|
|
|
|
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 12:44:13 AM | Teenwolf[[[I was being facetious. I've heard it a million times in the forums...some women think it's unattractive for men to talk about money.]]]
I don't mind when men talk about money. The time and place has everything to do with how attractive/unattractive it is. I see a pattern, though. Men who have $$, stability, success, mention it as one of their qualities, and would like women to be appreciative of it. Men who don't have it, think badly of women who appreciate the men in the first group. Can't win. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 12:46:18 AM |
Serenity Sam wrote: I was disturbed by what I heard on a forum so thought I would put this to the readers.A guy commented regarding women and quality of life. It went like this, if you cant provide for her why should she stay around. .......What is your view on the topic?
This is 2009, right? The ONLY reason I can see for a woman to be concerned about the mans income would be if they were getting married and were planning to have children, and she wanted to make sure she wouldnt be carrying the financial load alone.
Unmarried women who work usually can take care of themselves and often seek someone who is their equal in other areas. Of course they also want a man who works, and isnt lazy I would assume.
~Beth~ | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 12:50:25 AM | | And just to add to the above post...appreciating the men who are financially successful, doesn't mean we would not be with one who has less means. I have dated men from one spectrum to the other. I have come across good and bad attitudes from both sides of the income scale. The attitude is where it's at. Some men with $$ try to use it as a tool, to manipulate women. Like holding a carrot over their head. Some men without it, can have non excuseable issues too. Attitude people...attitude. | |
|
| life
Posted: 11/2/2009 3:27:47 AM | I think that a job is a job and one can easily lose his/her means, better indicator of compatibility is what they do on their weekends, with their friends, hobbies ..
Choosing a mate based solely on what they do for living and what it brings them is not the best indicator of how well the two people will get along, nor does it guarantee any "quality of life".
I have dated throughout the spectrum, those well off and those definitely nowhere near comfortable living.
It doesn't matter.
What matters is if that person can make me smile on a bad day, how he handles himself around people, and if he can afford himself to spend time with me or is his priority his job/friends/sports/whatever. Is he relatively reasonable when upset, would he raise his hand at a woman, does he open doors for me even a month after we've met, does he want to be around me when something good or bad happens in his day, is he nice to the waitress?
Those types of things are important to me.
Dating means you're getting to know the person, so yes, you need to go out and see how this person reacts with others, what's on their mind, what's making them want to get up in the morning, and yes, in the beginning this usually means spending that time and money going out more than staying in.
But the going out part can involve a cute little coffee shop on the corner and talking over yummy dessert, not necessarily an evening out on the town.
It is what you make of it.
Focus on a person rather than packaging and you're more likely to find a suitable one for you.
:-)
Best of luck! | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 3:35:46 AM | men have no chance at a successful relation if they cant provide finances, stability, and other check lists many women have regarding essentials for a relationship.
well, guess what? the extent to which this happens to men is pretty much the same extent to which it happens to women because they can't meet the youth, beauty, and other check lists many men have regarding essentials for a relationship. it's our genetic imperative to make sure you're a good and reliable provider, and it's yours to make sure we're the most suitable vesssel for your capable seed.
for every man crying because he doesn't have the material goods to make dating easy, there is at least one other woman crying because she doesn't have the physical goods to make it easy. various forms of elaborate social posturing rituals can sometimes overcome or at least mitigate the lack of material resources for males, or the lack of physical resources for females. the things that make us attractive to the opposite sex are largely subconscious, primal urges, reinforced by advertising and the dumbest common denominator. because more than we're willing to admit, humanity is largely a collection of naked apes in suits. when it was discovered that bill clinton (alpha male) played the saxophone, a million lesser males all over the country were displayed in television sound bites, playing saxophones. monkey see/monkey do. LMAO. and so it goes. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 3:45:34 AM |
I think what is unattractive is when some guys carryon about their worth or materialistic stuff. Being considerate and nice goes a long way than material means.
I agree.
I also find it moronic that some men who don't make that much money have opinions about prenups and gold diggers. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 4:43:52 AM |
Offer and SIGN A PRENUP. It's that simple.. THEN all men will know you LOVE them for that Beautiful inner-poor-starving-student that he once was.
That's assuming a woman actually wants to marry you. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 5:21:48 AM | Just do what I did - select a user name that automatically filters out any possibility of contact with women with those values. Yes, there are some. But if I thought that all women were like that, I wouldn't even wade into the dating waters.
At least, it worked for me. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 5:29:18 AM |
What is your view on the topic?
