Beware the pitfalls of a rich woman

[Scorpio]

And furthermore... for anyone who dares ask isn't the same true for a woman with regard to what she's getting in the bedroom... the answer is NO.  That's why you often hear of women who will put up with not being satisfied in the bedroom... they will go years without ever having experienced an orgasm... they will lie and pretend they are satisfied with their husbands bedroom performance (fake it)  and stay married to the man for the children's sake whether or not he's taking care of them the way they expect him to.  It doesn't matter what he's earning, or how poorly he's performing in bed, as long as he shows devotion and love towards her and their children, doesn't beat her and doesn't cheat on her and can keep them from going homeless and starving, she will generally stick with her man...

If this is the case then why are the majority of divorces initiated by women, ESPECIALLY when laws favor women with regard to child custody?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce#Who_initiates_divorce.3F

Men on the other hand will as I said before complain like a bytch if their woman is spending all the money or more money than she's bringing in and is on top of that not satisfying him in the bedroom... he will go cheat and use that to justify the cheating and be ready for a divorce...but as long as he's happy down there , and he's got the money to take care of the household without having to do backflips, and she treats him like he's da man, you won't hear a complaint out of him.

So making your husband feel loved and wanted, not wanting him to go to an early grave to support a lifestyle that neither of you can afford, and making sure someone you love is as happy as you can possibly make them in and out of bed is a taboo these days? Wow.

Oh and FYI males cheat and are satisfied only by doing the minimum in life. MEN try to do everything in their power to make sure their families are not only well provided for, but are HAPPY (at least to the best of their abilities).

[Susa]

Ok, so what's the point of your initial comment? 

If this is in fact a potential reality for anyone in a situation where they are *treating* someone (ie carrying the most financial responsibility) why talk about one side in isolation & make it a gender issue? People use people. Men use women & women use men, period. However, in terms of finances there are VASTLY more women using men for money. We just don't say much about it. In fact, women frequently talk & joke about finding sugar daddies. - LOL

I think the original question was "Any women ever dated a man that earned less than you? What were the issue in your relationship?".

And my answer was "Reality is, if you're making 6 figures and all he can afford is Denny's, dating is difficult." Which means, if as a woman I am used to dropping hundreds a week on entertainment and thousands on vacations and he can't, it gets in the way of what we can do together. Either I have to stop doing what I'm used to doing or I have to pay for him.

I've dated many men where we always went dutch and I was very happy with that arrangement. But dutch doesn't work when all he can afford is Denny's and I've got 4-star taste. In my experience, some men are OK with dutch, but few would allow a woman to pay most of the time.

And as I said before, those who do accept it, tend to be users. The rules for men and women aren't the same, and REAL MEN don't let women pay more than half.

[Bambi eyes]

A woman won't complain about a man who isn't certifiably handsome because if she's with him, you best believe that the cash is keeping her satisfied enough that she doesn't even care about his looks...

Uh, you were saying?  Exactly..

Women date men who are both ugly and cash poor.  Every rich man isn't ugly and every ugly man isn't getting paid... so  

If this is the case then why are the majority of divorces initiated by women, ESPECIALLY when laws favor women with regard to child custody?

Because men will stay in an unhappy marriage and just go and cheat to get the satisfaction they want rather than face giving half their money over to a woman they despise... it doesn't behoove a man to initiate divorce... he will most likely end up on the losing end of the deal.

So making your husband feel loved and wanted, not wanting him to go to an early grave to support a lifestyle that neither of you can afford, and making sure someone you love is as happy as you can possibly make them in and out of bed is a taboo these days? Wow.

Scorpio... don't put words in my mouth.  I am telling you how I see it... I never said it was right or that I agree with it.  I happen to think everyone should live within their means, and that if you want something that is not within reach financially then you do without it unless you can afford to buy it for yourself... I don't believe in asking someone to do for you what you cannot do for yourself, that's taking advantage, not being a good mate.

MEN try to do everything in their power to make sure their families are not only well provided for, but are HAPPY (at least to the best of their abilities).

ITA, 100% ...and note,  I use the term "men" loosley, to describe gender, not to decribe the true value of a real man.  

[Legacy]

I think the original question was "Any women ever dated a man that earned less than you? What were the issue in your relationship?".

Be that as it may, I am just saying that anyone can be used when they're carrying the weight. You being used doesn't change the fact that men are by far used more financially. The fact of the matter is money attracts people. If you got it, there's a good chance @ some point someone will use you because of it.

