|
|
|
|
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/18/2009 2:01:58 AM | Time out for a quick check of the scoreboard…
Msg #65 by GotFin is indeed a bit crazed, but does contain a couple kernels of truth. (2 minutes in the penalty box.)
Msg #68 by Ace presents a sensible and wise perspective. (High fives.)
Those who point out that men can also be gold diggers are right. (More high fives.)
As to the OP, 4151 e-mails in a 2 and a half year dating relationship? Don’t you have a phone? You said you even traveled afar with her--didn’t you ever actually see her in person much? That’s almost 5 e-mails every day—that sounds more like puppy love than well-adjusted adults. (Deduct major points for being whack.)
Oh, and you took her to romantic places like Hawaii yet never tried to knock the bottom out of her? Forget about deducting points, you are now the mayor of Whackville. Next time, mind The 10 Hour Rule. (Report to the penalty box, and let GotFin out.)
OT: I’m Old School (okay, maybe a relic enough to be Olde School). If I ask a woman on a date, I want to pay until further notice. She can buy a drink or an ice cream later or something token, but traditions such as holding doors open and picking up checks is The Manly Thing To Do—even if she makes more money. Chivalry pays dividends to both parties in its own satisfying way. (Score!)
Later in the relationship, we can more closely share dating expenses since we are sharing our lives, at least to the extent that we are by then investing most of our free time in each other. If one pays a dating expense without a second thought, and the other one does likewise the next time, that is a sign of mutual maturity and compatibility. If the parties have to keep score of who spends the money for dates, it isn’t going to work out on other issues as well, so eventually it just won’t work out overall. (Extra point after.)
[Time in! Resume play…] | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/18/2009 3:17:43 AM | Ace,
I hope you don't think kids aren't still being beaten. My information is that rates of physical abuse of spouses and children, as well as sexual abuse of children, are higher than ever today. During the past couple centuries, many thousands of English and Americans--including some of the best--were at times hit on the legs with a switch, rod, cane, belt, etc. as punishment in school or at home. There is a world of difference between this sort of occasional physical discipline, which may have done more good overall than harm, and continual, irrational beatings by family members, which are always harmful, never justified, and sometimes criminal.
You're right that an exception to a rule doesn't disprove it. But it raises doubts about a rule to show that it's not true in at least one instance. (I'm thinking like a lawyer here.) I also wanted to suggest that the rule may not be as great as he was claiming. He made the flat statement that it works, and I was showing that if a long-term relationship were the goal, delaying intercourse until marriage seemed to work even better. I suppose he'd counter that it was unrealistic to do that today--but I don't see any reason to think it was any easier for couples in the 1930's. They had libidos just like we do. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/18/2009 3:26:33 AM | Sock,
You nailed it. I agree with all your points. I look at paying for dates and chivalry just the same way--especially at first, and especially when I invited her. Later on, I've found it's a great feeling when the lady sometimes insists on buying the drinks, or whatever. Makes me feel appreciated. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/18/2009 9:58:48 AM | | Ace, Sock, Matchlight, I agree with you. There is something about a man who insists on caring for his woman. If a man wants to be an equal paycheck buddy, he is welcome to go find himself a woman who is willing to go along with that. But I find it both dishonoring and annoying, and proof that a man doesn't feel he has anything to offer. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/18/2009 2:43:27 PM |
But I find it both dishonoring and annoying, and proof that a man doesn't feel he has anything to offer.
You don't want to be with him just because you enjoy his company? What are you offering? | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/18/2009 3:30:31 PM | Hey Matchlight,
I worked for a while as a domestic violence treatment counselor. I am well aware that physical abuse is still with us. What has changed is the prevailing social attitude toward it. Back in the day, the accepted response was to stay out of it. Not so now.
Another prevailing attitude that has changed for the better: the old presumption that one gender is more credible and more capable than the other is just about gone. Good riddance!
The rules have changed for the better, overall. Exceptions are duly noted.
What couples had back then that weighed in heavily against their libidos was an intense amount of social pressure. Before reliable birth control, that degree of stigma was probably seen as necessary to prevent children for whom there wasn't adequate support. These days, there's no such overwhelming reason to delay sex.
