American Women

Select "Add New Message" to post a message.

American Women's acronym

G reedy
R ude
O bnoxious
A rrogant
N arcissistic

form Roget's Thesaurus (or at least it SHOULD BE)
noun: an extremely selfish creature that demands that the world (and all YOUR possessions) be laid at her feet without ANY thought whatsoever of reciprocation.

The American Woman is a monster that the American Man CREATED!!

Hey guys... here's a good website to check out...

http://www.heartless-*itches.com

(... replace the "*" with a "b" in the above address)

If you weed through the trash (and the Nazi's) there are some very valid complaints/comments being made.

For the new readers here: Go through the "Old Forum" on this topic... there's lots of good posts there.

Blame yourselves guys! American women are so nasty, fat, saggy, obese, not taking care of themselves.... all these have to do with the guys! American men make them so. Why? The bad attitude, the lack of taking care of oneself, the "endowment mentality" does not exist in vacumn. It is through ages of reinforcement, encouragement, pampering, from girlhood to womanhood. Everytime you take a fat woman out, everytime you let your woman cheat your money, everytime you wine and dine a woman and did not get laid, everytime you pamper her without a reward of love.........the monster is not created overnight. So, guys, blame yourself, not the women.

nofatso, yer right.... to a point. A lot of it can be attributed to the guy attempting to show interest without trying to be an uncouth beast. HE plays by rules that do not try to create an unfair advantage as women do 99.9% of the time. In such a case, the guy tries to meet her halfway and assumes (NEVER assume... spell the word and find out why!) that his attempts to act like a genuine gentleman will be eventually rewarded. NOT SO! American Women have a different agenda and will use a man without so much as blinking an eye. All this occurs while the man thinks he is building a rapport between them. I have NEVER ONCE known a woman (through MY experiences or those of others I've talked to) who has had the class to tell a guy up front that she is not intetested in a manner that would set her apart (class) from other women. Instead, she will willingly mislead the guy into believing that there is the hint of a spark while she encourages him to waste time and money on a classless sow. All the time while she is with HIM wasting his resources and leading him on, she is scanning the field for someone that she REALLY wants to be with. It took me quite a while to clear away the fog and catch onto this, but better LATE than NEVER. In my travels overseas, I more often than not, have come across women who are textbook examples of class. They don't act like leeches in search of a guy to bleed dry. American women are an overhyped, overvalued, underperforming, tired product that are outclassed every day of the year by women from other shores. The cunts from Heartlessbitches.com will flay me alive for what I have said, but why should I listen to those who only PRETEND to listen to both sides of the story? 'Nuf said!

Totally agree with your comment. You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. Problem is, most of us (i.e. guys) are living in dream land. I personally know two guys, yes two, who incurred a credit card debt of $5,000 and $10,000 respectively from their g/f who later broke up with them and refused to pay up. Both are genuinely nice honorable gentlemen but they have no clue when it comes to dealing with women. All along, they told me "how proud they are that in America, women are treated equal and fair." Equal and Fair? Do you call this equal and fair? So, American guys have no clue and they are doomed before the game even begins.

As to foreign women. I don't know if your observation is accurate. You are probably treated much better by these foreign women than they treat their average compatriots. Many reasons, the exotic effect you have over them, the "walking dollar sign" effect, the "American passport" effect, the"ticket out of hell hole" effect, all these combined will ensure you receive much better treatment than an average Joe in their country. Just imagine Tom Cruise in America, do you think many American women will dare to play Tom Cruise? Nicole Kidman tried but Cruise divorced her one day before California would define their marriage as a perpetual deal. So everything is relative.

..Having lived in Mexico for almost 2 years now I can safely say that basically women are women. It's just that American women have much higher standards. They've been taught to look for perfection while Mexican women are just happy with a good provider who doesn't smack them around or get drunk.

... in the USA women are taught now to be independent and aggressive, but they are still conditioned to be "feminine and passive". So, They want (and expect) the best of both worlds. They rightfully want to make the same pay as a man, but then they also want the man to assume all of the financial responsibilities of a relationship. Men put up with it because they want to get laid, but I've noticed more and more American men getting fed up and going international to look for women.

As men, though, we need to realize that we've created this monster. We need to stop feeding a culture that only judges women by their looks. Because, as long as we look for tits and asses, the women will look for wallets and sportscars. Superficiality breeds superficiality.

The women need to realize that they can't play both sides (maybe they can, but they shouldn't). They can't be as superficial as a man and yet expect not to be treated the same way. They can't be equal in the workplace, pampered in the bedroom, equal in the living room, pampered in the restaurant, etc. This wears guys down. Many men are so confused that they don't even know how to act.

Of course, this is a generalization. I've always been lucky to be with women who are confident and sure of themselves. These women DO exist, but they are difficult to find. Most women, as well as men, are merely playing roles.

...either way, though, I'm glad to be living in Mexico.

"As men, though, we need to realize that we've created this monster. We need to stop feeding a culture that only judges women by their looks. Because, as long as we look for tits and asses, the women will look for wallets and sportscars. Superficiality breeds superficiality."