Personally, I tend to think that those who tend to espouse the viewpoint that "money shouldn't matter, it should be the person that counts" are often just copping out, unmotivated or what have you. It's a lovely idea, that love should be all that matters, but let's face it, life isn't all beer and skittles. Sooner or later, the bills have to be paid, and for those who say "money shouldn't matter", does that mean they are looking for the free ride of having another pay for them, or are they just living in lala-land and expecting magic fairies to pay their mortgage/rent/bills for them?
My impression, what they're really saying is "MY money (or lack thereof) shouldn't matter...."
Entitlement, or...? Who's going to pay their bills for them then...? | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 5:40:02 AM | "money shouldn't matter, it should be the person that counts" This statement is actually correct. Money shouldn't matter and it should be the person that counts... in a perfect world.
And now for the qualifiers... the world isn't perfect and neither are people. There are people that will work hard, save and be responsible with their money squirelling away for a house, a nest egg and eventually work their way up to no longer having to be overly concerned where they'll get the cash to pay the next utility bill. By the time they've reached middle age, they'll be comfortable enough to indulge in luxuries, because they've foregone the vacations, partying, fast cars and whatever else the money was spent on in their late 20s and their 30s...
Then there are people that think because others have a decent life, they deserve the same thing... the white picket fence, the job that has various perks, the vacations, big screen tv and whatever else they haven't worked to pay for...
So while money shouldn't matter... it does, because there is an inherent difference of values in the two types of people. I have more in common with the men that work and actually earn their lifestyle than the ones that coast in life... those differences cannot be dismissed when looking towards a relationship.
So, I have to again agree with Sweetness until of course lala-land becomes a reality and my magic fairy visits to pay my bills... at which point I'll bang my head against the wall for a life wasted on responsibility...  | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 5:40:37 AM | [/Offer and SIGN A PRENUP. It's that simple.. THEN all men will know you LOVE them for that Beautiful inner-poor-starving-student that he once was.
That's assuming a woman actually wants to marry you.]
CAN SOMEONE TELL ME HOW YOU HIGHLIGHT SOMEONE ELSES QUOTE! THANKS
Funny story, my beloved grandfather, had once considered remarrying when his wife, my grandmother passed away after 50 years of marrage. I suppose she was financially more sound than he was due to her previous departed husband. My grandfather was an immagrant, served in WWI as a calvaryman along the US Border of US Canada. I admired him as a child, smart, wrote for a paper in NYC, was a terriffic family man and a wonderful grandfather. He was lonely without my grandmother. He thought he found a women who cared for him, but just before the wedding plans, she brought forth prenuptual agreements from her attorney. My grandfather was a very popular person amongst his community and people suggest he not go through with the remarrage. He didn't. He could take care of himself financially and actually didnt need for things. I could see as a very young person that this women was lonely but put money before my grandfather. She lost a terriffic person. I still remember that, I decided marrage must have little meaning even then when money is put before the person. I figure myself based on this why marry someone if there intrested in your finances. Today people can support themselves both men and women. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 5:45:32 AM | ^^^It can be seen two ways. It can be seen as personal and that money is more important, or it can be seen as separate and apart from the relationship.
Personally I think money and relationships don't mix - so I wouldn't want one to affect the other...it doesn't have to - for either person. A prenup is another way to let someone know their money isn't what you're with them for.
Instead some people take offense to another person trying to protect themselves and what they own. Most people who tend to be offended by prenups don't have much to lose. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 5:51:50 AM |
I still remember that, I decided marrage must have little value when people who have it put it before the person
Perhaps her family wanted to ensure the estate remained in the family and she listened to her family in much the same way as your Grandfather listened to his community. "Go ahead, Grandma, remarry and be happy, but make sure this geezer isn't looking for your money."
^^ It cuts both ways Sam. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 6:02:18 AM | 1kindman - as a financial planner, I regularly recommend prenups. In many cases they are necessary to determine from the outset how pre-existing assets or children from previous marriages will be dealt with.
However - in Canada a pre-nup (called a marital agreement) cannot supercede the provincial marital property act. So a party cannot willingly sign away all the rights which the government provides to married couples. This includes equal shares of all property and assets aquired during the marriage, child support which is manditory according to a provincial formula, and cannot deviate from that formula. Spousal support may be negotiated within the government limits. There is also a manditory requirement that both parties get independent legal advice from their own lawyers. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 6:07:19 AM | ZENBETH wrote
Serenity Sam wrote: I was disturbed by what I heard on a forum so thought I would put this to the readers.A guy commented regarding women and quality of life. It went like this, if you cant provide for her why should she stay around. .......What is your view on the topic?
