Strongchick, Danielson, Buksoon a thought for you.

[furious]

Strongchick stated in a previous thread about how the American value system is based on the dollar. So very true, and this has got me to thinking, which is a novelty for me.

Do you think the obsession with money that is dominating our society is caused in part by the growing salaries and financial freedom of working women? I read two or three threads from other message boards that I visit with topics like "Ladies, would you marry someone who makes less money then you?" and so on. It seems the general consensus amongst the ladies is: no.
Hhmmm.

So even with the growing salaries of women, if a man does not make more then her he is not fit as a mate? Mind you, I read this post from a medical student forum, which made me even more surprised. I understand to the need to find a mate who can build a good nest. But with the new wave of female professionals hitting the market, is it realistic for women to want a man who makes more then themselves when they are already drawing a 6 figure income?

Thoughts?

 

[strongchick]

Strongchick stated in a previous thread about how the American value system is based on the dollar. So very true, and this has got me to thinking, which is a novelty for me.

Do you think the obsession with money that is dominating our society is caused in part by the growing salaries and financial freedom of working women? I read two or three threads from other message boards that I visit with topics like "Ladies, would you marry someone who makes less money then you?" and so on. It seems the general consensus amongst the ladies is: no.
Hhmmm.


I have a feeling that the obsession with money is out of necessity. Capitalistic systems do not function without greed. It is considered patriotic to spend. Go figure.


So even with the growing salaries of women, if a man does not make more then her he is not fit as a mate? Mind you, I read this post from a medical student forum, which made me even more surprised. I understand to the need to find a mate who can build a good nest. But with the new wave of female professionals hitting the market, is it realistic for women to want a man who makes more then themselves when they are already drawing a 6 figure income?


Interesting. See...many women may not feel as secure as their men even if they are making big dough. A woman's working life is shorter. So she's got to rely on someone to take care of her and the kids after her working/earning years are done. Women tend to learn less than men, the older we are, and our salaries go down, not up, after a peak in our 40's.

You can't really blame women for being materialistic...we are taught this. And men believe they can buy the 'best' women if they have the money, even if the man isn't attractive.

And why not reserve your best years for the most money? If you follow the American value system, youth, beauty, and money, are the most valued commodities. Why waste your youth and beauty by not maximizing your wealth during these times?

Old women are throwaways. Perception is the key. Many of us perceive that we are running out of time....

...for example, I'm dating an older woman, and she's slowing down. If I weren't such an idealistic idiot, I should've found someone with a stable career and money. As it is now, I'm the bread winner. Love is a great thing, but...these are the best years of my life, and the next 15 are going to require constant care to maintain my glow. Should I stay with someone who has nothing, and risk my whole financial future on me alone, or should I get with someone who also has it going on and can carry ME through the bad times? <rhetorical question>

hmmm. Where da mens wit da money be at?!!!

 

[Steroid_Virgin]

This thread is fucking sad... I can't believe people actually think this way... Well, just means Im going to have to more discriminating.. shit... if all you want is money, you are missing out on the best in life.

 

[danielson]

woo hoo!

threesome! (though i have a feeling those two would skip off on their own somewhere in the middle of the night, steal all my money and make it look like i OD'ed on something)



seriously though


i'm not sure if its patriotic to spend, but i think we all have a responsiblilty to at least get out lives back on track....by not spending as much provided your situation is as stable as its always been, and lots of peole doing the same thing, isnt good at all



as for a women wanting a man with money, maybe their searching for the strongest mate, the one with the most plentiful supllies that will care for them and possible children best? who knows, i dont, i havet been on this earth nearly long enough to understand all women?

post the link to the forum with the medical students anyhow?


oh btw why did you stick me inbetween these two (J/K!!!! )

seriously though....im a bloke, and its in one of darwins laws the the male of the species will never understand the female.

