve the problems!

 

LOL, You've taken history before. You know that people of status married other people of status, correct? That doesn't even fly.

 

Yes, times have changed, but looking for what a man already have and not merely his potential is nothing new at all. My grandfather told my mother 2 things... be independent (don't depend on a man for anything, don't let him try to buy her, and be able to make her own way, always) and never settle for a man who had less than she had. He could have as much as, but not less than. If you have a nice salary, a car, your own place, and savings, he should have all of the same.

 

Oh, you don't have cable or a cellphone or the internet? When you get a wife, do you plan on cutting off these service? There was also a time when people didn't have a/c, gas, electricity, telephones or even TVs! And? How frugal is too frugal? How low are YOU willing to go? LOL, I see no cause to make this an issue about women, when the people I know who have the GIANT flat panel TVs are all men! :-p I don't know a man who doesn't have cable either!

 

Regardless, there ARE frugal women out there, and some more so than others. Some go with the cheaper cellphone companies because they get more minutes, and some pay a higher bill for better service. Sometimes it's people trying to keep up with the Jones' (both men and women) and other times it's people wanting QUALITY.

 

Now, lol to me, you seem like the guy who would complain about his wife "letting herself go" after a few years of marriage, so I do hope that you're not looking for the woman who has the health club membership, and goes to the spa so that her hands, feet, hair, and skin ALWAYS look their high-end best.

 

There are simple women out there just as there are simple men out there. LOL, just don't say that she has nothing to offer because she don't invest in all the things that make a woman more desirable (supposedly) in modern day America.

 

Nevertheless, you do have a point about staying single longer... and being independent sooner. But just hope you aren't expecting to have your cake and eat it too with regard to this matter...

[imbewildered]

The guy I'm dating now meets all of those "requirements." And yes, I do DESERVE a guy who's all that...and more.

 

JUst hope that you meet all of HIS expectations too. We guys have "lists" too .

[imbewildered]

Times have changed, and I notice a shift.

 

In my parents day (and still common among immigrants), women chose a man with certain traits. Perhaps ambitious, hard working, loyal, etc. of course attraction was a part of it.

 

 

Now, it seems to have shifted to what a man makes, or what he has already.

 

 

Ladies,

 

Woods is essentially saying that women in the past used to select men largely because of positive character traits plus his ability to provide for her as wife and mother. However, in those days women worked for their future alongside their man and they worked as a team. A women made a strong contribution in her own way and her man worked and provided and protected in his own wat. Traditional roles..

NOw the situation seems to be changed signifucantly to the extent that women see themselves as 'entitled consumers' not ' obligated contributors'. OF course this is NOT universal BUT Woods is saying that there is enough of a shift to be problematic. I agree.

The problem arises in that some women regard themselves as "entitled " to a life of extravagance and luxury and this existence is to be provided by her man as her natural "right".

 

I know a woman of 52 y.o who makes a good salary as a teacher. She is still angry at her ex H who divorced her 18 years ago, SHe is bitter because she cannot do the world sea-cruises like her married friends. THis women is stiil adamant that she wants a "tall, handsome, wealthy husband to look after her" and to provide her with a magic carpet ride..

WHat are her chances ?

[Jilly Bean]

Lovely, this is what you do in every thread..

 

This is called "The Charge of Irascibility" it is a feminine(and feminist ) shaming tactic aimed at men who are making too much sense in the debate. The target (the man) is accused of having anger ,resentment, undeserved or unresolved negative feelings toward women because of some past experience.

The objective of this tactic is to undermine the debate and divert the energy into a mild person attack on the target in the hope that it will all degenerate into mudlinging at which time AG can claim to be victimised and scoop in the sympathy vote from the other girls.

 

A womans age is very important to men when they are seeking a mate. Sorry. Actually the older men get, the bigger the age difference becomes. They find mid 20's to be the most beautiful.

 

 

So, is Woods the same person as IMBEWILDERED? Does this mean he's been supporting himself as two people throughout this entire post? Just seems random that they BOTH use the same quote:

 

http://www.loveshack.org/forums/showthread.php?t=157283&highlight=alpha+female&page=5

 

Refer to post #63...

 

This is called "The Charge of Irascibility" it is a feminine(and feminist ) shaming tactic aimed at men who are making too much sense in the debate. The target (the man) is accused of having anger ,resentment, undeserved or unresolved negative feelings toward women because of some past experience.

The objective of this tactic is to undermine the debate and divert the energy into a mild person attack on the target in the hope that it will all degenerate into mudlinging at which time AG can claim to be victimised and scoop in the sympathy vote from the other girls.

[cutegirl]

I actually prefer men who are broke or don't make a lot. I think men who make more money are more likely to cheat and have affairs and are more likely to think they own you and think they can "control" you.

 

BTW, I can afford to pay for all of my own crap and I earn over 100k a year and I don't need a man to buy jack SH+T for me. I prefer paying for my own meal and my own movie ticket. Thank you very much.

 

I don't want a man to provide for me, I like to be the provider. I use to take care of my ex financially and pay all his bills. So not all women are like how you think.

[CommitmentPhobe]

I actually prefer men who are broke or don't make a lot. I think men who make more money are more likely to cheat and have affairs and are more likely to think they own you and think they can "control" you.

 

BTW, I can afford to pay for all of my own crap and I earn over 100k a year and I don't need a man to buy jack SH+T for me. I prefer paying for my own meal and my own movie ticket. Thank you very much.

 

I don't want a man to provide for me, I like to be the provider. I use to take care of my ex financially and pay all his bills. So not all women are like how you think.