There might be a strategic reason--if one is only interested in a lifelong partnership. However, speaking only for myself, I don't like being gamed that way. A woman who is stingy with her affections is just as bad as a man who is stingy with his money. Both display a "me first" attitude that is, at best, unbecoming.
I'm new school. That doesn't mean I won't pay my respects to a woman. However, to me it makes a lot more sense to be solicitious toward those to whom I'm bonded than it does to those I'm just getting to know. It means so much more when you do it, not because it's expected, but because it's sweet. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 12:34:50 PM | I don't regard delaying sex as being "stingy with affections."
Sex can cause a powerful bond, especially with a woman, and if the relationship fails it is exponentially more painful if sex is involved.
To regard a woman who delays sex as "gaming" you simply displays a lack of understanding of the way that a woman's heart works. Also, every man must know that if a lady will lie down easily with you, perhaps she will lie down just as easily with another, and this may not create an image of her being good mate material.
Therefore, a woman is either "stingy with her affections" or cheap and easy...
Frankly, it's better for everyone if you wait.
If sex is to be the coin of the realm, perhaps it's best to be upfront. Personally, I'd rather not be gamed that way. Women have much more than pink mucosa to offer a man. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 4:08:25 PM |
A woman who is stingy with her affections is just as bad as a man who is stingy with his money Affection does not necessarily equal sex. Being physically and emotionally intimate and affectionate, does not have to involve intercourse. A woman should never be expected to provide sexual favors to anyone, before she is ready and feels comfortable in doing so. I know this was probably just bad wording on your part, because I know you feel the same way.
Just as there is the difference between being stingy or greedy with your money, is not the same as not having much of it. If you have it and want to spend it, fine. If you do not have it, most women are pretty accommodating. Men should not be expected to spend money they do not have just to keep a woman happy, nor should they have to worry that their sexual partner is going to deny them if they don't have much.
In either case, if you find a man who is not willing to part with cash, or a woman that is not affectionate... you can make your decisions based on what you want from a relationship, if that is what is really important to you. If you choose a woman with purposes of spending money on her to enhance your chances of getting some poon, well, you get what you pay for and don't come whining to me.
More than the reality of both of these things, I resent the subjects of money and sex being tied together in this way, unless you are discussing prostitution specifically. It's really quite tacky and cheapens both genders.
These days, there's no such overwhelming reason to delay sex. Put down the crack pipe and back away from the keyboard!
Sure, the fears of unwanted pregnancy are not so urgent... But the only birth control that still carries the 100% certainty is abstaining or being sterilized. Being an unwed mother does not carry the stigma it once did. But it's far from being a Saturday night party.
If anyone is paying attention to health issues, the fears of STD's have increased. And oddly, in the older age groups that should know better.
According to the CDC, it's a very real issue. They have broken it down by age, gender, race and location.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/health-disparities/default.htm
"Approximately 20 million people are currently infected with HPV. At least 50 percent of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives. By age 50, at least 80 percent of women will have acquired genital HPV infection. About 5.5 million Americans get a new genital HPV infection each year." HPV can cause cervical cancer.
"AIDS cases among Americans over 50 have quintupled since 1995, up from 16,300 in 1995 to 90,600 in 2003. Today, seniors represent an estimated 14 percent of total AIDS cases and senior women represent 18 percent of female AIDS cases."
If you get pregnant, there are options. If you get an STD... not all of them are curable. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 4:11:53 PM |
I resent the subjects of money and sex being tied together in this way, unless you are discussing prostitution specifically. It's really quite tacky and cheapens both genders.
I couldn't have said it better Mominatrix. I agree. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 5:12:54 PM | And thank you for reassuring me that it's not just me that saw something dreadfully wrong with it...
Going back and reading the original post, it's quite sad. Sad that he stayed there for 2 1/2 years, when he could see it was going nowhere... but sadder that he seems happier to have the money than someone he was so obviously fond of, for some time.
