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 have a hard time disagreeing with the OP but would add some particulars. Broadly 'younger' women are like this but once they have kids and/or get spurned by the "stud" kind of men, they change and become open to regular, nice guys. I see this so often it is overwhelmingly true.
But I also think small-town, non-ambitious, and unattractive women are less like this.
I ask this because I have been looking at poll's on various subjects plus a few I have posted on my own.
one being would a woman prefer a guy who hates his job but makes good money or a guy who loved his job but did not earn much, surprisingly most women answered the guy who liked his job but did not earn much, but sadly in real life such women seem hard to find.
if I am to believe the responses to many of the threads I've started most women would be happy with an average joe who was almost homeless but had a heart of gold.
But we all know the lot in life those guys receive, women on these forums say money does not matter to them, but in the real world we all see the guy with outward signs of wealth with the hottest girl in the club(no matter what he looks like).
women on these and other forums complain about guys who take them for granted, but in real life the guys that put them first get written off as needy or clingy.
Women say they value faithfulness but we see in real life they seem attracted to the guys least likely to be faithful (those super charming, flirty, charismatic guys who ooze confidence, players can't be players if they have nobody to play with) .
I am so confused.
Why the confusion? Actions speak louder than words. It's what people do that counts not what they say to sound better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back to NE
I have a hard time disagreeing with the OP but would add some particulars. Broadly 'younger' women are like this but once they have kids and/or get spurned by the "stud" kind of men, they change and become open to regular, nice guys. I see this so often it is overwhelmingly true.
But I also think small-town, non-ambitious, and unattractive women are less like this.
I think you are probably interpreting people's responses through your own lens. And, based on your sample survey question, you seem to be throwing up binary absolutes. "Not earning much, but happy with job" does not necessarily equal "almost homeless." And, truth be known, most people would probably be happy with "doesn't hate job, makes okay money." And that's actually probably something that more realistically applies to most people. It's not always about extremes (hates job, makes excellent money; loves job, makes crap money), and it's hard to apply generalities to everyday life when you're talking about extremes.
You are also using one trait to discount the presence of another. You're assuming that if a person is "charming, flirty, charismatic, oozing confidence," then that person can't possibly be capable of committing faithfully in a relationship. Not realistic. Do you suppose that the only people capable of faithfulness are those who lack charm, charisma, confidence, and who aren't flirtatious and personable?
So, there are flaws in your options, which will affect the responses you get.
You also have to take into account that there ARE people who are not going to attach themselves to anybody who is not extremely well-off, but that they don't actually exist in huge majority numbers, and who's to say they are avid lifestyle forum enthusiasts? Don't assume your average golddigger is a big city-data user. Consider that your sample may not be representative of the population you're looking to poll.
I agree with this viewpoint. The all or nothing approach leaves out the vast middle, where most of us are.
OP, why are you asking what women say they like, or appear to like? Are you going to try to fashion a life in line with what the results? Are you looking for evidence to support your beliefs about women, or about your struggles with women? What do you hope to gain?
I have never known anyone who met through friends or family to get married. Online dating? Yes. Meeting at shows/bars/events? Yes. Heck, one of the couples I know met when they became roommate.
I wouldn't date friends of friends, personally, and certainly don't want family setting me up.
.
meeting people organically at quality functions or through friends and family
Like you go to a thing with friends and they know some people and then you suddenly meet.
Or you love snowboarding and you go to some X games thing and you meet someone there.
Dude A posts a topic/question. 95% of the guys agree with what he's saying based on personal experiences OR the experiences of people they know/word of mouth etc.. The women will start to chime in and usually cite their own very personal stories that contradict what the guys are saying.
Good example: men will say "it's hard to find a woman in online dating." Women will say "you need to look at your own personal flaws for why you're failing." The guy says "but I can't even attract women whose standards are lower than what I bring to the table."
Woman says "well everyone struggles in dating." Man says "yeah but at least you have options." Woman says "I don't have any guys messaging me." The man and the woman both can't believe what the other is saying.
Here's what the fellas aren't telling you....the guy is only interested in women ages 18-28, white/light-skinned Latina, no kids, under '5-10", not "fat" or even "chubby", good career, college degree and more attractive than the typical girl next door.
