Dybbuk Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 @Robert Z: I know where this conversation is carrying over from and actually I totally agree with you in the sense that NO ONE (man nor woman) should ever build up the idea of the perfect mate and actually use that as the benchmark/standard when they start dating and reject everyone as soon as they violate this long list of ideals the person has. It's counterproductive and will leave you disappointed time and time again. I just think the examples you used in the other thread didn't really help the point you were trying to make. Is choosing a mate like shopping for a car? Well, not exactly but I personally did draft a list of things I MUST have, things I would like to have but were not necessary, and dealbreakers for both mate and car. Why? Both are big decisions, both need to compliment/fit into my lifestyle, and both shouldn't be taken lightly. If you start looking for mates and the person you're dating possesses a huge dealbreaker, or just doesn't have what you're looking for why on earth would you ignore those things and then resent your mate later for not being what you want them to be? That's like choosing a compact smart car when you need to haul lumber every morning for work. I think the biggest mistakes people run into when dating is they have superficial 'must haves' or they have too many "Must haves/dealbreakers" and not enough "Like to have". No one is going to fit into a perfect cookie cutter model, so there should be things you can be flexible about. However if you know deep down you cannot be with someone who smokes or has kids then stick to them so you don't end up with someone you're trying to change or resent later. I admit as soon as someone exhibits a behavior, or says something that causes concern, or just flat out tells me they do this/that and that immediately goes against a 'Must have/Dealbreaker' I drop them fast. Why? I think it's actually more cruel to prolong a courtship, make a guy pay for more dates, and give him false hope he has a chance when deep down I feel he and I just won't make it. Now if you've had tons of dates and no winners, then maybe you need to evaluate your list of must haves/like to haves/dealbreakers. People with supremely high standards just have to accept that finding a mate will take a looong time, or find a way to compromise on certain things so they enlarge their dating pool. I know making a list sounds overly analytical, but in reality my 'must have' list is short: Must have a sense of humor. Must be financially stable (job/source of income). Must be balanced mentally (No rage addicts, no depressed people hating their life, etc etc.) Must commit to me before sex and take relationships the same pace I do (which is kind of slow). Basically if I don't have to give you money, you can laugh and not be serious all the time, have your crap together in life and NOT want to have sex during dates 1-5, then I will give you a shot. My 'Likes to have' list is longer, but I can make allowances for someone who meets my must haves and seems genuinely interested in me. If it takes a long time for me to meet a man, so be it. I know what I want to be happy. In the end, I feel it's far better to be single for YEARS and be picky about who you choose than to hurt someone else because you gave them a chance despite every fiber of your being telling you no.
Eternal Sunshine Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 "true love" is reciprocated. Yours isn't.
MissBee Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 Time and time again women [maybe some men but I don't pay attention to them as much ] talk about choosing a potential mate as if they were buying a car. It is as if they have a checklist and anyone who makes it through the list might be considered for a relationship. But if they stray for a moment, one slip, one bad joke, one statement that isn't clear or a circumstance not desired, and they are toast. What I find most interesting about this is that things like attraction, chemistry, and love, are never mentioned. Do people really expect to fall in love with someone just because they pass a check list? When I met my sugar baby, she was an escort. And I fell madly, passionately in love with her on sight. And I grew to love her more every time we spent time together. My ex wife, on the other hand, was accomplished, mainstream, proper, and a very logical choice as a wife. I didn't marry her for logical reasons but that was always in the background. What I know now is that not for a moment did I love her as I do my sb. There is no comparison. And the marriage ended in disaster. But even after a long, bitter marriage that left me suicidal, I would marry my sb in an instant. I am quite sure she wouldn't pass a checklist in most people's book... being an escort and all. But that would be their loss. She is ten times the woman my wife ever was. So I read about all of these women who are choosing men based on their report card rather than love and attraction. And I keep thinking, good luck! I just hope you don't ruin a man's life the way my marriage ruined me. I think you are setting yourselves up for disaster. Love is never logical. Most people with any sense have qualities they need and desire and consider how someone will fit into their life logically and also need attraction, chemistry and all those things grow into love. Can I fall in love with a homeless man? Probably not since based on my "check list" of what I want in a partner I wouldn't date him to find out. I've said in another thread, where a member was incredulous that a woman did not like him though he felt he fit her list on paper, that relationships and romance are not just a dry match up of on paper requirements, but it is helpful to have some that you judge potential dates against. That said though it's not an either/or dichotomy but both/and. Most women I know want both love and someone who "makes sense" in their life....as look all around the board women in love with married men, bums, all kinds of people who they "love" but cannot have a relationship with in real life terms because outside of just feelings lots of aspects don't fit. Many men and women throw caution to the wind for the sake of feelings...as romantic as it may sound the proof is in the pudding that feeling good about someone or being insanely attracted or having chemistry isn't the end all be all, there needs to be a balance of both real criteria that adult people use to determine say a life partner and also attraction, chemistry, romance which grows into love.