 

[furious]

Hhmm.
50% of all divorces happen because of money issues. Sooooo, if a woman is not happy with the amount of money her man is making, it's ok for her to go out and look for another, richer man? And not create her own wealth?
If a woman has sufficient education and experiance, how is she any more a throwaway then an old man?
As a man, I was never taught that you could buy a pretty woman. I just observed it, in high school, the guy with the best car and clothes got the prettiest girls. In grade school, the guy with new Atari had the most friends. Etc.
The beauty thing goes both ways. Women are taught to go after a HANDSOME and RICH man, which is, what, 2% of the male population? Anything less is not acceptable.
I would think that women would be interested in changing trends established by the previous generations. They ARE taught to be materialistic and demand a husband with a high paying job. But, now, with education not sex being the important component in securing a professional career, why cannot a woman be the breadwinner and find a mate that makes her happy just being for being who he is, not what he does?

 

[danielson]

i don't think its great that stuff like that happens but then thetre might be a secondary cause of that lack of $$ (alcoholism etc)

hey.....put it down to social conditioning. your right they are told to go after the dudes that make the money, but then guys expect them to stay home and look ater the kids and get food on the table.....this is slowly chaning i think. in my friends family, the wife is the main breadwinner- i dont think there have been any issues there.....

 

[furious]

danielson, here is the link.

http://www.studentdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=28&t=000941


I understand the biological need to find a mate who can provide. But when the woman herself is making a 6 figure income, why does the male need to match her or make more? That is just plain greed, see what I am saying? There are other ways to ensure strong, healthy children that have nothing to do with drawing a quarter million a year salary.

Strongchick, I started reading Rich Dad, Poor Dad last night, should be finished by tomorrow.

 

[strongchick]

This thread is fucking sad... I can't believe people actually think this way... Well, just means Im going to have to more discriminating.. shit... if all you want is money, you are missing out on the best in life.

I hope you are talking about those other women. I don't care about money, otherwise I wouldn't be in this relationship for four years.

This is the world we live in...join in or die. I've reconciled myself to the fact that money is king.

Even though I consider my personal values to be above money, I have to live amongst people who only value money, looks, and youth.

If I don't get that high paying job, then I need to find someone who has one. This is how we validate ourselves.

Sad, but true.

Lets say I don't value money at all. What's gonna happen to me once I'm old and less attractive? You know the answer to that.

America is FUCKED UP.

 

[danielson]

you a medical student? wot year

anyhows, that maybe a cultural thing more than a woman thing

a friend of mines sister is gonna marry a mechanic, shes a nurse i think, and when she broke it to her parents they 'blew up'

maybe its to do with the family culture

 

[strongchick]

Re: danielson, here is the link.

http://www.studentdoctor.net/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=28&t=000941


I understand the biological need to find a mate who can provide. But when the woman herself is making a 6 figure income, why does the male need to match her or make more? That is just plain greed, see what I am saying? There are other ways to ensure strong, healthy children that have nothing to do with drawing a quarter million a year salary.


I don't know. If I made millions, I'd find a bunch of male and female toys, all ages, to service me. I wouldn't need to be married. I'd take care of them all and we'd party and live together. But for those who want children...hmmmm.

A lot of this is social. What woman wants to go to her tea parties and shit and show up with a house husband? It is still a taboo to be a stay at home man.


Strongchick, I started reading Rich Dad, Poor Dad last night, should be finished by tomorrow.

Great book. Nothing new, for most folks...but....it has made me really re-think my life/career strategy. I go to work happy now, because I understand that working for someone else is temporary and I am not emotionally invested in it.

 

[buksoon]

Strongchick stated in a previous thread about how the American value system is based on the dollar. So very true, and this has got me to thinking, which is a novelty for me.

Do you think the obsession with money that is dominating our society is caused in part by the growing salaries and financial freedom of working women? I read two or three threads from other message boards that I visit with topics like "Ladies, would you marry someone who makes less money then you?" and so on. It seems the general consensus amongst the ladies is: no.
Hhmmm.