Here's what the ladies aren't telling you: they have an account that filters out men of color, making under a certain amount of money, less than desirable education, under a certain height etc. They usually don't factor in the men they ignore/turn down. Poor options =/= no options. They'll say "I've only had 3 dates"...which means, "I've only met 3 guys I'd even consider."
I agree with this viewpoint. The all or nothing approach leaves out the vast middle, where most of us are.
OP, why are you asking what women say they like, or appear to like? Are you going to try to fashion a life in line with what the results? Are you looking for evidence to support your beliefs about women, or about your struggles with women? What do you hope to gain?
Seriously. I think everyone would be better served just going out and living life, but making sure to go places and be involved in things that put you in contact with like-minded people. Prior to the internet, people have been doing just that for hundreds of years. It's not rocket science but people make more of it than it really is. Sitting online, over-analyzing every angle and creating or responding to crappy polls doesn't tell you anything about a person you hope, but have yet, to meet.
I think you are probably interpreting people's responses through your own lens. And, based on your sample survey question, you seem to be throwing up binary absolutes. "Not earning much, but happy with job" does not necessarily equal "almost homeless." And, truth be known, most people would probably be happy with "doesn't hate job, makes okay money." And that's actually probably something that more realistically applies to most people. It's not always about extremes (hates job, makes excellent money; loves job, makes crap money), and it's hard to apply generalities to everyday life when you're talking about extremes.
You are also using one trait to discount the presence of another. You're assuming that if a person is "charming, flirty, charismatic, oozing confidence," then that person can't possibly be capable of committing faithfully in a relationship. Not realistic. Do you suppose that the only people capable of faithfulness are those who lack charm, charisma, confidence, and who aren't flirtatious and personable?
So, there are flaws in your options, which will affect the responses you get.
You also have to take into account that there ARE people who are not going to attach themselves to anybody who is not extremely well-off, but that they don't actually exist in huge majority numbers, and who's to say they are avid lifestyle forum enthusiasts? Don't assume your average golddigger is a big city-data user. Consider that your sample may not be representative of the population you're looking to poll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742
I have never known anyone who met through friends or family to get married. Online dating? Yes. Meeting at shows/bars/events? Yes. Heck, one of the couples I know met when they became roommate.
I wouldn't date friends of friends, personally, and certainly don't want family setting me up.
More true than not. Not universal, but more true than not.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4
meeting people organically at quality functions or through friends and family
Like you go to a thing with friends and they know some people and then you suddenly meet.
Or you love snowboarding and you go to some X games thing and you meet someone there.
I'm not talking about fix-ups.
Well, yeah, people meet people at shows/bars/events, sure. I know far more that met online, but that happens too sometimes, yeah. But if I go somewhere with a friend and meet someone, I'm not meeting them through friends, I'm meeting em on my own, I just happened to go with friends. Online is much more efficient and much higher chance of success I think, I might meet a handful of people a decade that way that are potential romantic prospects, while I can meet that easily in a month with online. Heck, even a week if I'm trying.
With regards to the OP, i'd say with women generally it's certainly more important what a guy's job is, and more pertinently how well it pays and his career prospects etc, than how much he enjoys doing said job.
If you write a dating profile that says "I'm a mail man and love it so much i'll be a mail man until I retire" then will you get a better response than if you write "i'm a doctor, i'd rather do something else eventually but it pays really well"? People aren't stupid they know what works best.
You are a victim of the media just like everyone else. .
This sums it up, OP. This is why you're confused. You put too much credence in the images you see in the media, instead of paying attention to what you see IRL. If it were true that women all ran after the high earners (they don't; we get high earners posting here that they can't get women to give them the time of day), then all the working-class guys, the sanitation engineers, the construction workers, the administrative assistants, the retail "managers" that make only slightly more than the cashiers they supervise, the insurance salesmen, wouldn't be married, but many of them are. Go to the mall, and look around at the couples. Do you see any wealthy guys?
And btw, women whose partners "put them first", as you put it, do NOT call that "needy" or "clingy". You're oversimplifying. They only call the needy, clingy guys needy and clingy. That's an extreme; it's a dysfunction. Letting your partner know you appreciate them has nothing to do with being emotionally needy and clingy.
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.
