Will more men go their own way in the near future? (partner, definition)

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by njbiodude

Usually when I meet a woman the first thing she asks is "Hi, where do you work?" Its almost like its out of a script, even if I try to steer the conversation away from that topic. Its even funnier when they have poor english skills, and that seems to be the only thing they know how to say clearly. I have to laugh when they end the conversation immediately after finding out what I do, which hilariously pays way above the median wage but apparently "not enough" for many. Im not bitter at all. I find this whole charade really, really amusing actually.

Your experience are very different from mine. It is rarely the first, second or third thing talked about. I ask it as much of women as they do of me, but the question is almost never "where do you work" but "what do you do". And I ask that for a very critical reason, I want to know what makes them tick, what drives them. I've had more luck dating when I've worked cheaper but more interesting and socially beneficial jobs than when I earned more working at a Big Four public accounting firm, in part I believe, because I was happier and more passionate about my work, and my work is more interesting.

It sounds like to me you're attracted to the wrong type of woman, or attract the wrong women. Most women I've dated over the past decade earn considerably more than me (50-100%), its a non issue.

[Dewdroplet76]

Originally Posted by timberline742

Your experience are very different from mine. It is rarely the first, second or third thing talked about. I ask it as much of women as they do of me, but the question is almost never "where do you work" but "what do you do". And I ask that for a very critical reason, I want to know what makes them tick, what drives them. I've had more luck dating when I've worked cheaper but more interesting and socially beneficial jobs than when I earned more working at a Big Four public accounting firm, in part I believe, because I was happier and more passionate about my work, and my work is more interesting.

It sounds like to me you're attracted to the wrong type of woman, or attract the wrong women. Most women I've dated over the past decade earn considerably more than me (50-100%), its a non issue.

I'm married and I ask most people that I'm meeting for the first time what they do. I don't care how much they make but it's just a natural starting point.

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by Dewdroplet76

I'm married and I ask most people that I'm meeting for the first time what they do. I don't care how much they make but it's just a natural starting point.

Oh, it comes up, for sure, and it is a natural conversation point, but if I meet someone out we usually first talk about music, or brews, or have you tried - insert restaurant nearby here - or whatever... it has nothing to do with status crap... the only time I ever ran into people concerned with status was in academia, esp when I worked at an Ivy.

[njbiodude]

Originally Posted by Dewdroplet76

So - you date lots of unattractive women - right? You don't only value women based on how attractive they are - do you?

Women care about looks almost as much so you've got double standards here. Personally, I really only care if someone is fat, beyond that I dont care all that much if theyve got other good traits, personally. Age, race, jaw structure etc arent that important.

That said Im working on maybe becoming a male gold digger. I find this whole sizing people up thing based on 30 seconds of conversation super funny, so I may just do it out of humor. Maybe Ill get bought free stuff too . So off to find some bored 35 year old divorced corporate finance women or big firm lawyers!

[Dewdroplet76]

Originally Posted by njbiodude

Women care about looks almost as much so you've got double standards here. Personally, I really only care if someone is fat, beyond that I dont care all that much if theyve got other good traits, personally. Age, race, jaw structure etc arent that important.

That said Im working on maybe becoming a male gold digger. That will forever insulate me from alimony, and maybe even child support. I find this whole sizing people up thing based on 30 seconds of conversation super funny, so I may just do it out of humor. Maybe Ill get bought free stuff too

Sounds like you've got it all figured out! Best of luck to you!

[Skydive Outlaw]

And the soundtrack to this thread. . . .


Fleetwood Mac:


'You can go your own way. Go your own way.'

[Mikala43]

Originally Posted by njbiodude

I think if you read studies and ask around you'll find youre very wrong. Why do you think the likes of Donald Trump and Hugh Heffner get so many attractive women? Do you think 19year old Brad Pitt could get as many women as he could now when working some menial job? I get more female attraction now that I have more money, period.

Usually when I meet a woman the first thing she asks is "Hi, where do you work?" Its almost like its out of a script, even if I try to steer the conversation away from that topic. Its even funnier when they have poor english skills, and that seems to be the only thing they know how to say clearly. I have to laugh when they end the conversation immediately after finding out what I do, which hilariously pays way above the median wage but apparently "not enough" for many. Im not bitter at all. I find this whole charade really, really amusing actually.

When women start offering to pay for dates or at least split the check Ill agree with you. But as of recent Ive had a lot of women ask me out then go out of their way to run as far away from that check as possible when it arrives (look away, go to the bathroom lol). Also if you look on most dating websites most women over 30 have "my mates earning potential is extremely important to me" in their settings. Again Im not poor so this doesnt particularly hinder me, I just find it impossible to deny.

