Trialbyfire Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 quite...just an in every female neo/paleo-con there a frightned little misandrist Agreed. I think the word "fear" encompasses it all, or "fear of loss of control" which equates to major, major insecurities.
Author Isolde Posted November 19, 2008 Author Posted November 19, 2008 Trialbyfire, I was saying that if men want to be providers for women, they should ensure that they get a good education and carve out a good career. If men want to be pursuers, they should pursue women they're interested in. If they want to pay for a date, they should insist on paying. Men complain about feminism's effects, but they can act however they want and take their pick of women who like that stance, and accept the rejection from women who won't tolerate it. At heart, this isn't about investment and returns. If two people are in love, they're in love, and equality can be very romantic so long as two people have different strengths, different weaknesses. It's true that women don't need men as much as they used to, but this is the new reality and we all have to deal with it in a respectful, caring way.
Trialbyfire Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Y'know what Isolde? I kind of agree with you, in that men and women define their own rules. If a man wants to be the great provider, then do it, while finding a mate who will stand behind him. If a man wants to be equal, then he finds a mate who will stand beside him. Same goes for the woman. If she defines where she wants to stand, even if it's in front of her mate, if the two want this. Whatever works for the two of them. There are no victims, only people who need to believe they're victims, for whatever their reasons.
Woggle Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 I make pretty good money and I am glad that I am not seen as the provider. Sometimes I do drive the bus but she does at times as well. The original goals of feminism were nobel but over time it has turned into this misandrist rejection of men in general because feminists believe that men only bring pain to a woman's life. This men are useless mentality in many independent career women has caused some men to paint all successful women with the same brush and while that is not fair men are just trying to better their odds of being successful in love. Love is a gamble and in gambling you go with the best odds. That is what men these days are doing.
alphamale Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Love is a gamble and in gambling you go with the best odds. . there are no "best odds" in gambling woggle...the house wins 98% of the time. you already know that.
Woggle Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 there are no "best odds" in gambling woggle...the house wins 98% of the time. you already know that. If you know what you are doing you can tilt it in your favor.
SushiX Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 I am only intimidated if she looks down on me for not making as much money as her. Otherwise I don't have a problem with it. But a part of me would love to provide for her and care for her. Maybe I might feel she doesn't need me sometimes since she's so independent already.
RecordProducer Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 But that's NOT true. I could be a billionaire and still feel I needed a man and still feel capable of being vulnerable to him in certain ways.This has nithing to do wtih you - it has to do with some men. If you're financially independent, they can't pull their crap on you or you'll walk away. You're doing the right thing for yourself and thankfully, there are plenty of men out there who don't care to hold all the cards against you.
Green Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Personaly a woman could be a billionaire and it wouldn't intimidate me. A woman can never know the power I experience. I enjoy play wrestling with girls and pinning them down. I'm KMT and nothing short of god himself intimidates me
deciduous Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Women(feminists) are so confused, (As you can often tell on this board) That they, themselves, do not know what they want anymore. Some days they might want a fling. Other days marriage. Other days a LTR. Other days they want to go home with a certain guy from the bar. Then they want a "aplha male" who does not sleep with many women, who makes lots of money, but also sees themselves as a complete "equal", in all ways. They pick and choose which outdated form of courtship are still valid.. The man asking, the man paying, the man making more money are good. Cooking, cleaning, housework, letting him set the rules and path to follow =bad. If feminists really wanted true "equality", since they now make money they would marry down and be very willing to suport house husbands as men have for centuries. However, they still have certain old fashioned ideas of what the role of a man is. Namely a wallet with legs. What does a "Neo con" have to do with dating? Typically "Neo Con" is a term used by racists to illustrate Jewish control over the Republican party. It stands for "new conservative". LOL
lino Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 I'm not intimidated by them. Personally I don't care what a woman does for a living as long as she's not a prostitute or doing anything illegal. Doesn't even bother me if she doesn't work at all!