STILL CANT FIGURE OUT HOW TO HIGHLIGHT SOMEONE ELSES QUOTES, HOMEONE HELP
Thanks Lintspoter it worked
I feel today, success of a family( with children) is dependant on a two income household, both parents working to survive and thrive, given the other components of love, admiration, and a genuine need to be with the other person exists. If they both wanted children then marrage is essential for the stability of the children and isnt that what it is actually about, marrage that is? I see no reason for marrage when children are not a factor.
I wouldnt marry anyone today, there is no reason for it, since child rearing is no longer a factor, two people can co-habitate without marrage, since in essence its just a legal contract which is only a security viehicle to those who might be insecure. What she has remains hers, what he has remains his. What expenses they occur as a group they share together. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 6:12:39 AM |
I wouldnt marry anyone today, there is no reason for it, since child rearing is no longer a factor, two people can co-habitate without marrage, since in essence its just a legal contract which is only a security viehicle to those who might be insecure. What she has remains hers, what he has remains his. What expenses occur they share together. Cohabitation brings with it the same financial responsibility towards each other that marriage entails in most places. Hell, where I live a relationship of permanence even with separate residences maintained brings about some financial responsibility for anything accrued during that relationship.
Everyone should check the laws of the area they live in as family law is constantly changing to adapt to more modern relationships.
STILL CANT FIGURE OUT HOW TO HIGHLIGHT SOMEONE ELSES QUOTES, HOMEONE HELP
http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts469064.aspx
 | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 7:00:42 AM |
ItsMargo wrote:
Perhaps her family wanted to ensure the estate remained in the family and she listened to her family in much the same way as your Grandfather listened to his community. "Go ahead, Grandma, remarry and be happy, but make sure this geezer isn't looking for your money
I imagine this may have been the case, they both grew up during an era when cohabitation was frowned on by society. They both decided to lead seperate lives, my grandfather continued to write, spend time with friends and his community. I don't what happened with this other woman that he had previously been engaged with. I just know I visited him in NYC and he came down to visit us in NJ. I think a lifetime with my grandmother at the age of 82 was fulfilling for him and saw no need for remarrying, he had other women friend that enjoyed his company, my guess is he found contentment being single after 50 some odd years with my grandmother. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 7:28:58 AM |
What is your view on the topic? I think it's TOTAL BS, hey, you asked!
Aren't some of these guys the SAME ones who post in forums about how much they DISLIKE exactly what they seem to be advocating as "desirable" here? You SAY you want a woman who doesn't see you as a checkbook.....YET....you don't like "independent women, "masculine" women, women who work, women who have any autonomy in life!!!!
You get EXACTLY what you wish for....and then cry about it!
I cant help to think are we as a society that shallow, bypassing good people for holding out on material gains, and loosing characteristics, chance at love in the name of materials? LOL! this is sheer insanity! Dude....I get bypassed all the time simply because I worked for a living and now have a good retirement income to show for it; but I'm not going to create a thread and whine about the fact! REVERSE DISCRIMINATION is STILL....>DISCRIMINATION!
I fully recognize that most men want a woman who is very dependent on them, because it makes them feel needed. Unfortunately, men (and I'm NOT man bashing...I adore men!) but you men ASK for this!!! You put your entire sense of self worth into how much money you earn...and you insist that women who earn a living are "masculine, independent" and not "old fashioned" enough for you. Well, it's time you realize that the BIGGEST reason that women traditionally got married in the first place....was to BE SUPPORTED financially. You really need to ask yourselves why you lament the bygone days of the 1950s.....and THEN turn right around and talk about how sad it is that women expect you to provide for the materially! It's BECAUSE....THOSE ARE THE WOMEN that YOU look for....and desire!
What you (men) are looking for...is a woman that they can COMPETE with....and win. The problem IS, that many women today are NOT looking to COMPETE; we're looking for PARTNERS.....TRUE partners, who don't view us as "The ENEMY" (competition) but who view our equal contributions as our commitment to the overall good of the relationship. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 7:38:49 AM |
I was disturbed by what I heard on a forum so thought I would put this to the readers.
A guy commented regarding women and quality of life. It went like this, if you cant provide for her why should she stay around. As sadly a statement as it sounds, I come to agree in many situations, men have no chance at a successful relation if they cant provide finances, stability, and other check lists many women have regarding essentials for a relationship. I cant help to think are we as a society that shallow, bypassing good people for holding out on material gains, and loosing characteristics, chance at love in the name of materials?
