a question for american men

[Very_Bad_Man]

The real question has not been asked or answered.

Do women care how much money you earn or have?

Yes, yes they do when it comes to long term commitments.

I'm not claiming all women are gold diggers but security is an issue.

It matter little what men think.

Facts are facts.

 

[kbate]

So despite having learned from such experts as AJ and Amicus that all women make all decisions based on emotion, we now learn from other experts such as VBM that women do not base their most important life decisions on emotion, but rather on cold-hard economics.

I'm confused.

 

[Wok]

seriously, do you honestly believe a woman's interest in you is directly proportional to the size of your wallet?

(not judging, just doing a little statistical investigation)

Yes, healthcare is not cheap in America.

 

[great lover]

seriously, do you honestly believe a woman's interest in you is directly proportional to the size of your wallet?

(not judging, just doing a little statistical investigation)

Yes!

 

[xssve]

Well there are a number of considerations but that typically comes in relatively high on the list, yes.

From an evolutionary standpoint, it merely reflects a feminine motivation to secure optimal resources for her progeny, but being largely a subconscious or even unconscious motivation, it is susceptible to abstraction.

i.e., men seek to maximize their economic utility to obtain pussy, which results in reproduction as a statistical probability.

So wealth technically represents fertility: the more sheep you have, the more wives you can support, and the more kids you can feed.

All of which means, if you're a bond trader and you don't have a penthouse staffed with hot sluts, you're doing it wrong.

Of course, a better example might be a professional athlete who has a big wallet and a big dick, they seem to get the connection.

 

[butters]

So despite having learned from such experts as AJ and Amicus that all women make all decisions based on emotion, we now learn from other experts such as VBM that women do not base their most important life decisions on emotion, but rather on cold-hard economics.

I'm confused.

don't fret our pretty head over it, kbate *flaps hand*. let the men decide all that sort of thing; as women, we have far more important things to discuss such as which is the best shop to buy our man's favourite steak from, and if he prefers us in seamed nylons or crotchless pantyhose

*pats hair*

 

[xssve]

It depends a great deal on who shot you down last, and why.

 

[Very_Bad_Man]

So despite having learned from such experts as AJ and Amicus that all women make all decisions based on emotion, we now learn from other experts such as VBM that women do not base their most important life decisions on emotion, but rather on cold-hard economics.

I'm confused.

try reading the results of questionnaires and studies you may learn sumptin.

and as a lesbian wtf would you know.

dumbass

 

[kbate]

try reading the results of questionnaires and studies you may learn sumptin.

and as a lesbian wtf would you know.

dumbass

Looking for the questionnaire in your post. Nope, not there. Just ignorant remarks from another 'genius'.

I hate to bring this up but for you isn't long term commitment equivalent to paying for the whole night?

(quotes used to indicate that I do not truly consider you a genius.)

 

[neci]

weirdness you wouldn't get in america.

i love my job and it pays like shit. some of the clients are quite wealthy. in america i would be expected to defer to them. here it's slightly awkward...
after a few months in the job i figured out a serious problem: my clients were often feeling like they should defer to me, with some of them being obviously very uncomfortable having me work for them. why? because they have 'common' accents and i speak in an accent associated with a higher social class. i started deliberately slaughtering the english language and, like magic, my clients were comfortable in my company.

i've done the same.

 

[Very_Bad_Man]

Looking for the questionnaire in your post. Nope, not there. Just ignorant remarks from another 'genius'.

I hate to bring this up but for you isn't long term commitment equivalent to paying for the whole night?

(quotes used to indicate that I do not truly consider you a genius.)

Do your own research lazy bitch.

I do recall several discussions in which I submitted numerous links to support my claims which you never replied. You and Recidiva are cut from the same cloth. Well read but no real life experiences. When anybody proves you're wrong you ignore any further discussion.

You are what we in real world call an educated idiot. Book learned but no real experience. Oh but your grammar is divine.

 

[Very_Bad_Man]

Oh yeah to the OP.

Your thread is a sideways attempt at slamming Americans. Go fuck yourself. Really. Cause nobody else wants it.

Europeans are the most class conscience people around. Yeah, this includes the Brits. Cunt.

 

[butters]

Oh yeah to the OP.

Your thread is a sideways attempt at slamming Americans. Go fuck yourself. Really. Cause nobody else wants it.