Commando Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 I don't find "successful" women intimidating because money and material isn't everything. They can have a ton of money but that doesn't mean their personality is any good. If they have both then great - it's attractive to me. I find intelligence and "success" very sexy.
stillafool Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 I was just reading this article the other day and it said 81% of single men (in their study) wanted a woman who is educated with ambition. This was the first requirement on the list followed by personality, then looks. So, I don't understand why professional women are complaining that men don't want them. It's just not true. You guys have the cream of the crop (as some would think). What kinds of guys are you looking to date? Why not date only professional men who are like you? Leave the other guys for the women who don't want to work outside the home and who don't have high professional ambitions. And, since these type of men don't seem interested in professional women anyway, what is the problem here?
movingonandon Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Men are not intimidated by succesful women. This is a myth created by bitchy women who would like to believe that the reason men don't like them is because they're succesful, not because they're bitchy. Most men these days *prefer* succesful women.
You'reasian Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Agreed. I think the word "fear" encompasses it all, or "fear of loss of control" which equates to major, major insecurities. I admit it. I'd get a little insecure if my girlfriend is bangin' other dudes... makes me a mysogynyst, huh.
ipetree Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Agreed. I think the word "fear" encompasses it all, or "fear of loss of control" which equates to major, major insecurities. HMMM.. Are we speaking of women? They want to be independent so they do not lose control over their own destiny, right? Does that signify major, major insecurities?
Brimstone_Angel Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 Oh. And just to set the record straight... I am intimidated of women for just being women.:laugh:
Trialbyfire Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 I admit it. I'd get a little insecure if my girlfriend is bangin' other dudes... makes me a mysogynyst, huh. HMMM.. Are we speaking of women? They want to be independent so they do not lose control over their own destiny, right? Does that signify major, major insecurities? Are you both neo/paleo cons? Those are the types I'm talking about who need to control others. An independent man or woman just controls themselves. Whatever happens, happens outside of themselves.
alphamale Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 i dated a female ER doctor for a few weeks. I was making approx $100k/yr at the time and driving a new corvette convertible. anyways i thought i was hot sheeyot. showed up at her place for the first date and she had two high-end BMWs in the garage and her house was about 5,000 sq feet. i was like although she was nice i and i was attracted to her i think i never called after the 2nd date. she was on me like white on rice but i just couldn't get over her making 3 times what i did
ipetree Posted November 19, 2008 Posted November 19, 2008 What is a neo con? How does that relate to dating? Please explain. Everyone in the real world knows women knows feminists are trying their best to control male behavior.. Basically trying to neuter them into wusses women can walk all over. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism David Brooks derided the "fantasies" of "full-mooners fixated on a... sort of Yiddish Trilateral Commission", beliefs which had "hardened into common knowledge... In truth, people labeled neocons (con is short for 'conservative' and neo is short for 'Jewish') travel in widely different circles..."[39] Barry Rubin argued that the neoconservative label is used as an antisemitic pejorative:[40] First, 'neo-conservative' is a codeword for Jewish. As antisemites did with big business moguls in the nineteenth century and Communist leaders in the twentieth, the trick here is to take all those involved in some aspect of public life and single out those who are Jewish. The implication made is that this is a Jewish-led movement conducted not in the interests of all the, in this case, American people, but to the benefit of Jews, and in this case Israel.
Woggle Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 What the hell does conservatism have to do with this? I am a liberal and I agree with most of the man here? In reality I have no problem with successful women but a few bad apples have given them a stereotype that hurts them in the dating world. Strong and independent women in many ways are like the female versions of the nice guy.
ipetree Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 What the hell does conservatism have to do with this? Beats me, lol.. Makes absolutely no sense..
orangehose Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 although she was nice i and i was attracted to her i think i never called after the 2nd date. she was on me like white on rice but i just couldn't get over her making 3 times what i did Interesting - I've also heard of the opposite happening though - male gold-diggers who are particularly interested in women who make lots of money. Regarding the subject of this thread, I think a good number of women don't want to marry someone who makes a lot less money than they do (of course, others don't care, I'm sure). I had an aspiring artist interested in me recently, and honestly, the thought of financially supporting him doing something super-fun while I was slaving away (albeit making good money) was unappetizing. VERY. I'd be enabling him to live at a drastically higher standard of living, and there'd be no reason to do that unless I were very in love with him. I sense though that men don't think this way - they feel fine funding women's fancy handbags and such. Even enjoy serving that purpose.
orangehose Posted November 20, 2008 Posted November 20, 2008 True, men tend to be more giving.. True, traditionally speaking. Of course, in return, the women give birth to and take care of the children. If/when the day comes when it's easy to have a child without a woman (say an artificial womb of some sort), men will be less interested in marrying and financially supporting women.
Recommended Posts