ivionthenet Posted February 19, 2015 Posted February 19, 2015 I had a relationship where it was love at first sight, truly. I only saw him from a distance and I was already in 'love'. Of course common sense tells you, that isn't love. But anyway the connection was intense and I never lost that feeling of infatuation with him. Everyday I got out a bed and looked down at his face and felt an intense rush of happiness for where I was and what I had. But you know what? It was also the most vacant, disconnected and superficial relationship I ever had. Neither of us were in love with the other, we were in love with our fantasies of each other and we resisted getting to know the real people underneath because the illusion was too good. Well the real people did emerge in time, quicker than yours, but not by much. I only realised the superficiality and fakeness of it all once I was out of it. And when the real us met each other, we did not like what we saw. That was the most painful part of it all. That all along, we just weren't compatible and the whole thing was a sham. None of it was real, in the sense that it would last through us being authentic with each other. It was a chemical attraction like no other, and I doubt I will experience it again. But, it was an illusion and to be honest I never want to be that blinded by hormones again that I fail to notice who it is I am in a relationship with. Well said. I feel the same I am really sick and tired of the process of: 1.See him, talk to him and conclude he is the love of my life after a few minutes 2.dream and dream and dream of him which magnifies the feelings 3.reel him in, start having intimacy and be the happiest person ever 4.wake up one morning and realise that I have no clue who this person is next to me, but I don't like who they are I am a firm believer in true love. TRUE love. So I guess that the feeling that conjures up these infatuated relationships can't be true love. It is more like a reaction to the void we are so desperate to fill at the time. The void of doubts, loneliness and mainly the absence of self love. In my case it was self love. For two years since my long term relationship ended I have been working hard to resolve these feelings inside me that drive me into useless relationships. And now I am at the point where I don't need somebody else's love and support to be satisfyingly and truthfully happy in my life. Everyday I wake up calm and collected, I love what I do and I love the people in my life. I love my body even if it's far from perfect and I accept whatever comes my way. I do not accept however the option of falling into a meaningless relationship again. It would be damaging. So I won't. I will get to know the person well before I commit. I feel that it's possible to listen to one's heart. My heart wants me to be loved and understood for the right reasons by the person who inspires me and whom I admire to the point that I find it hard to believe that he is with me. How could I expect that to happen unless I allow myself to make clear judgement of who he actually is?! And that takes time. So following one's heart is great, but maybe the heart can be tamed and be endowed with wisdom by healing it's wounds. Because essentially it is those wounds that drive us into romances that are doomed to fail.
Omei Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) I recently watched documentries on SugarBabys and the definition clearly states a woman who you lavish with gifts, money, and outings and they're not required to have sex with you but fulfill your emotional needs/company. If she has sex then she becomes an escort. And many sugarbabys or escorts live with their money givers for financial support. I used to be all about love but right now im all for logic with love coming into play after. Edited February 20, 2015 by Omei
Fhsjkfjrhsdh3646 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I recently watched documentries on SugarBabys and the definition clearly states a woman who you lavish with gifts, money, and outings and they're not required to have sex with you but fulfill your emotional needs/company. If she has sex then she becomes an escort. And many sugarbabys or escorts live with their money givers for financial support. I used to be all about love but right now im all for logic with love coming into play after. Um an Escort turned Sugar Baby is going to be dishing out sex. They're technically not really a "sugar baby" - they're just an Escort for the sole audience of one person.