Europeans are the most class conscience people around. Yeah, this includes the Brits. Cunt.

silly bugger

nope, it was a investigation that kind of proved my theory: lots of american men believe what AJ does when it comes to wallets, but plenty don't, and most the american women aren't so bloody thick as to be interested more in a man because he has a fatter wallet than her current partner.

yeah, keep trying hard at keeping up that very bad man image you nurture so carefully.

 

[Very_Bad_Man]

silly bugger

nope, it was a investigation that kind of proved my theory: lots of american men believe what AJ does when it comes to wallets, but plenty don't, and most the american women aren't so bloody thick as to be interested more in a man because he has a fatter wallet than her current partner.

yeah, keep trying hard at keeping up that very bad man image you nurture so carefully.

Here is a new thought for you.

there is this silly thing here called dishonest reality. What people write here is not necessarily their real reality. people here state opinions to fit in a certain clique or to be viewed a certain way. I can't tell you how many times a person states one thing on the GB and in PM states the opposite.

Oh yes the PC response is what many gave here which is a lot of horseshit really. I never claimed that women are motivated just by wallet size however the ability to provide is a motivating factor. There is an saying I heard by many women, "there are men we fuck and then there are men we marry", meaning in the end they want a man who can provide. Sociological studies support this.

 

[butters]

Here is a new thought for you.

there is this silly thing here called dishonest reality. What people write here is not necessarily their real reality. people here state opinions to fit in a certain clique or to be viewed a certain way. I can't tell you how many times a person states one thing on the GB and in PM states the opposite.

Oh yes the PC response is what many gave here which is a lot of horseshit really. I never claimed that women are motivated just by wallet size however the ability to provide is a motivating factor. There is an saying I heard by many women, "there are men we fuck and then there are men we marry", meaning in the end they want a man who can provide. Sociological studies support this.

try standing on a box when you attempt to patronise

 

[Very_Bad_Man]

try standing on a box when you attempt to patronise

Very poor attempt at a misdirect.

As far as patronizing I think you have that market cornered.

 

[butters]

Very poor attempt at a misdirect.

As far as patronizing I think you have that market cornered.

that's because you choose to view things through that jaundiced little eye of yours and judge others by your own standards.

here - a perfectly out in the open question followed by a perfectly reasonable reply:

Q: seriously, do you honestly believe a woman's interest in you is directly proportional to the size of your wallet?

(not judging, just doing a little statistical investigation)

A: Not proportional, no.

I think women in general want their men to have a job or some means of support, and there is a small subset that fixates on income as an indicator of success.





see? simple as that. it wasn't a difficult question, and required no dancing around the rooftops.

 

[Sean]

people here state opinions to fit in a certain clique or to be viewed a certain way.

Been a couple of months since I've seen this one.

 

[Very_Bad_Man]

that's because you choose to view things through that jaundiced little eye of yours and judge others by your own standards.

here - a perfectly out in the open question followed by a perfectly reasonable reply:

Q: seriously, do you honestly believe a woman's interest in you is directly proportional to the size of your wallet?

(not judging, just doing a little statistical investigation)

A: Not proportional, no.

I think women in general want their men to have a job or some means of support, and there is a small subset that fixates on income as an indicator of success.





see? simple as that. it wasn't a difficult question, and required no dancing around the rooftops.

As I said.

You have the market cornered on patronizing.

the opinion given there is an opinion and like assholes everybody has one. However, it flies contrary to surveys and sociological studies. sure, a women is not likely to marry or hang with an asshole regardless of his money.

Case in point and humorous to watch is a show called The Millionaire Matchmaker. http://www.bravotv.com/the-millionaire-matchmaker
This show proves that money alone will not win a girl even when they ARE looking for a man with money. However, anybody with real experience and not trying to be the "cool kid" would admit that ability to provide is a factor. Denying this is denying reality.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I think a slight distinction needs to be made here between class and money. As for all practical purposes money equates to class in the states, it is easy to see them as the same despite the small differences.

If England had a Princess and she wanted to marry a truck driver the population would have a shit fit. Rightfully so, the odds a truck driver could carry out the functions needed of a royal are very small. ( Meeting heads of state, etc..)

Just like the odds that I could marry some girl behind the counter of Starbucks and expect her to entertain, dine with clients, etc.. would be small.