There were things that the post left out, since she was older, is it reasonable to assume that she did not believe in pre-marital sex? It's not out of the question. Now was he spending that kind of money because he expected a sexual return on his investment, or because he wanted to do those things and wanted someone to do them with? If you assume the former, he would have gotten much further with a whore. And if that is what he wanted, why was he with a woman who was obviously not affectionate, either physically or sexually? Did he expect to win her over with expensive gifts?
It's just a rant, because he was hurt, and not just his feelings, his pride. Realistically, no woman or man who is a gold digger is going to come on here and try to explain the root cause of their avaricious behavior. Mostly because they don't see anything wrong with it. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 6:40:58 PM |
"AIDS cases among Americans over 50 have quintupled since 1995, up from 16,300 in 1995 to 90,600 in 2003. Today, seniors represent an estimated 14 percent of total AIDS cases and senior women represent 18 percent of female AIDS cases."
I wonder how this is tied in to the fact that perhaps the "youthful" of 20 years ago are now our "seniors" or those that fall into the 50 yr. old plus range. again, perhaps the symptoms were ignored years ago and are now the full reality for those with AIDS-related health issues.
you know, the old "THAT will never happen to me" mindset.
just a thought....... | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 7:14:10 PM |
Affection does not necessarily equal sex. Being physically and emotionally intimate and affectionate, does not have to involve intercourse. A woman should never be expected to provide sexual favors to anyone, before she is ready and feels comfortable in doing so. I know this was probably just bad wording on your part, because I know you feel the same way.
Here's the thing. For many men, the line between affection and sex is blurred. That is something that women don't understand about men. When the urge is high, affection feels condescending. I am so glad that my drives have settled down enough that I can tell the difference. Affection for it's own sake is a wonderful thing. Sex for it's own sake can be too. When both happen together, that can be wonderful. However, generally speaking, female culture only values affection and male culture only values sex. Women get hurt when sex is used as a substitute for affection. Men get hurt when affection is used as a substitute for sex. Of course, men don't complain about it directly. They get resentful and take action to try to solve the problem, such as by employing a rule like our above poster did.
Just as there is the difference between being stingy or greedy with your money, is not the same as not having much of it. If you have it and want to spend it, fine. If you do not have it, most women are pretty accommodating. Men should not be expected to spend money they do not have just to keep a woman happy, nor should they have to worry that their sexual partner is going to deny them if they don't have much.
Agreed. However, gold diggers don't see it that way--no matter how many e-mails you exchange.
More than the reality of both of these things, I resent the subjects of money and sex being tied together in this way, unless you are discussing prostitution specifically. It's really quite tacky and cheapens both genders.
It's not sex per se. It's sex as an indicator of acceptance and affection. That's what women don't seem to grasp about men. It's not simply about sex. It's about what sex stands for--acceptance, affection, acknowledgment of a man's humanity. We don't articulate that because we aren't encouraged to look at our own deeper motivations, but that doesn't mean we don't have them.
If there was some other ritual that would communicate total acceptance, men would gratefully ease up. I have. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 7:50:02 PM |
It's about what sex stands for--acceptance, affection, acknowledgment of a man's humanity. We don't articulate that because we aren't encouraged to look at our own deeper motivations, but that doesn't mean we don't have them. Now, I know you well enough to know that you know, that not all men view it as such. The portion of men that view it that way, is overrun by the ones who view it as self gratification and "exercise."
Do not be fooled, we get it that sex equals our love and approval towards most men. However, you may have to earn our approval, trust and intimacy. We need to make sure that you are worthy of further intimacy, and are not going to take our trust and crush it under your heel.
For most of us, where our groins go, our heart follows and even may precede. We have a responsibility to ourselves to protect our hearts, so they do not grow bitter.
In the same way, some women equate money and gifts, with the same noble things that you say men equate sex with. Do you wish to defend them as well?
Keep it up there Zippy, and you won't get a hug the next time I see you. I would so hate to be condescending!
| |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 7:58:21 PM | | I think the problem BOTH men and women get into is when they start to expect, demand, or think they are entitled to something. If you get into a relationship it should be because you truly want to be with that person. Not because your expecting them to do something for you or to you. Whether this be money or sex. | |
|
| |
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 8:05:32 PM | The only thing I expect is chocolate.