I realize there are some that have inner fortatude and dont succume to that, but I cant help realizing that many bypass what they value as meaningful to a succesful relationship.
What is your view on the topic?
For me, it's not about seeking out a "rich man" so he can shower me with gifts and treat me like a so called "Princess", but having a man that is capable of maintaining our household, etc....should we fall into a given crisis (i.e. I am hospitalized or can no longer work due to a health condition, etc....) and vice versa. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 7:46:35 AM | GrandmaBooBoo wrote:
What is your view on the topic?
I think it's TOTAL BS, hey, you asked!
Aren't some of these guys the SAME ones who post in forums about how much they DISLIKE exactly what they seem to be advocating as "desirable" here? You SAY you want a woman who doesn't see you as a checkbook.....YET....you don't like "independent women, "masculine" women, women who work, women who have any autonomy in life!!!!
You get EXACTLY what you wish for....and then cry about it!
I cant help to think are we as a society that shallow, bypassing good people for holding out on material gains, and loosing characteristics, chance at love in the name of materials?
LOL! this is sheer insanity! Dude....I get bypassed all the time simply because I worked for a living and now have a good retirement income to show for it; but I'm not going to create a thread and whine about the fact! REVERSE DISCRIMINATION is STILL....>DISCRIMINATION!
I fully recognize that most men want a woman who is very dependent on them, because it makes them feel needed. Unfortunately, men (and I'm NOT man bashing...I adore men!) but you men ASK for this!!! You put your entire sense of self worth into how much money you earn...and you insist that women who earn a living are "masculine, independent" and not "old fashioned" enough for you. Well, it's time you realize that the BIGGEST reason that women traditionally got married in the first place....was to BE SUPPORTED financially. You really need to ask yourselves why you lament the bygone days of the 1950s.....and THEN turn right around and talk about how sad it is that women expect you to provide for the materially! It's BECAUSE....THOSE ARE THE WOMEN that YOU look for....and desire!
The ask for response was to solicit both gender views, regarding on mans response to a question imposed before him. Why some men are overlooked as a compatable partner, if he is down on his luck when finances may be an issue. This person responded with, "Why would a women stick around if you cant offer her anything" My view was that when people view others by what they have to offer financially they are missing what this person might have to offer that isnt material based. I see this view conflicting with many people that have succumed to realize that although "money cant buy you love" it pays rent and bills. I have helped out women friends also when they were down on thier luck, but I never discounted them due to the circumstances life threw at them. I dont think anyone ever wants to be a burden on someone else if they can help it. What I do have an issue with is somone who is past the age of child rearing who may try to use marrage or the other person for financial gains, expecting them to foot thier expenses. Regardless of sex.
What you (men) are looking for...is a woman that they can COMPETE with....and win. The problem IS, that many women today are NOT looking to COMPETE; we're looking for PARTNERS.....TRUE partners, who don't view us as "The ENEMY" (competition) but who view our equal contributions as our commitment to the overall good of the relationship.
| |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 7:53:18 AM | Ya know, Yew.. I dont know what is so anti-woman about it. Here's a statement that will probably get even MORE women's panties all bunched up
MOST men are totally SURPRISED at the announcement that the woman they are with is pregnant. I'm talking about less than 15% were working on the PLAN of TRYING to make a kid. The others were sailing along believing in the regular taking of birth control.. and just not ready. It's the woman who decides when SHE is ready. Many times that decision is made WITHOUT PRIOR DISCUSSION OR CONSENT from the man.
Instinctually.. men dont have the DRIVE to experience fatherhood. They dont have a clock ticking.. seeing others with babies is NOT "Oh so CUUUUUUUTE" with all the cooing and smiles. To MOST men a child is an 18 yr RESPONSIBILITY. This means MORE hard work, LESS money to enjoy life with, MORE pulls on their time, and so so MANY times.. a lot less sex, since the women disgard the man's needs as a MAN to focus on the kid.
Shhhhhh.. we cant.. the baby might wake up
shhhhh we cant.. the kids might hear us
You cant sleep naked anymore cause of little johnny's fears where I let him come into bed with us
etc etc etc ad nauseum.
One of the BIGGEST complaints that men have is where their wives start IGNORING them AS A MAN and put ALL their effort and energy INTO THE KIDS.. but ALSO.. start nagging the man that he just cant do a damn thing right. Cant change the diaper, cant take out the trash, doesnt help out enough..
Ever think it's because he was a conscript and not a volunteer?
Lady.. I NEVER said being a mom was a bad thing. Neither did I say that being INTERESTED in having children was a bad thing either.