Buddhist Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 In my case it was self love. For two years since my long term relationship ended I have been working hard to resolve these feelings inside me that drive me into useless relationships. Because essentially it is those wounds that drive us into romances that are doomed to fail. In my case, a need to tame the ego and start putting real meaning into my life and develop impulse control. I was so hungry for someone, anyone to shower me with the affection I thought I deserved, that I was willing to sacrifice all the more important aspects of a relationship to get it. I stopped getting into relationships at that point of realisation and turned to meditation, yoga and spiritual development in order to feel whole. I have since lost all desire for relationship, except the one I am nurturing within me. 1
Omei Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 Um an Escort turned Sugar Baby is going to be dishing out sex. They're technically not really a "sugar baby" - they're just an Escort for the sole audience of one person. Sugarbabies are woman who do not have sex but offer company in exchange for money/gifts. If OP is calling his girl a sugarbaby then hes not receiving sex or hes mis informed of the definition. According to the documentries I watched I grew interested in learning about them when I started watching a woman's blog about being a sugar baby. I wouldnt say an escort could turn sugar baby unless they stop having sex
Buddhist Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 Sugarbabies are woman who do not have sex but offer company in exchange for money/gifts. I think the OP calls her a sb because he wants to distance the current relationship from it's transactional origins. If you follow his relationship thread it shows the gradual change in his mind over what he thinks the relationship is about, but not much change in what is actually going on in the relationship. The final posts are about him believing her to finally reciprocate his love. I had hard time seeing where he made that connection I want to be sensitive here because when I was in the throes of desperate infatuation no-one could have told me it wasn't love. No-one could have told me my partner was there for any other reason. Three years after the relationship, the reality hit me like a Mac truck swerving off the highway. I had to finally let go of all the stories I told myself, and see things as they really were. 1
Weezy1973 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 From an evolutionary/biological standpoint - women indeed are going to be attracted to two distinct characteristics clusters: 1. Genetic fitness: These would be indicators of good healthy genes that will propagate the species (i.e. keep going into future generations). These characteristics would generally be confined to pure looks. 2. Parental Investment: These would be indicators that the man would make a good father, which would also be beneficial in propagating the species and getting genes into future generations. These characteristics would include things like loyalty (i.e. the man spending time and energy on the woman/family rather than cheating), generosity, empathy and compassion. Number 1 would be what the OP considers attraction/love and number 2 would be what the OP considers "logic". For the vast majority of women, both are relevant. For some, the attraction veers towards 1, for others, the attraction veers towards 2. But both certainly play a role in overall attraction. And both, ultimately, play a role, into why women choose the men they do. 1
todreaminblue Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 sugar babies are normally younger women who older men feel a a renewal of their manhood with....they are young fit bodied compared to their male counterpart ......and they are bought..... i had feelings for an older man when i was about seventeen he loved all the things i loved art, classical music, he was impotent and i was his companion..he was i think early fifties..i was staying in young womens refuge.......i however termninated the relationship when my sneakers were not good enough and he started buying me stillettos and clothing more suited to him...i liked my jeans...and at that period of my life those months..... i couldnt be bought..when i broke it up....it was with this distinction i gave him ...i didnt want to be his sugar baby..deb 1
Fhsjkfjrhsdh3646 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I'm not disagreeing that Sugar Babys don't need to have sex. But there are a lot of Escorts who looks for "Sugar Daddys" and there is sex involved.
Buddhist Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I'm not disagreeing that Sugar Babys don't need to have sex. But there are a lot of Escorts who looks for "Sugar Daddys" and there is sex involved. And why wouldn't they? It's a good career move. Swap having sex with multiple unknown persons of unknown character for multiple sex sessions with a client who's character and preferences are known to you. It gives a higher level of safety in what is a very dangerous occupation, and you no longer have to expend as much emotional energy in being every guys fantasy, now you can just be one guys fantasy. Your income is now regular and assured and you can groom your client to be a repeat customer. In the case of this woman, it appears to be something she took up to get through college, now she's succeeded in that her last move will be into a corporate career and refocusing on her boyfriend.....who isn't the OP.
preraph Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 SugarBabies, like escorts, for legal reasons, "have sex at their discretion." They cannot advertise they have sex because then what they are doing on those sugarbaby websites would be illegal. I'm sure there are some taking the money and running. I'm equally sure if they're in business long, they're having sex to keep the money coming in.
