71 replies to this topic

[mvillanueva]

I fear that any man who might find it appealing would be loathe to admit it here.

Not at all on my end. I have nothing to loose or gain here.

[jamesser]

My first thougth is, shallow as it may be. Is she good looking enough, and not too picky that a man would consider "taking care of her". I'm sure everybody here has heard of "Trophy wives" so that's not a real shock!!!! Vicky Lynn Marshall AKA Anna Nicole Smith. I think that type of woman is very attractive to those men who want just that, a Trophy!

As for me I avoid women like that with a passion. I need a partner who can use her head for more than a hair style ... lol ... If you can not have a conversation with your partner, then their only value is to look at and that fades for everyone with time. Yes I know a very simplistic take on a complex subject.

[mvillanueva]

most guys I think would prefer a little independance but they still want to feel needed

That was one of the top three reasons why I exited my last relationship. It was a dismal and brutally horrfying realization to know the person I was with had little to no need of me.

I think you nailed one critical factor in a successful relationship.

Edited by mvillanueva, 13 August 2004 - 12:49 PM.

[cmt489]

most guys I think would prefer a little independance but they still want to feel needed

That was one of the top three reasons why I exited my last relationship. It was a dismal and brutally horrfying realization to know the person I was with had little to no need of me.

I think you nailed one critical factor in a successful relationship.

Yes, I agree, everyone has to be needed, however, the question becomes why we tend to jump to the conclusion that being "needed" equals being needed financially? A woman can be financially independent but still need a man for the other care and support that he has to offer (not to mention the physical needs - but he, that's a whole different story now isn't it ). "need" comes in many different forms and levels. Yes, not being needed at all is death to any relationship, however only needing someone for financial support, IMHO would also equal death to a relationship.

Again, just my opinion.....

Michelle

[jextract]

[taking deep breath ... counting to ten .... monitoring blood pressure.....]

OK, I don't mean to go off on a rant here...

I would never, EVER, IN A MILLION YEARS, EVER shackle myself in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER to a woman or a family (and they come together) like that. EVER!!

One of the most critical things that people fail to look at when choosing a partner is the family modeling that each partner got growing up. I was married to someone who worked two jobs when I met her then quit one when we lived together, then the other after we got married. Never even asked me. But her family model growing up was much different than mine: my dad worked long hours and taught college one or two evenings a week - it was expected to work hard and sacrifice in the short term for benefit down the road; her family was much different - blue collar (and I'm not being judgemental), her dad was home at 4:00 every day and they were all together at dinner every evening. I'm not saying one model is better than the other, merely that they are fundamentally incompatible. My ex-wife was the youngest of seven kids and was used to being taken care of in a family situation. My sister and I grew up very independent, by design of our parents - I was making my own lunch and doing my own laundry in elementary school.

So obviously my ex-wife and I are no longer together. However in the divorce, because I allowed myself to be in a contractual relationship (which is what marriage is) with someone who was content and desirous to use me as an ATM, I wound up paying an exorbitant amount in extortion ... er, spousal support. Not to be crass, but my friends and I have an expression that it is cheaper just to get a hooker and a housecleaner.

Two things I learned from this:
1) I do not date out of my economic bracket.
2) I would never, EVER get married without a pre-nup - I will never pay one more penny of spousal support ever in my life.

Living in Los Angeles, I see plenty of women (certainly not all, of course) who feel that their goal in life is to make themselves as attractive as possible and hook on to some rich guy who will fund them. What these women don't understand is that these men look at women as acquisitions, NOT partners or equals. They're just leasing them and will trade them in when they're ready to move on to a younger or hotter model.

And Don, I agree with you ... people who want equal rights without equal responsibility are worthy only of our contempt.

[Marvel]

"Or do you shy away from women who can make their own living and be successful?"

Now those women I have had plenty of direct experience with! Nope, I have not shyed away from those women. In my line, at this stage, those are the women I have and will continue to meet. However, in my experience, those women are much, much more emotionally cloistered, guarded, careful etc than other women in so called traditional gender roles.

What an interesting observation, Michael. Of everything written so far, that one statement just spoke to me. Granted, I haven't given it a great deal of thought (yet), but I would tend to agree wholeheartedly with that statement. I think it may be because we still feel the need to protect our independence- despite the changes in the last 40 years & economic neccessity, women in the workforce are still treated unequally.

Certainly, I've had some life experiences with men that have caused me to raise all kinds of walls but I made a concious decision a couple of years to tear them down. It's hard work but I do not want to go through the rest of my life being emotionally detached or unavailable to the people that I care for. I'm actually trying to model my daughter- to me, she personifies the type of woman that I would like to grow into- warm, caring, open, considerate of others, especially her husband & children. That's what I want to bring that into any relationship that I may have in the future because I want it to succeed for life. Our society has become to willing to accept relationships as temporary, not lifetime, commitments. I'm not willing to do that anymore & if I want to change that, I have to change me first.

Sorry to digress from the topic!

[jextract]

most guys I think would prefer a little independance but they still want to feel needed

That was one of the top three reasons why I exited my last relationship. It was a dismal and brutally horrfying realization to know the person I was with had little to no need of me.

I think you nailed one critical factor in a successful relationship.

