online dating - salary requirements

[musemaj11]

Then your policy only works if men are duty bound to marry or if only married men get high paying jobs. We've evolved from the point where people as a whole think like you, luckily.

Luckily for WOMEN.

 

You see, I was talking more from men's point of view of Equal Opportunity and anyone with honesty and logic would see and agree that it is disadvantageous socially for men.

 

However, from women's point of view, no one can deny that Equal Opportunity is indeed socially advantageous because it gives women complete freedom to be financially dependent or independent while in both scenarios men are always expected to be independent.

 

If I were a woman, I would support Equal Opportunity as well, but as a man I dont because simply it puts me at a disadvantage.

Edited December 1, 2010 by musemaj11

[Distant78]

Yea, as some stated OP, just be glad they're letting you know what type of person they are from the get-go....

[zengirl]

Luckily for WOMEN.

 

You see, I was talking more from men's point of view of Equal Opportunity and anyone with honesty and logic would see and agree that it is disadvantageous socially for men.

 

However, from women's point of view, no one can deny that Equal Opportunity is indeed socially advantageous because it gives women complete freedom to be financially dependent or independent while in both scenarios men are always expected to be independent.

 

If I were a woman, I would support Equal Opportunity as well, but as a man I dont because simply it puts me at a disadvantage.

 

Men can be financially dependent as well. I know some SAHDs. I don't really consider stay at home parents "dependent" though; those were choices the couple made together, hopefully.

 

Every member of society should be able to be self-sufficient if they so choose. If a couple plans a life differently, that's their business, but why shackle people? Men are not dependent upon women in an equality-based society, so it's not unfair to them; your way would unfairly shackle women with placing their fortunes only upon their husbands.

 

Now, men and women can place their fortunes upon themselves or their spouses, if they so choose. If they choose not to, that has nothing to do with social policy. Your suggestion is just an ignorant position to adopt.

[musemaj11]

Men can be financially dependent as well. I know some SAHDs. I don't really consider stay at home parents "dependent" though; those were choices the couple made together, hopefully.

Probably only 1% of men in this world are dependent on their women financially and most of the times its not by the women's choice.

 

Every member of society should be able to be self-sufficient if they so choose. If a couple plans a life differently, that's their business, but why shackle people? Men are not dependent upon women in an equality-based society, so it's not unfair to them; your way would unfairly shackle women with placing their fortunes only upon their husbands.

Did you not read everything I wrote?

 

I did not say women should be banned from working at all. I said the best jobs should be exclusive for men because unlike women, men are expected to provide and expect to provide.

 

I will change my stance when women start to develop the same instinct to provide for the men and children in their families. Otherwise, I say its fair to reserve the best jobs for men.

 

Now, men and women can place their fortunes upon themselves or their spouses, if they so choose. If they choose not to, that has nothing to do with social policy. Your suggestion is just an ignorant position to adopt.

IN AN ABSOLUTE WORLD.

 

Unfortunately, we dont live in an absolute world.

[zengirl]

Probably only 1% of men in this world are dependent on their women financially and most of the times its not by the women's choice.

 

 

Did you not read everything I wrote?

 

I did not say women should be banned from working at all. I said the best jobs should be exclusive for men because unlike women, men are expected to provide and expect to provide.

 

I will change my stance when women start to develop the same instinct to provide for the men and children in their families. Otherwise, I say its fair to reserve the best jobs for men.

 

 

IN AN ABSOLUTE WORLD.

 

Unfortunately, we dont live in an absolute world.

 

What we attempt to live in is a free world, where people are free to follow their dreams, regardless of gender.

 

I promise you that a man could find a woman who doesn't expect him to "provide" for her, if that's what he chooses. But you have to pick and choose what you want in life. I think we should respect everyone's dating choices in general --- don't want to date fat people, thin people, Christians, Atheists, people outside of your race, people without money, people who aren't beautiful, people who have red hair. . . whatever. It's all up to personal choice. And social and economic equality allows for more freedom and personal choice, which is what society should endeavor to provide.

[musemaj11]

What we attempt to live in is a free world, where people are free to follow their dreams, regardless of gender.