And as I said before, those who do accept it, tend to be users. The rules for men and women aren't the same, and REAL MEN don't let women pay more than half.

Susa, keepin women single since forever... 

If a woman makes 150K & a man makes 50K, he's not a real man because she's carrying 75% of the bills & he's carrying 25%? *smh* 1900 called, they'd like their reality back. However, they said feel free to use the reality in 2008. It's free. No charge.

Also, women who accept a less than equal arrangement aren't real women?

I just wanna gauge where your equality ends & your privilege begins because women can't seem to remain equal 24/7/365.

[Bambi eyes]

Women have been known to go to astronomical lengths to secure and fully possess financial stability.

Interesting how you turned this around... but the problem I have with this statement is that it assumes that women are incapable of securing financial stability without a man's help.  Women don't have to go to astronomical lengths to secure this within the context mentioned it in my post because they can secure this by simply going to school getting an education and getting a job....

A man on the other hand, cannot secure good puzzy without paying out the pocket (like Spitzer) and finding a woman (since we are the only one's with puzzy's)  to give it to him, so in my case he would have to go to astronomical lengths depending on how particular he is but in your case all a woman has to do is get an education, pursue the right job opportunity and voila, she's financially secure... no man is needed for that and no astronomical lengths is necessary either.  Can you say the same for a man seeking "good puzzy"?  No.

[Legacy]

Women date men who are both ugly and cash poor.  Every rich man isn't ugly and every ugly man isn't getting paid... so 

Men date women who are both ugly and cash poor.  Every poor woman isn't gorgeous and every gorgeous woman isn't getting paid... so 

Women have been known to go to astronomical lengths to secure and fully possess financial stability.

Interesting how you turned this around... but the problem I have with this statement is that it assumes that women are incapable of securing financial stability without a man's help. 

It doesn't assume anything.

A man on the other hand, cannot secure good puzzy without paying out the pocket (like Spitzer) and finding a woman (since we are the only one's with puzzy's)  to give it to him, so in my case he would have to go to astronomical lengths depending on how particular he is....

Bullshyt.. Do you know how many fine women I have dated? BAWAHAHA!! Shyt, I had a long list of em before I graduated college & I didn't have no dayum money. We like to call the men you're describing as "simps". - LOL

but in your case all a woman has to do is get an education, pursue the right job opportunity and voila, she's financially secure... no man is needed for that and no astronomical lengths is necessary either.  Can you say the same for a man seeking "good puzzy"?  No.

But many DON'T get an education & would rather have a man take care of them. Thus, they'll go thru whateva to get a man who will do that for them so avoid doing it for themselves. And yes, men can get attractive women w/o having a lot of money. A lot of blue collar, decent to good wage earning dudes got very attractive women.

[devineone]

Ok, so what's the point of your initial comment? 

If this is in fact a potential reality for anyone in a situation where they are *treating* someone (ie carrying the most financial responsibility) why talk about one side in isolation & make it a gender issue? People use people. Men use women & women use men, period. However, in terms of finances there are VASTLY more women using men for money. We just don't say much about it. In fact, women frequently talk & joke about finding sugar daddies. - LOL

I think the original question was "Any women ever dated a man that earned less than you? What were the issue in your relationship?".

And my answer was "Reality is, if you're making 6 figures and all he can afford is Denny's, dating is difficult." Which means, if as a woman I am used to dropping hundreds a week on entertainment and thousands on vacations and he can't, it gets in the way of what we can do together. Either I have to stop doing what I'm used to doing or I have to pay for him.

I've dated many men where we always went dutch and I was very happy with that arrangement. But dutch doesn't work when all he can afford is Denny's and I've got 4-star taste. In my experience, some men are OK with dutch, but few would allow a woman to pay most of the time.

And as I said before, those who do accept it, tend to be users. The rules for men and women aren't the same, and REAL MEN don't let women pay more than half.

I hear you Susa and understand that you are speaking from "your personal experience" as is your right.  However as usual, everything seems to become a battle of the sexes .  Why can't a person simply share their thoughts according to the topic thread without feeling they have to constantly defend their thoughts    It's such a drag to have to go through this.  I guess if a topic thread came up "Why do women like the color Red so much".  And a woman shared her thought, someone else would leap on the chance to turn it into their own personal battle field and battle of the sexes if "they" perceived what the woman said to be harmful to men in general.
Why can't they just accept that this person is speaking from their experience and sharing "their own" ideas in the topic thread.  Why does it have to come down to trying to convince someone that what "they" think is wrong? 
Man if some of these posters were musicians,  I would never want to play with them on a gig.  I could just see them playing over everyone, criticizing the pianist because they played an inappropriate though correct chord in the 10th measure... man what a freaking drag.   

