🚀 go-pugleaf

The way I heard it is that men look for younger women who are more likely to 
bear him children, and women look for successfull men who are more likely to 
provide for them. 

Gus

In article <DrBL7p.BKt@world.std.com>, jcooley@world.std.com says...
>
>Bogbody <bogbody@aol.com> wrote:
>>I, too, am impressed when I hear that a man has a nice car or owns his own
>>house. I am not overly impressed when I hear that a man lives with five
>>roommates in a run-down flat and rides a second-hand scooter. As several
>>women have pointed out, however, it is not the WEALTH that is impressive,
>>it is the indication that the man is a responsible, stable adult. If
>>wealth were the issue, then I would be impressed by men who drive Ferari's
>>(spelling, sorry) - as it is, I wouldn't be interested in a man who drove
>>such a vulgar, flashy thing. If a man is too wealthy, I might become
>>uneasy. (I'm not sure why.) However, if a man has a NICE car and a DECENT
>>place to live, then my weird female instincts say "Ah! Now, he might just
>>turn out to be a wonderful father for my children." At the very least,
>>even if I'm not looking to have babies, I still feel re-assured that this
>>guy might not be the type to borrow money and be flighty.
>
>
>That's funny: these are almost the exact same words my fireman friend said
>when he got the house on Cape Cod and the Jeep.  (I went to his wedding
>yesterday.)  He used to say he could almost hear the women go into this
>"maternal mode" when they saw his car and heard he owned a house.  He
>got a hell of a lot of dates and really enjoyed himself this way!
>
>
>>I hope that men are using similar, parrallel criteria when they are
>>evaluating a woman they have just met...
>
>That's a little more complicated these days, Katy.  It used to be that
>men were purely judged as "success objects" and women as "sex objects"
>(to very grossly oversimplfy things)...  but with women's equality and the
>economic pressures we're all under, it's gotten kind of muddied.   I must
>admit that most guys still have to be physically attracted (at first)
>for a relationship to even begin and I don't think this is really going
>to change much....
>
>I have an aquaintance (more like a friend of a friend) who I've known for
>the past three years whose name I'll say is "Barb".  Barb has been going 
out
>with Ben for over 9 years and desperately wants to marry him.  He said no
>because of a mix of reasons plus the fact he wanted her to lose some 
weight.
>Barb was kind of bullshit about the whole thing so started to try dating
>other men.  She has a fairly good job, her own condo, but she was 5'6"
>and wore size 22 clothes.  She couldn't get any guys to date her.  Over
>about 6 months she lost about 30 lbs and plateaued at size 18.  For the 
>past 1 1/2 years she's been doing everything to get a steady
>boyfriend -- stuff like paying big bucks to answer personal ads and
>joining dating services.  And every weekend the friend of a friend tells
>me how poor Barb had a great date with some new guy -- but they *never*
>call her back for a second date.  Barb's even joined one of those pricey
>dating services where it worked out to $120.00 per date -- and she still
>can't get a second date!
>
>  - John
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>  __))    "Glass ceilings?  Name ANY ex-goat farmer who's made management!"
> /_ oo  
>  (_ \   Holliston Poor Farm                                   - John 
Cooley
>%//  \"  Holliston, MA 01746-6222           part time Sheep & ex-Goat 
Farmer
>%%%  $   jcooley@world.std.com       full time contract ASIC & FPGA 
Designer
>