 

I promise you that a man could find a woman who doesn't expect him to "provide" for her, if that's what he chooses. But you have to pick and choose what you want in life. I think we should respect everyone's dating choices in general --- don't want to date fat people, thin people, Christians, Atheists, people outside of your race, people without money, people who aren't beautiful, people who have red hair. . . whatever. It's all up to personal choice. And social and economic equality allows for more freedom and personal choice, which is what society should endeavor to provide.

We can always talk about 'should'.

 

But as long as women are still the ones who give birth, they WILL ALWAYS have the instinct to want men who are able to provide for them.

[daphne]

I think u can't really compare liking beauty n liking money. When someone likes u because u r attractive, that person still likes u because of u. On the other hand, money is something external. Your attraction is not for the person.

 

Please. They are both superficial things. Neither makes you who you are.

[zengirl]

We can always talk about 'should'.

 

But as long as women are still the ones who give birth, they WILL ALWAYS have the instinct to want men who are able to provide for them.

 

Not all women want men who "provide" for them, and "provide" can mean other things that aren't money.

 

Besides, not all women want to marry men anyway. Some want to remain unmarried. Some want to marry women.

 

Your views are antiquated for a reason. Many reasons actually. We've evolved past them because we've learned better.

[musemaj11]

Please. They are both superficial things. Neither makes you who you are.

They r both superficial. But not equally superficial.

 

Tell me from the bottom of ur heart, would rather have someone likes u because he thinks u r beautiful or because u have a big house?

[zengirl]

They r both superficial. But not equally superficial.

 

Tell me from the bottom of ur heart, would rather have someone likes u because he thinks u r beautiful or because u have a big house?

 

I would rather have someone who wanted my money than someone who wanted me solely for sex. To me, that's where they come into it---using "beautiful" is like saying, "Would you rather have someone who appreciated your achievements?" instead of just the big house, appreciated that you'd earned the house and your abilities. Of course, we want to feel beautiful. We don't want to feel our beauty is a commodity, any more than someone wants to be used for their wealth, as it's a commodity. People like to be appreciated for their achievements as well as their beauty----people of both genders want someone who sees both of those things in them.

[musemaj11]

Not all women want men who "provide" for them, and "provide" can mean other things that aren't money.

 

Besides, not all women want to marry men anyway. Some want to remain unmarried. Some want to marry women.

 

Your views are antiquated for a reason. Many reasons actually. We've evolved past them because we've learned better.

U r arguing for exceptions who chances r make up only less than 5% of world population n u know it.

[sweetjasmine]

The fact that women will always find an excuse to choose a richer man makes me think that Equal Opportunity is the most socially unfair institution for men.

 

I say women should be barred from well-paying jobs.

 

This reason alone is why I will never vote for Equal Pay. Men should get more pay because they will always be the ones expected to provide.

 

Not everyone's world revolves around relationships and relationship dynamics. China, price of tea, yadda yadda yadda.

 

I say men should be barred from jobs, period, so that women stop expecting them to provide!

[zengirl]

U r arguing for exceptions who chances r make up only less than 5% of world population n u know it.

 

First of all, I doubt it is that little. Second of all, it doesn't matter how few it is.

 

Besides: The kind of women you're describing----who expect men to provide for them----aren't taking these high paying jobs you think only men should have anyway.

 

I understand that there will always be some men who long for the days where they could subjugate women more easily, just like there are some ignorant, disgusting people who'd probably like to re-institute slavery or segregation, but I suggest moving to a country where the laws still don't allow women to be free or getting over it.

[musemaj11]

First of all, I doubt it is that little. Second of all, it doesn't matter how few it is.

 

Besides: The kind of women you're describing----who expect men to provide for them----aren't taking these high paying jobs you think only men should have anyway.

 

I understand that there will always be some men who long for the days where they could subjugate women more easily, just like there are some ignorant, disgusting people who'd probably like to re-institute slavery or segregation, but I suggest moving to a country where the laws still don't allow women to be free or getting over it.[/QUOte]

From the beginning I merely stated that equal opportunity is disadvantegous for men. U were the one who disagreed n so far u have only shown how equality benefits women which I already said I absolutely agree with. However u have not presented any argument againstmy claim that equal opportunity is socially inequal for men. Perhaps u just don't care n I understand.