So even with the growing salaries of women, if a man does not make more then her he is not fit as a mate? Mind you, I read this post from a medical student forum, which made me even more surprised. I understand to the need to find a mate who can build a good nest. But with the new wave of female professionals hitting the market, is it realistic for women to want a man who makes more then themselves when they are already drawing a 6 figure income?

Thoughts?

ZOW! That descripion could not be less me! The idea that I wouldn't be with someone because he didn't make a lotta moolah. I could see OTHER women on this board being like that, not me.

I'm trying to imagine the ways I could be materialistic and I seriously can't think of anything. Honestly. I'm the girl whose favorite restaurant is Taco Bell, who never wore a piece of jewelery (no earrings,neck chains, not even a watch) a day in her life, whose wardrobe is the most utilitarian thing ...

Who took a job as a teacher in the "inner city", even with Master's degree and a 4.0 GPA and "Honor's Program" on my diploma (just means I had to take tougher classes, and more of them, than the other undergrads).

Anyway, I had to set that straight before answering the question. I am NOT the woman who will fall in love with a wallet (despite the nagging of my old Jewish relatives to do exactly that!!!)

I don't know what to say. My answer is "no, it's not because of the growing salaries of women." For a reason, I would only say that this society is probably the same degree $$-centered as it ever was, and women's salaries have only grown in recent decades. The two don't seem to correlate.

That's my gut-feel.

 

[spongebob]

Re: Re: Strongchick, Danielson, Buksoon a thought for you.

I have a feeling that the obsession with money is out of necessity. Capitalistic systems do not function without greed. It is considered patriotic to spend. Go figure.

greed and patriotism were here long before capitalism.

 

[buksoon]

I DEFINITELY agree that is considered patriotic to spend (Rudy Guiliani saif after attacks: You want to help NY? Come out here as tourists and BUY STUFF.)

When Gordon Gekko said "Greed is good", he meant that it keeps America afloat.

America, as Strongchick says, can indeed be fucked up. Example: we are among the leaders in scientific/global research--it's BIG industry. Yet, still workin' on cancer drugs, on treatment of paralysis, a million et ceteras.

But if you want the drug so that 70-yr-old men can still get boners, oh sure, right on that!!

The hunger for money, for pleasure (as opposed to happiness), for surface beauty and facades--powerful motivators.

 

[danielson]

viagra was originally developed for treatement of angina


the 'straighting of the flag pole' was a side effect




also treating impotence is a bit easier than say cancer....though who knows what cures have been supressed for commericial gain

they've sold placeabo's to thirld world countries before and told them they were antibiotics and charged them full price too

 

[spongebob]

I DEFINITELY agree that is considered patriotic to spend (Rudy Guiliani saif after attacks: You want to help NY? Come out here as tourists and BUY STUFF.)

America, as Strongchick says, can indeed be fucked up. Example: we are among the leaders in scientific/global research--it's BIG industry. Yet, still workin' on cancer drugs, on treatment of paralysis, a million et ceteras.

But if you want the drug so that 70-yr-old men can still get boners, oh sure, right on that!!

why is it that we make assumptions based on what we see a mayor say, i have nor as any one i know ever held this premise, that it is patriotic to spend. never.

again we make judgements based on statistics or analogies, maybe we havnt discovered a cure for cancer or aids etc. because its damn hard too. making someones dick standup is prolly relatively easy.

how much money has been spent on cancer and aids research vs. the amount spent on viagra. now that would be a better arguement, but prolly wouldnt excite people or be worthy of a thread due to fact that its prolly overwhelmingly in favor of the cancer, aids, and etc

 

[buksoon]

viagra was originally developed for treatement of angina



also treating impotence is a bit easier than say cancer....though who knows what cures have been supressed for commericial gain

you said "angina"... hehe

Ahem!