[Bambi eyes]

Bullshyt..  Do you know how many fine women I have dated? BAWAHAHA!! Shyt, I had a long list of em before I graduated college & ain't have no dayum money.

Does fine=good puzzy though?  

I guess I really can't defend this position because I really wouldn't know what you guys consider "good puzzy" but if I were to base my ideas on what Gov. Spitzer did, or what Kwame lost over chasing "good puzzy" I'd say truly "good puzzy" isn't that easy to come by or else men wouldn't be out there buying it, or losing their careers and jobs over it, or disrupting their families over it,  and I would assume that you guys have no real way of knowing if it's good or not before you try it, so I would think that if you are "particular" and "discriminating" you might just go to astronomical lengths to find the best there is out there without having to literally sample them all... and then once you've found it, the last thing you want to do is blow it by quibbling with her over who earns the most money. No?  That's my point... a man won't complain about how much a woman earns if he's found what he's looking for AND she meets his needs in the bedroom...

But many DON'T get an education & would rather have a man take care of them.

Legacy, I'll have you know that Black women take the lead in seeking higher education in this country... we outnumber black men in college enrollment... so what's that you're saying about many of us not getting an education?  What FACT is that based on?    There was an article about that in the NY Times or the Journal... and it specifically stated that women out number men in their enrollment in higher education.  I'll see if I can find the article.

Men date women who are both ugly and cash poor.  Every poor woman isn't gorgeous and every gorgeous woman isn't getting paid... so  

But we weren't talking about women dating men who are cash poor... or women who are gorgeous... we were talking about Men who you said don't complain about women who earn less than they do and WHY they don't complain... what has this statement got to do with that?

[Legacy]

Bullshyt..  Do you know how many fine women I have dated? BAWAHAHA!! Shyt, I had a long list of em before I graduated college & ain't have no dayum money.

Does fine=good puzzy though? 

Not necessarily just like ugly (or less than gorgeous) doesn't equal bad pusci.

But many DON'T get an education & would rather have a man take care of them.

Legacy, I'll have you know that Black women take the lead in seeking higher education in this country... we outnumber black men in college enrollment... so what's that you're saying about many of us not getting an education?   What FACT is that based on?    There was an article about that in the NY Times or the Journal... and it specifically stated that women out number men in their enrollment in higher education.  I'll see if I can find the article.

No need. We know more women are going to school these days. However, women still have more non college grads than grads. I believe that's this is still the case for every group breakdown by race & gender. Also, a BW w/ a masters on average makes about the same as a BM w/ a bachelors. The discrepancies in education don't necessarily equal a discrepancy in income so that whole concept is exaggerated at best.

Men date women who are both ugly and cash poor.  Every poor woman isn't gorgeous and every gorgeous woman isn't getting paid... so 

But we weren't talking about women dating men who are cash poor... or women who are gorgeous... we were talking about Men who you said don't complain about women who earn less than they do and WHY they don't complain... what has this statement got to do with that?

The point is men date women who are ugly (or at least not top notch). Sometimes the men have money, sometimes they don't. Men date women who are gorgeous (or at least very good looking). Sometimes the men have money & sometimes they don't. In that way, they're no different than women therefore there's really no point in making it gender specific.

If you say that men who date women who earn less don't complain because they're being satisfied in other ways (sex/partners looks) then the same is true women who date men who aren't handsome & don't complain because they satisfied in other ways (money).

The women who aren't in this situation are irrelevant. The ones that ARE in this situation are no different that the men who are getting a need met so they overlook other deficiencies. Again, no need to make a gender specific argument.

[Vance87]

Women have been known to go to astronomical lengths to secure and fully possess financial stability.

Interesting how you turned this around... but the problem I have with this statement is that it assumes that women are incapable of securing financial stability without a man's help.  Women don't have to go to astronomical lengths to secure this within the context mentioned it in my post because they can secure this by simply going to school getting an education and getting a job....

