Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
-Public Transportation Very close, I have to say tie.
-Walkability Boston
-Vibe and Pace of life Not really sure what this means
-Waterfront setting Boston Area, an ocean is better than a lake
-Food Both good, but Chicago is probably a little better
-Nightlife Chicago, Boston's bars close too early
-Sports Boston, hands down.
-Recreation (including parks) Boston Common & Boston Public Garden vs Millenium Park & Lincoln Park...very hard, but Chicago gets the nod here.
-Community feeling Boston
-Meeting People (including dating) ?
-Best city/area for college students (undergraduates) Boston, the Mecca of colleges
-Best city/area for college graduates Boston, still the Mecca of colleges
-Best city/area for non-skilled workers Probably Chicago, I don't really know of many factories aside from Gilette in/around Boston.
-Cost of living Chicago's cheaper
-Best Climate Both are Crummy
-Best Arenas & Stadiums Wrigley vs Fenway? Tie. TD Banknorth Garden vs Delta Arena? Basically the same. Soldier Field vs Gilette Stadium? Soldier Field by infinity
-Most Ethnically and Racially Diverse Chicago
Overall both are amazing and gorgeous cities. Boston's my hometown, so obviously I love it, but I totally love Chicago too. Last time I was flying from Denver to South Carolina (where I went to school), I had a stopover in Chicago. My plane had troubles, so they pushed me onto a flight later in the night, but I insisted they put me on a flight the next morning so I could spend the night in the city. Got to meet up with some college buddies who were from Chi-Town that night. My wallet was much lighter the next morning and my liver hurt, but it was certainly worth it!
You are pitching one the most historical areas in the US, an unmatched academic tradition with a Midwestern town where everything is less than 100 years old? Of course, Boston unless you like greasy food and want to mix with fat, obnoxious farmers.
Sounds like someone had their heart broken. This just comes across as a little too bitter and specific to be a general observation of about 5 million women. Don't worry plenty of fish and the sea...time heals all wounds...you'll find that special someone...etc.
No, I'm good. My SO is from Mass.
What I wrote is a distillation of my experiences with Chicago women, obviously it's a huge generalization and should be taken with many grains of salt. My coworkers who aren't native to Chicago concur with me though, because we have something else to compare with Chicago women. The city seems to bring out the worst in otherwise comely Midwestern women. Women from Chicago are so fake (almost a caricature) compared to New England women whose two feet are much more firmly on the ground and don't have something to prove all the damn time.
Yeah, it sounded pretty dumb- I thought it was just a generalization. What I don't understand is people trying to insinuate like if you don't believe what they believe it's because they have more experience: "we all have something else to compare with Chicago women".
Trust me on this- you'll see you it when you get more experience: Chicks (or just people) are generally the same everywhere. Human nature doesn't just intrinsically change in Chicagoland. LOL
There's ******* in Chicago and there's ******* in DC. There's nice chicks in Seoul and there's nice chicks in Seattle. There's high maintenace windbags on the Central Coast and there's high maintenance windbags in Honolulu. And everything in between, all in the same place.
But I still laugh that people- ESPECIALLY in places with hundreds of thousands of people- are actually different that others. It's just so ignorant! LOL
Yeah, it sounded pretty dumb- I thought it was just a generalization. What I don't understand is people trying to insinuate like if you don't believe what they believe it's because they have more experience: "we all have something else to compare with Chicago women".
Trust me on this- you'll see you it when you get more experience: Chicks (or just people) are generally the same everywhere. Human nature doesn't just intrinsically change in Chicagoland. LOL
There's ******* in Chicago and there's ******* in DC. There's nice chicks in Seoul and there's nice chicks in Seattle. There's high maintenace windbags on the Central Coast and there's high maintenance windbags in Honolulu. And everything in between, all in the same place.
But I still laugh that people- ESPECIALLY in places with hundreds of thousands of people- are actually different that others. It's just so ignorant! LOL
There is a reason why "something in the water" cliches persist. Because it really is true! Of course there are people of various types everywhere, but what I'm going at is the distribution. I'm sure there are mathematics geniuses in low-tier community colleges, as there are retards at MIT who can't add a fraction, but the probability of you finding a math genius at a community college of equal size to MIT (i.e., the small area of the tail on the far right of the distribution) will be much smaller than at MIT. Period. Obviously the distributions won't be nearly as different when we are talking about women in whole cities, but hey it could still be perceptible. When you are dating, you tend to be more sensitive to that right tail of the distribution, which suddenly makes that 5 million people a lot less to start. You don't really care that the means for the different cities are similar, you just care about the far right tail of your personal taste distribution.
And Boston's metro also has that unsavory amount. It's funny to compare Boston to MIT and Chicago to a community college, but...it's not really true. In fact, Chicago and Boston are each- as I insinuated in my initial post- are the pre-eminent college big cities in the country. Between Northwestern, U of Chicago, DePaul, Harvard, MIT, and BC there's not too much of a difference.
Sounds like you just went to the right places in Boston and the wrong ones in Chicago, really. I still can't help but to chuckle to think that there's just a greater amount of "better" chicks in Boston.
And Boston's metro also has that unsavory amount. It's funny to compare Boston to MIT and Chicago to a community college, but...it's not really true. In fact, Chicago and Boston are each- as I insinuated in my initial post- are the pre-eminent college big cities in the country. Between Northwestern, U of Chicago, DePaul, Harvard, MIT, and BC there's not too much of a difference.
eh, DePaul really isn't in the same league as Northwestern, U of C, Harvard, MIT, BU and BC. I didn't mean to compare Chicago to a community college, the CC and MIT analogy was just a random example. U of C and Northwestern are awesome institutions. I'm not that biased.
It's in the same league as BC. I didn't mean they were all equal, and in fact, I messed up. Harvard and U of C are basically equal, and Northwestern is to journalism as MIT is to mathematics. I put them in the wrong order, because I was looking for a general equivalency in the order I put them. DePaul and BC are basically the same, except BC is better at football (they're both of an equal average-ness in basketball).
It's in the same league as BC. I didn't mean they were all equal, and in fact, I messed up. Harvard and U of C are basically equal, and Northwestern is to journalism as MIT is to mathematics. I put them in the wrong order, because I was looking for a general equivalency in the order I put them. DePaul and BC are basically the same, except BC is better at football (they're both of an equal average-ness in basketball).
Nah. Harvard is much more than U of C. There is a good reason people like Obama chose Harvard over any local school. Northwestern journalism?
I heard so much about yet it is hard to believe you can have a good journalism schools withouth having any sersious journalism in the area. I mean what are the serious, national newspapers and magazines in Chicago? Playboy? Cranes?.
Harvard and MIT are in a different league than chicago schools.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure there are mathematics geniuses in low-tier community colleges, as there are retards at MIT who can't add a fraction, but the probability of you finding a math genius at a community college of equal size to MIT (i.e., the small area of the tail on the far right of the distribution) will be much smaller than at MIT. Period. Obviously the distributions won't be nearly as different when we are talking about women in whole cities, but hey it could still be perceptible. When you are dating, you tend to be more sensitive to that right tail of the distribution, which suddenly makes that 5 million people a lot less to start. You don't really care that the means for the different cities are similar, you just care about the far right tail of your personal taste distribution.