 

As for ur suggestion for me to leave the country, do u realize how rather foolish that is? Most chinese want to live in the usa so why don't they just come here tomorrow then?

Edited December 1, 2010 by musemaj11

[musemaj11]

Not everyone's world revolves around relationships and relationship dynamics. China, price of tea, yadda yadda yadda.

 

I say men should be barred from jobs, period, so that women stop expecting them to provide!

U know what? Maybe that is one solution. However who r going to invent things n erect buildings? Lol

[flying]

They r both superficial. But not equally superficial.

 

Well, duh. I mean after all, rich people will generally get richer as they get older, while beautiful people...won't. From that point of view, choosing someone based on looks could be considered far more superficial, because it eventually goes away...and thus is even less a part of who that person is, in the long term.

 

That said, I've never given a salary requirement in a profile. I don't doubt that there are people who do, but as was said up-thread, all kinds of jerks can reduce people to all kinds of numbers.

[Woggle]

I don't agree with barring women from any jobs but I do think that if women demand men play their traditional role then they should not get mad when asked to play theirs. There are some women who demand that a man be the man but roll their eyes when asked to do anything that is considered traditionally female.

[Art_Critic]

U know what? Maybe that is one solution. However who r going to invent things n erect buildings? Lol

 

Women can't invent things.. did you ever hear of Windshield Wipers ? or Kevlar... or COBOL...hahaha

[musemaj11]

I don't agree with barring women from any jobs but I do think that if women demand men play their traditional role then they should not get mad when asked to play theirs. There are some women who demand that a man be the man but roll their eyes when asked to do anything that is considered traditionally female.

In the modern times, there is really no reason for women not to make their own money instead of leeching off someone else.

 

For thousands of years, a traditional woman means she takes care of the kids, does household chores by hand, cooks, and helps her husband working in the field/farm, or whatever.

 

Today, men have invented dishwashers, laundry machines, vacuum cleaners, and they even help them with household chores. Being a traditional woman in America equals to doing nothing compared to being a traditional woman in other countries.

 

If you live in America and you still want a rich man claiming to be traditional, chances are you are not traditional. You are just a lazy parasite.

Edited December 1, 2010 by musemaj11

[USCGAviator]

I don't have a salary requirement. I just want a woman thats attractive to start with. IMO the area I live in is slim pickings, and to narrow it down with salary or education just makes odds worse.

[Star Gazer]

Especially the people who need people to be college educated, that just gets me to laugh.

 

What does this bother you so much??

[musemaj11]

I think education requirement is valid.

 

Im only in college but I have friends who barely graduated from HS and there is really nothing much you can talk about with them apart from sports and girls ...

 

But then again there are some men who like their women mute anyway.

[Stung]

I think education requirement is valid.

 

Im only in college but I have friends who barely graduated from HS and there is really nothing much you can talk about with them apart from sports and girls ...

 

But then again there are some men who like their women mute anyway.

 

I'm glad to hear that you are still in school. As evidenced by your posts in this thread and several others, you still have a lot to learn.

[Chicago_Guy]

I don't think this is that big of a deal, especially if the women do make decent money themselves.

 

I once saw a Match.com profile for a girl who indicated that she made $40 or $50k or something around that. This was a very attractive girl in her mid-20s. However, she actually wrote in her profile that she enjoys vacations and likes to stay at 4- or 5-star hotels. Obviously she isn't going to be able to afford nights at too many top rated hotels unless she's leeching off a rich guy (either that or she spends all of her salary and hasn't saved anything). I thought that her profile made her seem like a total gold-digger.

[musemaj11]

I'm glad to hear that you are still in school. As evidenced by your posts in this thread and several others, you still have a lot to learn.

Ya well, not only teenage kids go to college you know ...

 

Besides, instead of simply telling me that Im stupid because Im not over 40 yet, perhaps you wouldnt mind sharing your old age wisdom then? Im very interested. Really.

Edited December 1, 2010 by musemaj11