A man on the other hand, cannot secure good puzzy without paying out the pocket (like Spitzer) and finding a woman (since we are the only one's with puzzy's)  to give it to him, so in my case he would have to go to astronomical lengths depending on how particular he is but in your case all a woman has to do is get an education, pursue the right job opportunity and voila, she's financially secure... no man is needed for that and no astronomical lengths is necessary either.  Can you say the same for a man seeking "good puzzy"?  No.

I guess if you say so Bambi. You and many other women would do yourselves a huge favor if many of you would stop drinking your own kool-aid. I don't mind you all making gratuitous comments in regards to what makes you all tick, but the bad habit too many of you have with QUALIFYING for men their levels or expectations in terms of fulfillment get real tired. But hey we all got opinions right?

A comedian If my memory serves me once said if puzzy was a stock it would be trading at an all time low. His point was that women themselves don't value their "puzzy" themselves by the way they give it away. And I can attest as from the male perspective that getting puzzy is by far not on any list of most difficult things to get.  I'll also throw you another bone from a man who's lived a little. Don't nothing beat what you refer to as "good puzzie" like MORE. If you want the raw truth men crave abundance and variety more than anything else in terms of sexual stimulus and needs. This world is littered with the crushed and devastated state of minds of very attractive and probably sexually proficient women who can't believe or understand how or why her mate cheated.

As a matter of fact if more women would keep quiet long  enough and listen to the perspectives of men, they would learn a lot about what truly makes many of us tick. Instead many appear to want to "validate" themselves at our expense. Typically using the least successful and marginal of our lot to paint us all. 

As to your financial assertions; your ability to obtain your own financial independence doesn't carry over in terms of "value" with men like ours does with you. That's the skinny of it all. It's also a big azz clue for the rather successful(financially) of your lot who continuously remain manless and wrap yourself in this faux sense of contentment so that lonely reality is easier to deal with. Men don't grave nor need your financial prowess. Our needs are actually quite basic, but require you all to get it so that marrying or committing to monogamous relationships are WORTH IT TO US.

 

[devineone]

[As a matter of fact if more women would keep quiet long  enough and listen to the perspectives of men, they would learn a lot about what truly makes many of us tick. Instead many appear to want to "validate" themselves at our expense. Typically using the least successful and marginal of our lot to paint us all.

Hey I'm quiet and listening. "Tell me something good." (Rufus). 
Seriously, I'd really like to hear your perspective on what truly makes a man tick where women are concerned.

[Vance87]

[As a matter of fact if more women would keep quiet long  enough and listen to the perspectives of men, they would learn a lot about what truly makes many of us tick. Instead many appear to want to "validate" themselves at our expense. Typically using the least successful and marginal of our lot to paint us all.

Hey I'm quiet and listening. "Tell me something good." (Rufus). 
Seriously, I'd really like to hear your perspective on what truly makes a man tick where women are concerned.

If judging by the responses from some of you in this thread and some others are indicative being genuine; that's ok sis I'll pass. My experience on this site and subsequent observation of the current lot tells me very little has changed in regards to the women being truly open-minded and just receptive to "equality" as we know it. Most of the time the interest is condescending and combative. But maybe things will change and I may feel inspired to to comment to one who's quiet and listening. But not on this site.

[devineone]

[As a matter of fact if more women would keep quiet long  enough and listen to the perspectives of men, they would learn a lot about what truly makes many of us tick. Instead many appear to want to "validate" themselves at our expense. Typically using the least successful and marginal of our lot to paint us all.

Hey I'm quiet and listening. "Tell me something good." (Rufus). 
Seriously, I'd really like to hear your perspective on what truly makes a man tick where women are concerned.

If judging by the responses from some of you in this thread and some others are indicative being genuine; that's ok sis I'll pass. My experience on this site and subsequent observation of the current lot tells me very little has changed in regards to the women being truly open-minded and just receptive to "equality" as we know it. Most of the time the interest is condescending and combative. But maybe things will change and I may feel inspired to to comment to one who's quiet and listening. But not on this site.

Well I joined this site in Jan or Feb, so haven't been here all that long.  I was asking because I genuinely want to know.  But I respect and understand if you want to pass.  At any rate, I grew up with 4 brothers so I am not exactly in the dark, but I'm not a guy and can always hear different ideas. 