What a scary thought. And I don't doubt true. So many industries would crumble if cures, as opposed to on-going treatments, were ever found for various maladies.

On this board there all these political conspiracies. Like Oliver Stone is posting under 10 different handles. These FINANCIAL conspiracies never get any play. But I bet the effects are just as far-reaching, if not more.

 

[spongebob]

What a scary thought. And I don't doubt true. So many industries would crumble if cures, as opposed to on-going treatments, were ever found for various maladies.

On this board there all these political conspiracies. Like Oliver Stone is posting under 10 different handles. These FINANCIAL conspiracies never get any play. But I bet the effects are just as far-reaching, if not more.

yea must be a conspiracy, call you know who.

no, there's always another maladiy around the corner to fuel the fire.

and why havnt we found a cure for herpe's, now i know there's gotta be a conspiracy on that one.

 

[buksoon]

why is it that we make assumptions based on what we see a mayor say, i have nor as any one i know ever held this premise, that it is patriotic to spend. never.

Sponge, you don't think the government waits on pins and needles every "Black Friday" (the first Friday shopping day after Thanksgiving--the official start of Xmas shopping). They do!

That's what Reaganomics and "trickle down" was based on--the rich would throw money into the system (by buying stuff) and the poor would reap benefits of all that commerce--the sign of a healthy economy.

 

[spongebob]

Sponge, you don't think the government waits on pins and needles every "Black Friday" (the first Friday shopping day after Thanksgiving--the official start of Xmas shopping). They do!

That's what Reaganomics and "trickle down" was based on--the rich would throw money into the system (by buying stuff) and the poor would reap benefits of all that commerce--the sign of a healthy economy.

i said, "why is it that we make assumptions based on what we see a mayor say, i have nor as any one i know ever held this premise, that it is patriotic to spend. never."

the govt does want us to think its patriotic, but i dont!!

 

[danielson]

you said "angina"... hehe

Ahem!

What a scary thought. And I don't doubt true. So many industries would crumble if cures, as opposed to on-going treatments, were ever found for various maladies.

On this board there all these political conspiracies. Like Oliver Stone is posting under 10 different handles. These FINANCIAL conspiracies never get any play. But I bet the effects are just as far-reaching, if not more.

its truly possible......given their past actions, im sure they would be perfectly content to let people die if they could make $$ out of it.

you can't be sure however. the HIV drugs in south africa being disallowed to be generic and the antibiotics proves they have the capacity to though.


as for the angina....what ever do you mean

 

[gymnpoppa]

I think both buksoon, and strongchick are both right.....that's how our society operates here in America. I just lost an ex who was a major player in the BB world, and she was under enormous pressure to do a hell of a job. Above and beyond what most men have to do, in the same position. If I hadn't been involved with her, I wouldn't understand it from a woman's point of view (not that I do completely still), but I saw the difference.

Spongebob, our selfish president has publicly implored the public to spend money, fly, even before they established a security for the airlines. Which led me to believe he doesn't have a clue about what's been happening, or he doesn't give a shit about the people. I'll go with the latter. I mean, how can you expect people over 1 mil have lost their job due to layoffs this year......and you're expecting these people to spend money? Patriotic, no, selfish.

No federal assistance for the hospitality industry, which he just refused yesterday, and to extend the unemployment benefits, they had to twist his arm. His determination to give tax cuts to the wealthy during the same times, magnifies his lack of response to the people most affected by the economy.

I feel as though he's determined to keep the country divided....

 

[gymnpoppa]

Re: Re: Re: Strongchick, Danielson, Buksoon a thought for you.

greed and patriotism were here long before capitalism.

Capitalism and greed go hand in hand. The easiest way to understand this is to live in another country where it (capitalism) isn't so prevalent. Where greed doesn't surpass, integrity, and other basic human values.

I note that on another thread, most men who come from other countries here, think American women are very superficial, vain. The majority that is. Which makes it the fault of both men and women.