So when the douchbag blue collar guy hits on the hot chick in the business suit at the bar and she turns him down, he assumes it is because of money...not class.

Despite the fact that there is a very good chance he would never fit in to her world, and they probably have nothing in common. She knows that, and so does he. But calling her a gold digger makes his fragile ego feel better.

 

[blobfish]

If women judged prospective partners based solely on emotion connection, I'd be set. But they don't, and I'm not. Part of that is my own choosing, though; I would rather not marry than feel like dead weight. No matter what anyone says, it is the man's job to provide. Even if the wife works too, the husband should at least have a similar income, not just for the sake of his own ego, but also for his wife. If not, everyone will say that she married a bum, and they'll be right.

 

[butters]

If women judged prospective partners based solely on emotion connection, I'd be set. But they don't, and I'm not. Part of that is my own choosing, though; I would rather not marry than feel like dead weight. No matter what anyone says, it is the man's job to provide. Even if the wife works too, the husband should at least have a similar income, not just for the sake of his own ego, but also for his wife. If not, everyone will say that she married a bum, and they'll be right.

ok, let me give you a personal example to consider:

my best friend's husband has just turned 50. he has worked all his life since leaving university, and spent the majority of his working years as a research cancer scientist for a london hospital, barely ever taking time off. my bestie had been married and a housewife for most her adult life, wasn't 'allowed' to go out to work, and was divorced a couple of years before she met him.

they've moved up country into a house he's invested money into by way of selling off his deceased mother's house, and my friend's house down here is in the process of being sold, but most the money from that sale will go back to the mortgage provider, with just some to go into their joint bank account.

now my bf's husband took an early retirement instead of being laid off in the nhs cutbacks. since moving up country the sort of work he's being offered is ... pathetic, really. they have a pup, chickens, and have been decorating throughout... my friend has a job, nothing fancy.

between them they have come to the conclusion that, for now, she will remain working while he stays home to run the place. this suits both of them to a T, as she is making up lost time and loves working, meeting more people and so on. he is more than happy running the home, cooking the meals (he is an excellent cook!) and being more apart from people as a general rule.

does this make him a bum? does it make him lazy? no, it means it's a solution they've come to that absolutely suits them best as a couple. things may change in teh future, but for now they are perfectly content this way. running a household was never, ever an easy job.

 

[berry juice]

If women judged prospective partners based solely on emotion connection, I'd be set. But they don't, and I'm not. Part of that is my own choosing, though; I would rather not marry than feel like dead weight. No matter what anyone says, it is the man's job to provide. Even if the wife works too, the husband should at least have a similar income, not just for the sake of his own ego, but also for his wife. If not, everyone will say that she married a bum, and they'll be right.

ditto

 

[bronzeage]

If women judged prospective partners based solely on emotion connection, I'd be set. But they don't, and I'm not. Part of that is my own choosing, though; I would rather not marry than feel like dead weight. No matter what anyone says, it is the man's job to provide. Even if the wife works too, the husband should at least have a similar income, not just for the sake of his own ego, but also for his wife. If not, everyone will say that she married a bum, and they'll be right.

I once judged my partners solely on emotion connection and made a few poor choices.

There was a point in my life where I was suddenly single, and realized I could actually pick and choose my next partner. A few did not make the cut. Along with general compatibility, she also had to have a job, or at least be capable and willing to get one. I had to let one incredible woman go because I knew she would be a financial drain, all the way to bankruptcy. If I had Bill Gate's money, I would have kept her and probably been quite happy. As it was, she was out, and the next one up turned out to be a perfect candidate.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

If women judged prospective partners based solely on emotion connection, I'd be set. But they don't, and I'm not. Part of that is my own choosing, though; I would rather not marry than feel like dead weight. No matter what anyone says, it is the man's job to provide. Even if the wife works too, the husband should at least have a similar income, not just for the sake of his own ego, but also for his wife. If not, everyone will say that she married a bum, and they'll be right.

That is bull shit.

While rare, if the situation presents itself a man is just as capable of staying at home and taking care of the kids as a woman.

Unfortunately in todays world having one stay at home parent, no matter the gender is rare.

While woman typically have a better temperament for this, it is not always the case. No matter who it is that stays home, the kids benefit.