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 ...
Live & Learn or just Survive & Deny
Sorry.. posted to the wrong poster.
Rca2000, I think you meant your comment for marajade. I was also complimenting her interests.
Yes, I did. Just goes to show that I am human, and capable of my share of mistakes
I like women who can handle a fully automatic weapon and watch my back while I snipe liberals from rooftops. Think that whining yuppie "boardroom bitch" is hard enough for that?
I doubt it. (besides, I'm already married to one who is... and I can't divorce her anyway because she's grabbed my prized Colt original CAR-15, so eat your heart out, baby...)
Oh, and BTW-- I figured the "SW"stood for Smith and Wesson.
Mundane or not, "overstated" is a pretty ironic charge coming from the guy using a functional adolescent (the "dude who can't keep a job for more than two months.") as his foil in the "marriage material" contest. You might as well compare an adult to a high school freshman.
Sorry, but I regard trotting out such a cypher to support your point as disingenuous as crafting public policy based on the putative "old person" that has to eat dog food in order to afford "Depends."
Even so, the issue wasn't overstated by me: it was rebutted by me.
I think that a woman, in choosing a mate, should (maybe "ought to") consider whether this man will be able to provide a stable and safe environment for the raising of children, i.e., for her and for her children. This demands a consideration of his "pocketbook potential."
I might be inclined to agree with you if what we saw 'in the wild' was a pass/fail standard, but that is most definitely NOT what we see.
What the men on this thread are reporting is being graded pass/fail on "comeliness," with money acting as an exponent to the calculation.
Were I to look for an analogous rhetorical shell-game to defending financial "consideration," my first choice would BE "Choice."
Despite loud protestations about sovereignty over their own bodies, such women prove to be remarkably unconcerned by any infringement aside from those which touch on abortion.
The rhetorical maneuvering I've seen so far is another expression of the same type of duplicity. Rational self-interest is being used to camouflage naked avarice.
Does that mean that a millionaire should win out over a tow truck driver? NO!
The question you should be asking here is not "should they," but "do they." And answering THAT question with anything but a negative leaves your credibility in the dust.
admittedly, there are some woman who marry for money, but that is not the issue here.
That is exactly the issue here. Plausible deniability is not going to get you benefit of the doubt when practical experience allows no doubt.
Men aren't offended by prospective mates qualifying them, they're offended by the weight and single-minded attention given to their finances in that qualification.
The issue is whether the man's income or income-potential is a legitimate consideration in choosing a mate, and I agree with those who say "yes."
And I agree most Freeperettes wouldn't fall under the assertions I've put forward, but most women aren't Freeperettes.
What I can't understand is how the most strident defenders of 'financial consideration' on this thread have expressly rejected it in their own lives. It resembles nothing else, so much as American college students defending "The Revolution."
You forgot my fave - if she wears very, very (2 verys+) pointy shoes, stay away.
You dig cars? I want a red 1965 Sunbeam Tiger convertible, the car Maxwell Smart drives in the tv series 'Get Smart.' :-)
pointy toed shoes....you are so correct.....
So this what I will be looking forward to ...it's already hard for me now...I'm a female college student.....well it explans why women like Oprah or Dr. Sec. Rice never married.
By the I 'm not looking foward to marrage anyway...because I tend to stand out anyway with saying a word.
lbjgal
Or he may have learned the hard way not to bother. After making the first move thousands of times, with no useful results (ie, I was still single), somewhere in my mid-30's I finally concluded, "If she's not interested enough to make the first move, she's not interested at all!"
So I gave up chasing. And my wife made the first move.
I can tell you exactly why Oprah never married, and it has nothing to do with money, power, or status. As for Condoleeza, well, tragically in the African-American community there's a shortage of good men, relative to the number of good women available. At least, that is my observation as an outsider.
Generally speaking, however, women instinctively look UP the status ladder for mates, whereas men do not care at all. Hence a higher a man's status, the more mating opportunities he has; whereas, as a woman's status goes higher and higher, she unconsciously screens out a greater and greater percentage of the male population. In other words, it has nothing to do with men's prejudices and everything to do with female instincts.
I do note, however, that it seems none of them were somehow worthy of your continued attention, else you would not be speaking of them in the past tense.
I have dated occasionally as the inclination struck, and whether or not it was I or they that did the asking, for one reason or another things simply did not work out. Now I am currently involved with someone and no longer looking.
I have never been the sort to consider women 'brief amusements', under any circumstances, and despete the assumptions of some to believe that simply because it was a member of the fairer sex that did the asking somehow that 'classified' them as somehow being, ehmmrr, 'less desireable', in reality I am not usually out and about looking for 'dates' so at the time they asked I changed My inclinations and decided to accept the offer in leiu of a rather quiet interlude pursuing more solitary pastimes.
Things simply did not work out in the past. Asking party notwithstanding.
I have noticed that indeed newer cars are being listed as 'more powerful' in recent advertisements. However, I also remember laughing hysterically at a commercial advertisement for "The new, improved model with the INCREDIBLY powerful one hundred and twenty-five horsepower engine!!!"
I think you overlooked the part as well when I specified that what was under the hood in My auto was not by any stretch of the imagination a standard powerplant. Disregarding for the moment the electical changes I implemented in the vehicle as well due to the fact that they had little to do with the motor. I loved that car because no matter what happened I could always repair it, no matter what. I specifically modified the powerplant as a proof-of-concept platform, but those older cars I have a passion for because of their simplicity. They 'Just Work'. My preferred auto would be a customized Model T, incidentally.
You and me both!
LOL! Glad to see you have good taste, luv. *grin*
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.