Whereas, men who (spongebob) date women from other countries, find that a good majority are just looking for love, and offer basic values of life and love. (speaking from personal experience here)


patriotism only surfaces when it's convenient. Otherwise, nobody would give a shit about firemen, emts, policemen, other public service workers. We have definitely gotten away from patriotic thinking in day-to-day life.

I remember some restaurants bitching about giving policemen a discount on their meals.......or offering discounts without strings attached. Greed plain and simple.

 

[spongebob]

Spongebob, our selfish president has publicly implored the public to spend money, fly, even before they established a security for the airlines. Which led me to believe he doesn't have a clue about what's been happening, or he doesn't give a shit about the people. I'll go with the latter. I mean, how can you expect people over 1 mil have lost their job due to layoffs this year......and you're expecting these people to spend money? Patriotic, no, selfish.

gym, you make some good points, but i was only commenting that we see these political figures get on tv and make these remarks, to be patriotic and spend. and in reality(the real world, people we actually associate with) this does not happen.

i said that i nor anyone i know has the "be patriotic and spend" mentality, they dont give a fuck. they spend when they need things and when they can afford it. now thats my simplistic view of it.

i think, that we are making assumptions based on TV, and political figures satements. it just isnt that way.

 

[spongebob]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Strongchick, Danielson, Buksoon a thought for you.

patriotism only surfaces when it's convenient. Otherwise, nobody would give a shit about firemen, emts, policemen, other public service workers. We have definitely gotten away from patriotic thinking in day-to-day life.

its hard for me to keep up with all the topics that surface from the original thread, but i'll comment on this.

gym, you know americans have always had that attitude. we are silent with our patriotism(love), and for the most part that includes our day to day lives as well(with friends and family).

but that doesnt mean its not there, sure we prolly should show it more, but we dont. and i dont think that makes it anymore artificial or convenient. i think we are all proud of the sacrifices our military, emt's, firemen, etc. make, we just dont show it all the time.

im not that old, but maybe someone can comment on whether it was different in the past.

 

[buksoon]

i said that i nor anyone i know has the "be patriotic and spend" mentality, they dont give a fuck. they spend when they need things and when they can afford it. now thats my simplistic view of it.

i think, that we are making assumptions based on TV, and political figures satements. it just isnt that way.

And I think you were responding to me, because I brought up Guiliani as simply one example, and probably the most clear-cut, and tell-it-like-it-is. You wanna help America? Spend your dime here.

That's a fact, Sponge. Capitalism needs commerce. It needs those cash registers zinging. I don't think I was simply "making assumptions based on what I see on TV."

Also, I'm not sure Amercians "spend when they need." If so, then "need" is a broooaaad category! I think if a person tallied up their purchases for any given month or looked around their homes at the trinkets, they would see that "need" is not a motivating factor in buying.

Not placing a judgment on that, just sayin'.

 

[furious]

Re: Re: Strongchick, Danielson, Buksoon a thought for you.

I don't know what to say. My answer is "no, it's not because of the growing salaries of women." For a reason, I would only say that this society is probably the same degree $$-centered as it ever was, and women's salaries have only grown in recent decades. The two don't seem to correlate.

That's my gut-feel.

Back to topic.
I have to disagree. I think women do push the financial envelope, due to the fact that they are making more money, but still expect a potential mate to make even more.This is as unrealistic as guys wanting to date a supermodel. Women can be liberated from the kitchen, but men cannot be liberated from being the breadwinner? It doesn't seem right.
When did extraordinary greed become a pre-requisite for mating? Of course, my view is slightly tainted. I live a half mile away from the beach in Los Angeles, and am surronded by beautiful women driving Mercedes SUVs. I constantly hear from the older generations how our social value system has deteriated (sp) over the last few decades. Just curious as to what has caused the rise in materialism, and death of values.

Oh, and thanks for keeping this post intellectually stimulating, peeps.