I'm glad you were a stay at home mom. That means you put the kids first.. AND had a man willing to carry the entire financial burden.. Good for you, for the sake of your kids.. BETTER for you.. and the kids.. that they HAD a good provider who took ON that burden of feeding, clothing, and housing ALL of you.
Tell me.. what happened to that marriage anyway.. if everything was SO SO HAPPY?
Why are you here on a dating site?
Ya know.. your profile says..
" I took a personality quiz recently,and the result compartmentalized me as an introvert/idealist..... I have the attention span of a fruitfly.
Reality 101:Make big decisions with your head..small ones with your heart."
To your thread comments here.. I'd agree with all of that. It's to the last one I direct ALL men to read.
In conclusion.. it's amazing to me that YOU took such offense at what I wrote as a personal preference for whom I wish to date. Remember.. "Offense" is ALWAYS taken.. never given.
I'd sure like the answers to what happened to your marriage. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:04:22 AM | From previous quote, hope I get my view across, but think it may just inspire another string of tangent responses, so here goes nothing, lol CONTINUED
The response was regarding a guy from another forum who made the statement, "If you can't offer her anything why would she stay with you". Naturally everyone responded to it differently, had different views of what the sentence actually mean but heard the words from thier own experience. The way I interpreted it was that why would somone stay with someone else if they had nothing to offer. Naturally if there were no common thread that made each one not even care about one another naturally that is obvious. But here, its a man saying, "If he can provide support, expecting to be the supporter" First I find this statement lost in the past, when one person could support a family, its no longer a factor today so that is irrelevant. I think a more apropriate statement should be why would a man or a women consider the other if either one couldnt provide support. I realize women have this internal clock and many may not feel fulfilled without completing her materal need to bear a child. It is so prevalant today with women deciding to have a child out of wedlock and putting this before everything else. Most women will admit, the child is the most important thing in thier live, its the best thing that happened to them. When someone takes that step with the man they choose and it doesnt work out, its that women and mans responsability. I see women with children who look for others to compensate for thier misfortune in the father they chose and look for men to help raise thier children. My own brother made that mistake being taken in by such a person, so I have some ill feelings in this regard. And naturally he has learnt from it. He is a responsable man, it was his second marrage, he provided child support for his first child and had his boy each weekend. He helped raise this womens children although it was a burden, he came to love the kids even though he lost his love of the women who had used him. I know once the last remaining child that exists between them is grown he will get rid of her because she doesnt contribute to the household, only spends her income on herself and the credit card bills she accumulated on unnessearry items has been a hardship on him and the children. She is basically a very selfish person. The children were asked a number of years ago, two her natural sons, and one between them, who they would want to be with if they divorced, all chose my brother, non wanted to stay with the natuarl mother. Some people have to learn the hard way. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:40:43 AM | 1kindman[[[Tell me.. what happened to that marriage anyway.. if everything was SO SO HAPPY?
Why are you here on a dating site? ]]]
All you had to do, is look closer at my profile to see my marital status. My husband passed away. But that has nothting to do with the point I was making. Your post is anti woman to me, because it was a direct put down to women who are interested in being Moms. You said something about it being a need to make them feel more like a woman. Women don't need children to feel womanly. And I have known plenty of men, who were just as excited about becoming Dad's as their wife/girlfriend. I'm really baffled at the way you are describing children to be such burdens to men. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:48:34 AM | ikind man about my profile[[[" I took a personality quiz recently,and the result compartmentalized me as an introvert/idealist..... I have the attention span of a fruitfly.
Reality 101:Make big decisions with your head..small ones with your heart."]]]]
And your point is? I have a focusing problem when it comes to books. I can't concentrate real well on them. I have no problem mentioning some of my imperfections.
The reality statement is one I will stand by till I die. The other way around, will get us in trouble way too often. I don't always abide by it 100%. But I do think it's best not to "follow your heart." The heart doesn't think...neither does the genitalia. | |
|
| Love,Quality of life and who pays
Posted: 11/2/2009 8:53:42 AM | Generalize much?
I have met my share that would and have gladly over the years reap much from my labor.
Just be able to hold you own gentlemen, those days are gone me carrying the major part of the load. I won't and can't anymore.
Some men are after a sugar momma to.
I would never dump someone I loved in between jobs or careers, but he better not be a job snob until he finds what he wants.
Be a clerk or something until a offer comes along, and don't sit at home waiting for the bus so to speak..
Any one of us could have what we have go poof at any time. | |
|
|
| Page 3 of 28
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 |
|
Home
login 
