Posted on 09/17/2005 6:59:48 AM PDT by teldon30
Dear Amy: I'd like to be in a relationship again, but I never even get asked out (unless you count frisky 85-year-olds and drunks at the corner bar). I'm a 32-year-old woman who's happy, sociable, and attractive. (I paid for college by modeling and continue to take care of myself.) I'm second-in-command at a big company, financially secure, and own a beautiful home. How can I meet men in general, and more specifically, men I'd actually want to date?
Deluxe Chopped Liver
Dear Deluxe: To scare away vampires, it takes garlic and crosses, which make ugly bulges in sleek, satin evening bags. Luckily, all you have to do to scare away men is pull out a business card that says ''senior vice president.''
''Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac,'' said Henry Kissinger. Sure it is — unless you're a woman. Research by Stephanie L. Brown and Brian P. Lewis, published in Evolution and Human Behavior (Nov. '04), seems to confirm what many lonely women at the top already know: When guys go for the woman in the boardroom, it isn't the woman running the meeting but the secretary who wheeled in the coffee and croissants before it started.
Sure, plenty of men will scamper up the corporate ladder for a one-night stand. But, according to Brown and Lewis' study, men looking for dates or relationships tend to prefer their subordinates to their colleagues or bosses. The researchers hypothesize that men evolved to want women they can control as a means of guarding against ''parental uncertainty'' — unwittingly raising kids fathered by the Neanderthal next door as their own. Brown and Lewis think this may also explain why men are suckers for ''behavioral expressions of vulnerability'' — women who act like they might not be able to make it across the street
(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...
Or she's just hopeful, which makes her see only the positive things and not the rest. Utilizer could stop all this by just being straight with her. His subtle hints obviously aren't as good hints as he thinks they are.
However, there is a distinct possibility that I am incorrect in that assessment.
Feeling protected is also included as a part of security. Its not just about money.
I had a choice between marrying a man who made $200 a month in income and another who made over $2,000. Come on, at some point a woman does think about how a man can provide for her and their children.
Well, women are SUPPOSED to be masters of the 'hint'. I am attempting not to be deliberately rude but shouldn't she be getting a clue by now that I am NOT interested without rubbing her face in it?
If I'm reading this guy correctly, that's a 50/50 proposition, at best.
"Just hopeful" is simply another way of saying precisely what I said, but saying it in a way that gives her credit he's clearly demonstrated she doesn't deserve.
I'd be willing to bet if he was explicit with her, she'd try to talk her way around it.
Bloody 'ell; I am not a female. I am just not as good at subtle hints as they are. But come on; it's been almost a year since we first started seeing each other and almost eight months continually that she has been attempting to communicate with Me. Give us a break here. I KNOW she is not as unintelligent as some I have met in the past.
Thank you. I know that by God, there are many more out there like her :)
Are you familiar with the joke about the old millionaire propositioning the ravishing young thing at the dinner party?
Some days you can't win.
No, I am not.
I don't know. In these he said/she said sort of things, I take it with a grain of salt that one person could "clearly demonstrate" anything about the other. The impression I get is that he's confusing her, so maybe he ought to be a little more explicit. I think it might demand too much to ask someone to decipher your "clues". If she still won't talk no for an answer, then I don't think you need to be confused about her either.
The only thing I've found women are masters of is "heads, I win. tails, you lose."
If your forced you rub her face in it, I promise you, she'll label you a "bastard" for doing what she pushed you into.
So in other words if the first male had suddenly come to you with 5,000 per month your choice would have been different? How about 10,000? Or, 3000? 2500? I know you are probably going to be offended by this but I can not help it; I do not think I am the only one who understands specifically where you stand. If those are your standards, then I do not think I can effectively make you understand how much a piece of meat that makes a male feel like. The higher-priced beefstock is the choice cut. Got you. If I were a husband reading such comments I can tell you right now that I would be making alternative plans for the future as quickly as possible and reconsidering whether I could in actuality turn down that higher-pressure (more pay) position at work. I might not get a comfortable reception at the end of the day. And we males are the problem? Guess I really need to find a higher paying job as quickly as possible or I am doomed to remain celibate and unattached for the rest of My life.
Hey, you know the story better than I do. All that I'd point out is that your tactic isn't accomplishing what you thought it would, so maybe you better try something different.
No, probably not. You are totally fixated on the financial and are projecting it onto women.
I mean this literally.
These career women make horrific wives and mothers. So it is just as well that they are kept out of the gene pool.
see my post 1017
I can't believe I'm being faulted for actually considering how many babies I can pop out and if I can afford all of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.