Mike, I've gotta disagree with you. I am not interested in a relationship with a woman who needs me. I want to be with a woman who wants me but doesn't critically rely on me for anything. I don't rely on anyone else for anything and I expect her to be just as independent.

Not to mention I've worked my tail off and sacrificed much to get to where I am and I have the same expectation for my partner. In a lot of respects, character is formed by struggle and I want to be with someone who has the toughness that comes with beating adversity. I've dated women who have come from very wealthy families and I have nothing in common with them largely because they haven't had the same struggles that I have.

[jamesser]

Scubagirl1966 - Sweety - and I'm not being condesending or macho - so if my use of that term is ofensive to you my apollogies in advance.

That's the type of women I look for. Yes I deliengently seek that type of woman. Problem is sometimes they are not so willing to make time for a relationship. Sucessful, independant women are just as guilty for the relationship busters as what men are accused of. Like being a workaholic or a control freak. I've been there. I still look for those women, I see them far superior to "hooters" girls. Please any Hooter's ladies out there or future hooter's ladies, don't be ofended. It's not meant at anyone in particular only the sterio type of the good looking but dumb no skills woman who's husband hunting. And hey it's a socital thing. How many times have you heard the term "great catch". Just a little more food for thought.

Is marrige meant to be a competition, survival of the strongest?

James

[Latitude Adjustment]

I think she is looking for someone to pay for the granddaughters wedding! When I went to a seminar on paying for your kids college education there was a woman batting her eye$ at me, $he had figured out another option.

[RichardB]

.................What these women don't understand is that these men look at women as acquisitions, NOT partners or equals. They're just leasing them and will trade them in when they're ready to move on to a younger or hotter model.

And Don, I agree with you ... people who want equal rights without equal responsibility are worthy only of our contempt.

Very well said! I for one would also rather have a partner, an equal for a SO, rather than an acquisition.

[sea nmf]

A couple of thoughts:

1. Can't a woman be beautiful and successful? Wouldn't that be a better trophy?

2. Can't you love someone, rather than "need" them. (It depends on what the definition of "need" is.)

3. Jaimie - not all woman outside your economic bracket will do the same thing your ex-wife did. Regarding family modeling, I, too, came from a family of seven children. I was making my own lunch and doing laundry at a very early age. My mother "worked" inside the home, mostly because she was always pregnant (LOL) and my lesson was to do the opposite and to not depend on someone else to provide.

Good points, all. This happens to be an interesting subject and I like seeing your ideas. My intention is not to discredit but to question. I really do have an open mind on this one.

[cmt489]

Not to be crass, but my friends and I have an expression that it is cheaper just to get a hooker and a housecleaner.

Alright, since I have the house cleaner does this mean that I only have to seek out the hooker now?

[mvillanueva]

most guys I think would prefer a little independance but they still want to feel needed

That was one of the top three reasons why I exited my last relationship. It was a dismal and brutally horrfying realization to know the person I was with had little to no need of me.

I think you nailed one critical factor in a successful relationship.

Mike, I've gotta disagree with you. I am not interested in a relationship with a woman who needs me. I want to be with a woman who wants me but doesn't critically rely on me for anything. I don't rely on anyone else for anything and I expect her to be just as independent.

Not to mention I've worked my tail off and sacrificed much to get to where I am and I have the same expectation for my partner. In a lot of respects, character is formed by struggle and I want to be with someone who has the toughness that comes with beating adversity. I've dated women who have come from very wealthy families and I have nothing in common with them largely because they haven't had the same struggles that I have.

I was not very clear and given this topic, I ought not to be so telegraphic. I should have said had "little to no need nor want of me".

Despite your disagreement, my sense is that while we do not agree, we are not that far apart. When emotional connections are made, the mutual need is there often manifested as mutual reliance.

I like that feeling.

Edited by mvillanueva, 13 August 2004 - 01:23 PM.

[jextract]

1.  Can't a woman be beautiful and successful?  Wouldn't that be a better trophy?

A "better" trophy? That is the holy grail!

2.  Can't you love someone, rather than "need" them.  (It depends on what the definition of "need" is.)

Totally agree with you. You should love someone for who he/she is, not for what he/she can provide you (and I'm not exclusively talking about financially) that you can't get on your own.

3.  Jamie - not all woman outside your economic bracket will do the same thing your ex-wife did.  Regarding family modeling, I, too, came from a family of seven children.  I was making my own lunch and doing laundry at a very early age.  My mother "worked" inside the home, mostly because she was always pregnant (LOL) and my lesson was to do the opposite and to not depend on someone else to provide. 

I'm not saying that all women outside my economic bracket would do that, I'm merely saying that given that such a large percentage of marriages end in divorce, and given that the divorce laws in California in particular and other states as well are so punitive to the more financially successful partner, it only makes sense to protect yourself as best you can by 1) minimizing the difference in your income and 2) legally avoiding potential financial damages.

[jextract]

Not to be crass, but my friends and I have an expression that it is cheaper just to get a hooker and a housecleaner.

Alright, since I have the house cleaner does this mean that I only have to seek out the hooker now?

Just remember, you aren't paying them for the sex, you're paying for them to shut up and leave with no strings attached afterward. Think of it as renting instead of leasing or buying!