I accept nothing less.
And I think if I see the term "gold digger" mentioned in just one more forum thread, I'm either going to vomit or my head is going to burst violently into flames. Maybe both. I've never met a freaking "gold digger" in my entire life. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 8:12:52 PM |
I've never met a freaking "gold digger" in my entire life.
I've never met a man that would message a woman, they hardly know, about sex. But then again, men aren't seeking me out they are seeking women. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 8:19:02 PM | I've never met one either. This may have something to do with the fact that I often go to the Church Mice for emergency loans to get through the month. On the other hand, the good news is that I am long on respect. So I can't afford a night out at The Cheesecake Factory (or rarely), but a picnic in the park with a bucket of KFC is kind of fun, and all that I expect, or accept, is the beginning of affectionate friendship. That's my conception of the foundation for anything more...and I don't think it's unrealistic or unobtainable.
If you do actually do the exploding head thing, Sterling, could you post the video on YouTube? You'll be (posthumously) famous!! | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 8:20:50 PM | But then again, men aren't seeking me out they are seeking women.
Women aren't seeking me out either - well, mostly not, anyway ... (there was that 25-year-old with the bodacious ta-ta's who emailed me, but I had to tell her it wasn't happening, it's just not my thing ..... )
At any rate, I was speaking of friends, women I know, have met, or have come in contact with in my life. After living in California for 25 years, I have yet to meet anyone who meets this overblown definition of a "gold digger". The picture painted by so many on here that you can't swing a dead cat without hitting one in Southern California pretty much boggles my mind. I've never seen this scenerio.
Maybe I just don't get out enough.  | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 8:26:40 PM | | This mostly seems to be an internet thing. Unfortunately, it seems to bring out the worst in both genders. Like road rage. I know lots of women in my everyday life that aren't like that either. But I have met a couple. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 8:30:15 PM | If you do actually do the exploding head thing, Sterling, could you post the video on YouTube?
Yes I will, Old Folkie, and I shall entitle it "Sloppy thinking only gets worse with decapitation". I just know that it will be wildly entertaining. 
This mostly seems to be an internet thing. Unfortunately, it seems to bring out the worst in both genders. Like road rage.
I couldn't agree more. I want absolutely no part of the gender wars. I have laid down my sword and pray for peace. | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 9:17:16 PM | OP,
So you went on cruises, vacations, bought her diamonds and never even held her hand...for 2-1/2 years? You actually counted 4,151 emails? Really?
So your question
What makes a gold digger a gold digger??? surprised me after your description of your relationship to this woman. It is hard to take the question seriously given your story.
My question is, weren't you a little obsessed? Sounds to me she played it out and you were complicit. Maybe there are gold diggers because there are deep pockets of gold and the owner is willing to let someone dig away.
Her comment
You are nothing without me. and your response
Oh well, it's ok. is telling of what I think the real issue is here. She had you under her thumb, you were obsessed and in denial, and low self-esteem made you an easy target.
P. T. Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every day".
 | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 9:56:51 PM |
I've never met a man that would message a woman, they hardly know, about sex. But then again, men aren't seeking me out they are seeking women. Perhaps we gold diggers should just start messaging men for luxury cars and furs... | |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 10:03:40 PM | Hey, I wonder if threads like this would be a good place to troll for someone looking to buy love and companionship in exchange for cars and other expensive stuff? Maybe it's worth a try. But, Be careful Momi, he might want to hold your hand.
| |
|
| Gold digger and 4,151 emails
Posted: 2/20/2009 10:19:55 PM |
Perhaps we gold diggers should just start messaging men for luxury cars and furs...
Hey, don't take offense if this doesn't apply to you, and I don't believe it does. I certainly don't defend the men on here that message women for sex, I was just trying to make a point with that analogy. Why do you want to defend women who do this? I never said every woman is a gold digger, not even close. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 6
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
|
Home
login 
