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 live in one of them. It's all I can afford, unfortunately.
Still, when I'm out socializing at events, restaurants, bars, etc. Everyone seems to have at least an undergrad.
Interesting, must be about one's social circle. I find that I'm usually one of the only people there that has a 4 yr degree, and it's rare (outside of work) that I find people that have an advanced degree.
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 vfr800-cr250
Interesting, must be about one's social circle. I find that I'm usually one of the only people there that has a 4 yr degree, and it's rare (outside of work) that I find people that have an advanced degree.
It is a social circle and environs thing.
It was more common to meet people without one when I was younger and in the upper midwest like you (Wisconsin for me), but even in Madison, it was more the norm, but again, Madison is a more educated area than most.
i know this may seem unfair to many but for many men, such as myself, physical attraction is more important than being able to "provide" or contribute to bringing home the beacon. sure, it helps, but it isn't a deal breaker, which is opposite for many women. it's pretty much hard wired imho, i.e., beauty+wealth. and while many women may not have the best of beauty, many men likewise aren't as resourceful.
but maybe it's a generational thing...
I have to agree, looks are more important to me, the rest comes second, that is nothing new, it has been that way all my life
well thanks for the frankness, that's a reasonable perspective.... don't buy into your criticism about me though but wtf... btw i've bang many a hot babes in my life time, did one last weekend
The bolded statement is your issue, not the funds. If that's your attitude about women, the ones who are actually worthy of dating can sense this attitude and don't find it attractive, regardless of money. I say that as a woman of value (35, own my home, have a great job, smart, hot, well-traveled, a very nice life, etc.) who has dated men with lots of money or who will have lots of money. How I've been treated has always determined whether or not I'd carry on a relationship with someone, not his finances. HOWEVER, I wouldn't date someone who is frivolous with his money and can't keep a job. At some point, we all need to assume financial responsibility - that's much more attractive than someone who just makes a lot because the financial habits tend to remain, but the income doesn't always remain.
Case in point: Last year I dated a gorgeous guy who's set to make 7 figures in a few years. He started out treating me well, but that quickly changed. He too has banged a lot of babes and that attitude came out in the way he treated me, so I ended it.
Another guy who will likely earn 7 figures in a few years has been begging to date me for years. The money would be nice and he's a decent guy, but he's not what I'm looking for. We have next to nothing in common and want very little of the same things in life, so he's not a good match. Has nothing to do with money.
The bolded statement is your issue, not the funds. If that's your attitude about women, the ones who are actually worthy of dating can sense this attitude and don't find it attractive, regardless of money. I say that as a woman of value (35, own my home, have a great job, smart, hot, well-traveled, a very nice life, etc.) who has dated men with lots of money or who will have lots of money. How I've been treated has always determined whether or not I'd carry on a relationship with someone, not his finances. HOWEVER, I wouldn't date someone who is frivolous with his money and can't keep a job. At some point, we all need to assume financial responsibility - that's much more attractive than someone who just makes a lot because the financial habits tend to remain, but the income doesn't always remain.
Case in point: Last year I dated a gorgeous guy who's set to make 7 figures in a few years. He started out treating me well, but that quickly changed. He too has banged a lot of babes and that attitude came out in the way he treated me, so I ended it.
Another guy who will likely earn 7 figures in a few years has been begging to date me for years. The money would be nice and he's a decent guy, but he's not what I'm looking for. We have next to nothing in common and want very little of the same things in life, so he's not a good match. Has nothing to do with money.
i believe you, since i too have discovered there are certain women that just don't fit into my life and lifestyle. i'm a believer in ensuring an SO should add value to your life an not complicated it more, it's just that i find certain types of women easier to deal with than others, but that's a personal choice... and the advantage of having a larger pool of choices having greater resources can offer.
I've been wondering about this whole dynamic some recently. Seems like people that are really driven and have a fair amount of energy have a hard time sharing the dominant role in a relationship (I fit that description). The result is that a lot of these folks tend to "run over" their partners a bit too often (I also fit that description). That tends to be hard on relationships (surprising, no doubt). I think people like the idea of having a partner with a lot of drive, but the reality of being forced into a role where one follows most of the time isn't quite as easy as the ad says.....
Just a thought on the subject.....
Interesting point.
There definitely needs to be a balance. The dominant role does not have to be THE dominant role. Usually two people are going to have different strengths where that dominance can shine. For most Id say that balance is difficult to obtain and maintain.
i know this may seem unfair to many but for many men, such as myself, physical attraction is more important than being able to "provide" or contribute to bringing home the beacon. sure, it helps, but it isn't a deal breaker, which is opposite for many women. it's pretty much hard wired imho, i.e., beauty+wealth. and while many women may not have the best of beauty, many men likewise aren't as resourceful.
but maybe it's a generational thing...
I don't know if it is generational or not. I don't consider it unfair, its is exactly the point I was addressing. At the same time the ones who feel this way are the ones who complain the loudest and feel as victims of "unfair" or biased divorce laws.
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.
