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 don't like put in effort to get women. I'm not socially awkward, personally, and I am physically attractive enough to have attractive women throw themselves at me every now and then. However, I hate that relationships have basically become a second job. Personally, I'd prefer a woman that just comes to me easily, does whatever I want, and pops out a few kids (there are a few places in the world where this is still possible, fortunately, if absolutely necessary).
I would have loved to live at a time where easy jobs were plentiful (I do have a marketable skill, but the job I do requires a lot of effort). I also would have loved to not live in such a politically correct time where feelings matter above just about all else.
I know. My son has a POSSLQ (person of opposite sex sharing living quarters). It sounds like "possum" and sounds cuter than "significant other." She is more than just a girlfriend and more like a wife, but they've (so far) chosen not to get married and they've been together quite a few years.
Until 35 years I ago I, too, was a POSSLQ (or had one) but we got married because we wanted kids. My son doesn't seem to be headed that direction. Somebody better start having kids or we're going to run out of people.
POSSLQ is such a dated term, I think it was only in the 1980 census.
* Court-ship was often long and arduous. While one night stands have always been around, back in those days a man might have to spend a year courting a lady to make her 'his.'
I'm not batting for one or the other, I'm just wondering which era is better for dating and marriage.
This was a big upside for me! I dated then, not now
Well people married younger, so it must have been. I remember hearing in my sociology class that half of all new brides in the 1950s were teenagers as were 20% of all grooms. The trend during the fifties was to get married younger, not later and people in this decade married younger than people before and after.
You also have to realize that people had been through the Depression and dealt with loneliness and separation during the War. This no doubt caused people to crave home and family which would explain the headlong rush into marriage after the War ended in 1945 along with the emphasis on the nuclear family.
Also the economy was booming, jobs were plentiful and wages were rising. So young couples could afford to marry and set up households at younger ages than in the past.
I would love to traditionally court women. Not gonna happen these days.
I think of all younger persons wanted it, they could make it happen. Women want to use their brains today, to be doctors, not just in gynecology, pediatrics and family practice, and lawyers, not just in social services, and most want the door open in business as well. I bet few really want the same social roles as men?
Then I do not know much about what us going in today.
I think of all younger persons wanted it, they could make it happen.
I'm a millennial and this hasn't been my experience at all. Everyone cares about sex and fun. No one has much interest in romance or practicality.
Quote:
Women want to use their brains today, to be doctors, not just in gynecology, pediatrics and family practice, and lawyers, not just in social services, and most want the door open in business as well. I bet few really want the same social roles as men?
Nah, women relish these roles. Most want to be exactly like men.
Quote:
Then I do not know much about what us going in today.
It's okay. It sounds like you are older and from a great time in American history. I am truly jealous.
Nah, women relish these roles. Most want to be exactly like men.
True, unfortunately, for them. Next thing you know, they're lawyers and realtors stuck on OLD sites approaching 40, wanting families, yet wondering why guys aren't flocking to them despite their six-digits incomes.
"Oh, you work 70-hour weeks in a profession with legendarily low job satisfaction (See: lawyer) and terrible reputation and you argue for a living?"
:Golf clap:
"Congrats. Now, back to your cubicle and rack up some billable hours!"
True, unfortunately, for them. Next thing you know, they're lawyers and realtors stuck on OLD sites approaching 40, wanting families, yet wondering why guys aren't flocking to them despite their six-digits incomes.
"Oh, you work 70-hour weeks in a profession with legendarily low job satisfaction (See: lawyer) and terrible reputation and you argue for a living?"
:Golf clap:
"Congrats. Now, back to your cubicle and rack up some billable hours!"
Nah, women could generally do whatever they want in dating without any repercussions. From what I've seen, a woman can go many years without dating. Then, she suddenly decides to date and she will have many suitors without any effort on her part.
If she wants to, she could be married within a year to the exact man that she always wanted.
For men, you need to put in a ton of effort to get any girl at all. If it's a girl that you really want, chances are many men really want her as well so you have a lot of competition. So you settle for whatever woman gives you a chance.
So, basically, women could do whatever they want and still have massive success. Men can't do this (in western countries anyway). This is what I've observed anyway.
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.