 

lol marry me please

 

Seriously woods, get a grip will you? Women don't usually have a clue what they want until you light a spark in them. Then they redefine their rules. Human beings are complex evolving creatures, not commercial products. That's the beauty of it all.

[OpenBook]

Seriously woods, get a grip will you? Women don't usually have a clue what they want until you light a spark in them. Then they redefine their rules. Human beings are complex evolving creatures, not commercial products. That's the beauty of it all.

 

And I believe men are the exact same way. I've seen a lot of them completely reverse course when they fall madly in love with a woman who is "different from all the rest" - all their previous rules go right out the window.

[CommitmentPhobe]

And I believe men are the exact same way. I've seen a lot of them completely reverse course when they fall madly in love with a woman who is "different from all the rest" - all their previous rules go right out the window.

 

Absolutely. Supposedly we want some size zero blonde girl with large boobs... what a load of rubbish. The best thing about being with someone is their imperfections.

[Kamille]

Seriously though, the whole premise of this thread, that (all) woman are only looking for big income earners now more then ever is completely false.

 

Has no one heard of the Victorian age? Mariage was the only thing that could give a girls upward mobility so women were at the time more intent on marrying up. (Many studies have been done on the subject. For rural France you could read Pierre Bourdieu, La valse des célibataires).

 

What has changed is that women now have the right to own property and open bank accounts.

 

So don't come here and pretend that ALL women were happy with the previous arrangement or that it was something noble in them that made them accept their dependance on their husbands.

 

Plus, in that Stanford study article you linked about men marrying younger women (I think the age difference being 4-7 years generally for second marriages), the researchers found that income wasn't a factor. Richer men did not fare better on the current dating market then poorer men.

 

You like facts, you have facts. (All) Women do not now more then before expect men to be able to support them and their love of Louis Vuitton handbags.

 

What has changed is that both men and women no longer need marriage for social stability so yes, they can be pickier when it comes to who they will marry.

 

I remember reading somewhere that the most relevant factor when it comes to who will pair up with who right now is the level of education. Since I have a college degree, I am statistically more likely to marry someone who also has one, regardless of income - but of course, if we both have college degrees, then we are likely both in the same income bracket and share somewhat the same lifestyle.

[Touche]

Well, let's see...my ex-husband met all the things on your list except for one. We were not close in age.

 

My H meets all of the items on your list also, with the exception of one...he smokes. But then, unfortunately so do I.

 

So you're saying that BOTH times I was unrealistic? Hmm....interesting.

 

Also, where are you getting the notion that a woman would have to be better looking than 99% of the population to get a man with those qualifications?

 

Have you seen the wives of these millionaires and billionaires? Are they all "tens?" I don't think so. They must have had other things to offer.

 

I don't think I'm 99% better looking than the general female population. So I guess both of the men I married must have thought I offered something more than just looks. You seem to think that that's their only criteria.

 

Thank goodness that I chose men who weren't quite that superficial.

 

 

 

And

[havoc]

Maybe Woods is going after the wrong women. Most of my female friends are good, honest, working people who just want to share a life with someone. I don't know what all this 75k nonsense is about -- and where I live 75k would not go very far to support two people, much less kids! So, wherever he got that figure, is that an average? In some areas, that's a great income, and in others, it's just getting by.

 

By the way, studies show that men do not seek out youth and beauty as the number one attribute for a long-term mate. Men want someone who is kind and intelligent first, and then attractiveness, if that helps, lol. Take me at my word please -- I am far too lazy to dig out my notes from my "Sex and Relationships" class to prove this, but it's true. But, if requested, I will find the exact stats.

[Jilly Bean]

I still can't believe you guys are blowing by the fact that there is a STRONG likelihood that Woods and Imbewildered are the SAME person! And that he (she?) has been posting as two people on the SAME thread, and supporting himself/herself.

 

Please see my post #118...

[havoc]

Hi Jilly,

 

I'm a tad new and so I missed that. But, yeah, sock puppets are lame.

[Kamille]

I still can't believe you guys are blowing by the fact that there is a STRONG likelihood that Woods and Imbewildered are the SAME person! And that he (she?) has been posting as two people on the SAME thread, and supporting himself/herself.

 

Please see my post #118...

 

 

posting on one's own thread as someone different is against community guidelines and I think is monitored through ip adresses.

 

I think what's going on is that Imbewildered and Woods are pals on the So Suave forum. The rethoric is borrowed straight from there (the charge of irrascibility for instance).

[imbewildered]

I still can't believe you guys are blowing by the fact that there is a STRONG likelihood that Woods and Imbewildered are the SAME person! And that he (she?) has been posting as two people on the SAME thread, and supporting himself/herself.

 

Please see my post #118...

 

Nah, you got a burr up your azz honey.

Woodie is not me and I am not him - although he sounds like me a little,doesn't he?. Then again your mistake could be because you are just generally confused and a tad suspicious because he quoted me. I do congratulate him in quoting me accurately via a cut and paste. Good job Woodie.

You may not believe that we two have never met, and you may be super reluctant to accept that you are in error here BUT you are.

I could care less.

[Jilly Bean]

posting on one's own thread as someone different is against community guidelines and I think is monitored through ip adresses.

 

I think what's going on is that Imbewildered and Woods are pals on the So Suave forum. The rethoric is borrowed straight from there (the charge of irrascibility for instance).

 

I think they're the same person, K. Just a gut, and I'm going with it. And I think IP's are only monitored when there are gross offenses - not just one guy posting as two in order to support his own arguments.