[Legacy]

Aww shyt.... Vance is back & he spittin DAT KNOWLEDGE!!! - 

I guess if you say so Bambi. You and many other women would do yourselves a huge favor if many of you would stop drinking your own kool-aid. I don't mind you all making gratuitous comments in regards to what makes you all tick, but the bad habit too many of you have with QUALIFYING for men their levels or expectations in terms of fulfillment get real tired. But hey we all got opinions right?

In a nutshell, stop telling men what what we want, like, think, and let us tell you.

A comedian If my memory serves me once said if puzzy was a stock it would be trading at an all time low. His point was that women themselves don't value their "puzzy" themselves by the way they give it away. And I can attest as from the male perspective that getting puzzy is by far not on any list of most difficult things to get.  I'll also throw you another bone from a man who's lived a little. Don't nothing beat what you refer to as "good puzzie" like MORE. If you want the raw truth men crave abundance and variety more than anything else in terms of sexual stimulus and needs. This world is littered with the crushed and devastated state of minds of very attractive and probably sexually proficient women who can't believe or understand how or why her mate cheated.

And that's for a number of reasons but one in particular. Pusci ain't special, but neither is scrotum for that matter. Men want pusci for sure but women want scrotum for sure. No woman can't play me with the "Imma hold out method". For one, you want some scrotum eventually & for two I can get it somewhere else. Play the hold out method if you want. - LOL

The other issue you spoke to was abundance & variety. Real talk, men don't fear marriage but marriage means less of everything. Less freedom, less variety(dating), less money(spending more) & eventually less pusci (when the marriage becomes a routine) - LOL

Women still haven't figured out that they can't impose their will on men to get married. They have to understand why men DON'T like marriage & offering something that makes marriage less of a sacrifice.

Men don't grave nor need your financial prowess. Our needs are actually quite basic, but require you all to get it so that marrying or committing to monogamous relationships are WORTH IT TO US.

 

Preach!.. Work on what will make a man consider marriage. No one is willingly signing up for 50% of the good life they once had!

[Starchild]

This thread is ridiculous.  Yall are wildin out.  The facts are:  Men use women in relationships.  Women use men in relationships.  Men use men in relationships.  Women use women in relationships.  There is no difference in volume or degree. the only differences are what tools each individual has at their disposal to play the game, and what each wants from others.  Supply and demand.  All people --no, all animals--(at least those with any sense) use whatever means they have at their disposal to get what they want.  It's not necessarily nefarious, it just is what it is.

 I know several girls who were struggling and used to go on dates to get dinner.  They used what they had--charm and good looks-- to get what they needed--money, food.  No intention of dating these guys, giving anything up, or having any form of relationship.  But they were asked to dinner, and they were struggling, so they went.  5-6 dates lined up a week.  They'd keep playing dudes (aka mealtickets) for as long as they could get away with it without having to do anything they didn't want to (sex, commitment, etc.)  And why did the men go for this?   Because men are expected to pay. We are expected to woo women.  With whatever means we have at our disposal. 

Some men are more creative than others, and will do more unconventional things to woo.  Some women only accept being wooed if it's done traditionally--i.e. by spending sums of money on entertainment, gifts, etc.  But even that has exceptions.  One woman might love to go for an ice cream cone, and a walk in the park with one [sexy, interesting, turn-on, etc] guy, but only accept another [less interesting, for whatever reason] guy if he spends on her.  Our culture and society teach us that men are supposed to chase women.  Yall talked about it up in the 'hunter v. fisher' thread.  You want to be chased. 

Women, yall cannot be up in here chastising men for 'paying for pucci' and then be up in another thread yapping about you wouldn't date a man who doesn't pay for dates or chase your stankin ass or whatever else.  And if he's paying for dates, guess what he's after?   BINGO!  Pucci!  Maybe not tonight, maybe not Saturday night, but oh yes, I am after it.  And if you ain't trying to give it up, I will take my date-paying for self to someone who will.  Supply and demand.  Why pay more than the going rate? 

Chris Rock said men want food, sex and silence.  Feed me, f**k me and STFU.  To whoever brought up call girls--call girls supply that.  Of men who pay for sex, most don't pay for the sex per se, they pay for the woman to LEAVE after the sex.  No strings.  No shopping for window treatments on weekends, or visits to the in-laws', or anything else.  A service. 

Another newsflash to those women who think that there is something special about them by virtue of that thing between their legs---that they can control a man or keep him or whatever because "it's so gooood."   It is good, it's pucci.  But it's not special.  They're all pretty much the same.