Omei Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 Im not saying a sugarbaby cant have sex if thats the agreement im just saying by definition according to the documentries I watched they are women who offer comfort without sex being apart of what they trade, thats all.
Fhsjkfjrhsdh3646 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I agree - its smart for them to get one guy to pay them each month or whatever to go out from time to time on dates / have sex. They don't have to worry about being assaulted by random creeps and ****. That being said - I think a lot of sugar baby/daddy arrangements involve sex. Either way though sex or no sex - you're basically paying them to enjoy being with you. 1
mightycpa Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I suppose that as long as you realize that you're not the love of her life, then what's the harm? You fall in love with whoever it is you fall in love with, right? There's no rhyme or reason, and most people certainly don't fall in love for actual characteristics... it's the total package, it's what you get out of it. I don't think it is any stranger than falling in love with someone online, or staying in love with someone who no longer loves you. It's not like you can turn it off like a switch. But if you're fooled into thinking there's really something there, I'd encourage you to turn off the money and see what happens.
amaysngrace Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 So you fell in love with a woman that liked you because YOU passed the checklist. Her list was short. Money was the only requirement. She's a typical woman and you fell for her. So having a checklist works, correct? 2
Popsicle Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 And why is this piece of advice directed at women particularly? Especially when you admit, you did the same thing yourself? I think he mostly just wanted to gush about his sugar baby. And maybe poke at other women at the same time. But for the record, I pick love over logic any day.
Els Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I don't think it should be about checklists - but there is a marked difference between having an arbitrary 30-item laundry list (must be above 6', must have D or DD cup boobs, etc), and having a good general idea of what you need and want out of a relationship. To me, the former doesn't make sense, but the latter does. Attraction and chemistry is very important, but so is compatibility. Plenty of relationships start out sizzling hot and fizzle out fairly quickly because the two people are not compatible in the long term. That being said, I'm curious - do you think your sugar baby has a 'checklist' for the men she chooses to be in relationships with? 1
Fhsjkfjrhsdh3646 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 So you fell in love with a woman that liked you because YOU passed the checklist. Her list was short. Money was the only requirement. She's a typical woman and you fell for her. So having a checklist works, correct? That would be fine and dandy if a checklist was the only requirement. But attraction is something that happens naturally. Someone could be totally illogical for you and want the totally wrong things but you would be attracted to each other. Likewise someone who makes total sense for you on paper, you might not have a connection with them.
amaysngrace Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 That would be fine and dandy if a checklist was the only requirement. But attraction is something that happens naturally. Someone could be totally illogical for you and want the totally wrong things but you would be attracted to each other. Likewise someone who makes total sense for you on paper, you might not have a connection with them. I thought we were talking about long-term partners here. Compatibility and shared values are big components when choosing a partner for the long haul. Attraction to them goes without saying but if it's all you've got for them then just sleep with them and don't invest yourself any further.
TigerLilly78 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 Eh the op always goes on and on about his SB..its nothing new its kind of sad to some looking in but I guess if it makes him happy thats all that matters I agree if the money and gifts cash for school was gone she would move on in a heart beat meh far as people having "check lists" there is noting wrong with this people have preferences and their own personal standards when it comes to dating why is that wrong? I dont get it..
Fhsjkfjrhsdh3646 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) I thought we were talking about long-term partners here. Compatibility and shared values are big components when choosing a partner for the long haul. Attraction to them goes without saying but if it's all you've got for them then just sleep with them and don't invest yourself any further. If women just look at a checklist for the long haul and skip attraction - no wonder there are so many husbands in unhappy marriages, pissed off that their wives won't have sex with them. And no wonder there are so many females on blogs like Jezebel spouting misandrist BS like "I can't believe my husband wants me to have sex with him, I'm not some cheap hooker!" If you're not attracted to someone, you shouldn't be marrying them. Physical chemistry is important in the long haul too. To be clear - I'm saying that Compatible Goals and Attraction are BOTH important in the long haul. Edited February 20, 2015 by barcode88
Recommended Posts