 

[spongebob]

And I think you were responding to me, because I brought up Guiliani as simply one example, and probably the most clear-cut, and tell-it-like-it-is. You wanna help America? Spend your dime here.

That's a fact, Sponge. Capitalism needs commerce. It needs those cash registers zinging. I don't think I was simply "making assumptions based on what I see on TV."

Also, I'm not sure Amercians "spend when they need." If so, then "need" is a broooaaad category! I think if a person tallied up their purchases for any given month or looked around their homes at the trinkets, they would see that "need" is not a motivating factor in buying.

Not placing a judgment on that, just sayin'.

let me make myself as clear as mud, i know the govt. wants us to spend as does businesses. THATS HOW OUR SYSTEM WORKS.

now i will repeat myself for the third time(this is redundant). i nor anyone i know(people in real life not on TV) has the mentality that spending is patriotic. they spend for selfish reasons yes and also for needs.

therefore my opinion is that you, strongchick, and others are assuming that just because rudolf guiliony or whatever that mans name is, made these statements along with bush, that, that is how people(me, you, friends and family) feel.

example, do you spend money because you feel you are being patriotic? its that simple. i dont.

 

[gymnpoppa]

gym, you make some good points, but i was only commenting that we see these political figures get on tv and make these remarks, to be patriotic and spend. and in reality(the real world, people we actually associate with) this does not happen.

i said that i nor anyone i know has the "be patriotic and spend" mentality, they dont give a fuck. they spend when they need things and when they can afford it. now thats my simplistic view of it.

i think, that we are making assumptions based on TV, and political figures satements. it just isnt that way.

I agree......I guess it would be asking too much to have an objective political/news outlet, or such to comment on what the public is really thinking huh?

 

[spongebob]

I agree......I guess it would be asking too much to have an objective political/news outlet, or such to comment on what the public is really thinking huh?

your right but it seems like there should be something out there to gauge this. if not though, thats why i revert back to good ol common sense. does it actually happen within your life.

 

[gymnpoppa]

Re: Re: Re: Strongchick, Danielson, Buksoon a thought for you.

Back to topic.
I have to disagree. I think women do push the financial envelope, due to the fact that they are making more money, but still expect a potential mate to make even more.This is as unrealistic as guys wanting to date a supermodel. Women can be liberated from the kitchen, but men cannot be liberated from being the breadwinner? It doesn't seem right.
When did extraordinary greed become a pre-requisite for mating? Of course, my view is slightly tainted. I live a half mile away from the beach in Los Angeles, and am surronded by beautiful women driving Mercedes SUVs. I constantly hear from the older generations how our social value system has deteriated (sp) over the last few decades. Just curious as to what has caused the rise in materialism, and death of values.

Seeing as how I'm a little older, and remember what the older generations believed in, I believe our social value system has degenerated also. they took prayers, and the allegiance out of schools....outlawed corporal punishment......and look at how violence in schools has increased......of course parenting (lack of) has a lot to do with that also.

Nowadays, for a lot of people, it is all about the image. Men and women. I think it's woven in the minds of the public. We are so used to doing whatever we please, and competing to see who can acquire the most, or do the most, or who will go the farthest.....look at television, the show Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire? We are no longer content to raise a family, churn out productive, law-abiding citizens. That's too routine. We have to bungee jump, see if we can make the show Jackass, etc.

Remember when parents complained about Beavis and Butthead? The Simpsons? Not anymore.

 

[gymnpoppa]

your right but it seems like there should be something out there to gauge this. if not though, thats why i revert back to good ol common sense. does it actually happen within your life.

I think there should be, but I think if there was, some opposition group would discourage, or discredit it. Or label it un-American. The uneducated, or person who doesn't use their common sense, is the easy prey.

BTW, I didn't mean to imply that your mentality agreed with the patriotic spending thing.......I acknowledge your objective, independent thinking process, bro.