Yes. The more you have going for you................. the more you have going for you. This should not be an "ah-ha" moment.

It applies to everything in life: romance, friendship, employment. Everything, and that applies to everyone.

[ohio_peasant]

Originally Posted by somebodynew

But who does not want to be on the giving and receiving end of empathy, patience, kindness?

You're right, of course. But these things are all situational. Emotions flare, provocations are flung, and kindness fades. Patience is fragile. If we depend on continuity of emotional bonds to remain together, then we're liable to easily split, to drift away or to suddenly sustain a rift. This doesn't just apply to romantic relationships. Crack some salacious or insulting joke, and ruin your social standing - despite possibly decades of carefully grooming alliances and mutual rapport.

Originally Posted by Mikala43

Yes. The more you have going for you................. the more you have going for you. This should not be an "ah-ha" moment.

Yes, and no. Promotions are rarely given purely for technical skill. True, one can't be completely incompetent, but being affable and pleasant is generally more important than being knowledgeable, skilled or hard-working. I say this not as a disgruntled employee, but as one of the persons who makes recommendations and evaluations for promotion.

Likewise in relationships. It's not the candidate who is most beautiful or most handsome, most financially successful or with the broadest shoulders or fanciest whatever, or the most/greatest/best XYZ. It's based mainly on how Person A makes Person B feel. If that feeling is attractive, then the person in question will be attractive, regardless (to a point) of raw physical beauty or good standing as a potential mate. So it's entirely possible to have lots "going for oneself" on paper, and yet, to fail as a candidate for relationships.

I'm not going to defend the "men's movement" advocates (whatever is the term of the day), but I emphatically agree on one crucial point: the building of a relationship based on feeling and emotional attachment, is a cultural paradigm that is most definitely gendered. It favors women over men. Male thinking, by and large, is more mechanical and prosaic. Education... OK, I went to school, I got my diploma, check. Job... OK, I sent resumes, I got my job, check. Wife? OK, I asked around, found a lady, got married, check.

Here's a Mars/Venus trope of my own: men are from the Middle Ages. Women are from the Enlightenment. Men think in Aristotelian terms. Women prefer Leibniz and Spinoza.

How's that for a facile stereotype?

[somebodynew]

Originally Posted by ohio_peasant

You're right, of course. But these things are all situational. Emotions flare, provocations are flung, and kindness fades. Patience is fragile. If we depend on continuity of emotional bonds to remain together, then we're liable to easily split, to drift away or to suddenly sustain a rift.

You don't RELY like a thoughtless, lazy person. You ACT and strive to keep these things alive every day. Without that, what is the value of the relationship? My DH and I have been married 22 years, together 24. Trust me we did not just "rely" on feeling to be oh so happy. Kindness and empathy don't just well up in a person unbidden except in new and exciting relationships. They are drawn upon to sustain the love.

This doesn't just apply to romantic relationships. Crack some salacious or insulting joke, and ruin your social standing - despite possibly decades of carefully grooming alliances and mutual rapport.

I can crack salacious jokes, though I don't choose to insult people, until I am purple. Because I don't give 2 figs for social standing and have chosen friends of like mind.

Yes, and no. Promotions are rarely given purely for technical skill. True, one can't be completely incompetent, but being affable and pleasant is generally more important than being knowledgeable, skilled or hard-working. I say this not as a disgruntled employee, but as one of the persons who makes recommendations and evaluations for promotion.

That's funny. I get promoted because I save or earn the business money.

Likewise in relationships. It's not the candidate who is most beautiful or most handsome, most financially successful or with the broadest shoulders or fanciest whatever, or the most/greatest/best XYZ. It's based mainly on how Person A makes Person B feel. If that feeling is attractive, then the person in question will be attractive, regardless (to a point) of raw physical beauty or good standing as a potential mate. So it's entirely possible to have lots "going for oneself" on paper, and yet, to fail as a candidate for relationships.

I'm not going to defend the "men's movement" advocates (whatever is the term of the day), but I emphatically agree on one crucial point: the building of a relationship based on feeling and emotional attachment, is a cultural paradigm that is most definitely gendered.

I know SO many men who would not agree, even if they don't know it. Even on this board so many complain about men who were never loved. What is love?

It favors women over men.

It favors people who live it.

[JerZ]

Originally Posted by Dewdroplet76

I'm married and I ask most people that I'm meeting for the first time what they do. I don't care how much they make but it's just a natural starting point.

Same here. It's just a conversation starter and a safe one (i.e. it's not politics or anything inflammatory or overly opinionated; it's neutral).