Your plaintive groans about untrustworthy/manipulative/ scheming women, is just the same old same old whinge, from feckless, girlymen here. What's up with this ? Can't you guys , after dating a woman for three months or so, figure out what she's really like ? Don't you talk ever really talk to women , or is it that you don't listen ? Yes, some people, men & women are actors ; however, there are clues and gut feelings about people we interact with and if you disregard them, then it's your own fault for winding up with a harridan.
I should charge for this advice, but since we're all supposedly on the same side, here's some tips for dating / wooing / finding a mate.......................
If you have any friends at all, ask them if they know any single women. Don't stay cooped up in your house/apartment and moan about there being no one out there; get out there ! Join whatever you can ( that interests you ) and meet new people. Don't be afraid to talk to a girl and don't be afraid to ask her out! When/IF you go out, don't be selfish, don't be an eogmaniac, and don't talk about sports, your job, or yourself ( unless SHE brings it up !),and ask her questions about what she is interested in...and don't forget politics ! Yes, it used to be that politics, money, and religion were forbidden topics ; they no longer are. Get to know her; REALLY get to know her and that does NOT mean sexually ! Forget what the feminazis have been screaching about for 40 years; open doors, help her on with her coat, be kind, respectful, charming, and don't expect sexual favors because you paid for dinner and/or a movie. Don't be an " empty suit " ! Be interesting, funny, and have at least four topics of conversation that you are knowledgable about ( NOT including football, hockey, basketball,baseball, your work, old girl friends ) that you can chat about.
Going out to dinner : Know what wine goes with what, know a little bit about food, and for goodness sakes, have GREAT table manners !
If and when " dating " becomes more serious, DO get into the nitty gritty about children, religion, and whatever is important to YOU. If you find someone, whom you think is compatable, you won't be, if your tastes, wants, and needs are dissimilar ! MEET HER FRIENDS AND FAMILY MORE THAN ONCE OR TWICE BEFORE YOU GET " SERIOUS ".
They "myth " , as you called it, about meeting MISS RIGHT at a party, is NOT a myth at all. I met my husband at a party one of my friends threw. Some of my daughter's friends met their husbands because they were brought into/part of the group she is a part of. Though her core group contains girls she went to school with, they all have brought in " new " people and still do.
The marriage penalty tax is on two ( husband & wife ) earner incomes. This has NOTHING to do with married couples with one breadwinner; ergo, your specious, error riddled pronoucement about that, is not only erronious, but spurious. President Bush's new tax plan eliminates this tax and also raises the $600 child exemption to $1,000 ( per child ) and he'll probably get it passed.
Extremely import thing : DON'T EVER TALK ABOUT THINGS YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT !
If we reduce the amount of money that we take from those with two incomes, how do we make up the difference? I'd love to see the difference made up by reducing government spending, but I see little chance of that happening. Will removing this tax increase productivity and therefore revenue? There is no evidence that it will. Decreases in tax rates will increase tax revenue when the tax rate is at very high levels. It worked that way in the 80's because the rates had been so high in the 70's, but the Laffer curve only points to the idea of an optimum rate for highest tax revenue. If we reduce the amount that we take from those with two incomes, we must take more from someone else. The quickest way to get more is to raise eveyone's rates. That increase in rates will hurt single income families.
Extremely import thing : DON'T EVER TALK ABOUT THINGS YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT !
Here's something extremely important for you to think about. Calling something spurrious and error riddled doesn't make it so, and putting labels on opposing arguments doesn't prove your argument right. Every billion in taxes saved by double-income families must be paid by someone. Eliminating the "marriage penalty" does nothing for the traditional family.
Here's something else that you should think about. Talking about topics on which one is not well versed is a great way to learn. However, learning requires that one listen and pay careful attention to what the other person is saying. You seem to have forgotten that lesson somewhere along the way.
At some level, I think you mean well. I even agree with many of your points. Even much of your advice seems good. Maybe I just think it's good because much of it consists of things I've tried or things that I was already planning. Maybe I should doubt it for the very reason that it seems so similar to what I was thinking. However, I don't tolerate haughty people who don't listen. Sadly, many conservatives have fallen into believing that their conservatism can be gauged by how arrogant they can be. They probably mean well, but I think it's a bad sign for conservatism.
WFTR
Bill