Men did not "create" this "monster" as you call it. It is called Biology and men have "judged" women for their physical attributes since BEFORE the beginning of recorded time. ACCEPT IT! It is our natural role, but we don't adhere to it as steadfastly as our Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon ancestors did. Regrettably, another thing we don't do as our ancestors did is to exhibit a backbone and put our foot down in the presence of a woman. We, as Amercan men have been so castrated by the Feminist movement that we are conditioned to think that anything a male thinks as positive is oppressive to the advancement of women. Men will ALWAYS judge women by their physical attributes and women will ALWAYS judge men by their ability to provide.... to one degree or another. The "PROBLEM" between the sexes is MORE pervasive here in the US. Women want the metaphorical penis while retaining their feminine qualities. In other words, they want to "right" the alleged wrongs of 5 millenia of "men oppressing women". BUT... in a sense, men DID create this problem... they allowed women to walk all over them in their march to "equality". Equality to women means a woman's heel twisting in a man's back. The sooner we can see that, the better... Myself, I would never treat a woman like crap, BUT she had better know tha she will NEVER RULE ME.....

Guys, Equality of the Sexes is good and I support wholeheartedly. However, what we have here in the US is NOT equality of the sexes. The field is tilted toward the women and it is not equal. In our communities, workplaces what we have is not equality but a general favoritism toward the women. Case in point, in most jurisdiction, the court is always in favor of the women. In the workplace, it is much easier to lay off a non performing male employee than a female employee. It is just a reality. Back to men/women relationship. The scenario is not equal when we (men) accept the fact that:
1. Dating UFC (ugly fat chicks) is alright. We date UFC don't take of themselves as in dressing nicely, keeping fit and trim, nice hair and well groomed. As men continue to disguise this loser mentality with the "it's the heart, not the look".
2. Spend time and money on women who treat men as "good friend", "soul mate - no laid style". If you are one of those "hey, let's be friend" and getting no sex while keep spending money on her, that's not respecting women, that's not equality, that's just plain stupidity.
3. You are the sole breadwinner of the family, yet all the economic and family decision has to get her final approval. (I have friends who would forsake good career opportunity because their wives do not want to move to the city of the new employer).

HIGH FIVE, nofatso! I swear, dude, you must be the part of my mind that speaks out whilst I'm asleep! Yes, all the s*** you stated is sadly true... What really makes me scratch my head is that a lot of the time, they expect us to blindly accept the lines they throw at us: "I just wanna be friends" and other similar BS that makes up the female arsenal of misspeak. After much reflection, I was able to see the mess for what it was and decided that the UFC (God, I LOVE that term! LOLOLOLOL) and other variants are actually AIDING me in weeding out the psychos, the liars, the BS artists and the users. It's like they have a large placard resting in front of them saying: "Lemon" or "Lying Skank User" or what have you. Keep up the good fight, nofatso!

sin....yes, it's true that men are driven by the visual. that doesn't mean, though, that we must act on our primal urges. if so, then we would be running around [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord125][CodeWord125][/url] women at will. the problem begins and ends with the fact that we teach and are taught that superficial aspects are most important. how many of the men who post messages about money-hungry, superficial women would be willing to give the plain-jane woman a second look. the majority want supermodels, but beautiful women have been taught by our culture to over value themselves because they have the stereotypical features of beauty. it's like if you had a car that you knew your neighbor wanted. wouldn't you hold out for more money if you knew that he would absolutely pay it? why should a woman be willing to settle for "less" (at least in her own mind) when she has been taught that she is much more valuable to men?

this takes me back to my original point. if a woman's entire value is the physical, then why is it wrong for her to judge us on the same superficial scale? sure it's wrong, but both sexes are wrong. it is not out natural role to be animals and hump the most fertile female. but it is a woman's natural role to seek a man who will be supportive. the problem is that there are about a million mixed signals out there. this is not a contest so there is no need to defeat the women.

women are experiencing growing pains as a gender and this, my friend is a monster that we did create because we held women as inferiors and took advantage of them for ages. so, in a sense, we are suffering for the injustices of our ancestors. the misanthropes of the world will become frustrated and use this to lash out at women. a civilized man will sit back, weed through the head cases, and find the female gems.

by the way, the real problem between the sexes is in the third world where women are only slightly more valuable than livestock. this may not be a problem for you because you would be at the top of the food chain, but would you want your daughter, sister, mother, etc. to be thought of in this way? the problem that you speak of is the one where women refuse to be kept down and treated as equipment. this may be difficult to hear because it's a lot easier to blame our own problems on the actions of others, but it's the truth. women are so difficult because we created a foul atmosphere for them and when they try to break out of it or when they respond with equally stupid actions, then we curse them. grow up.

"sinjumaster". Thank you for your kind remarks. You are being gracious. I am humbled by your comments.

"miller2k". I appreciate your discussion but I think you misunderstood most of the comments posted here. We are NOT talking about disrespecting women, we are NOT talking about putting women down, we are NOT talking about degrading women. We are talking about equality of the sexes and how, as men, we should manage OUR own behavior such that the playing field is LEVEL. Bottomline is, if you let women taking advantage of you, then you WILL BE taken advantage of. Just look around this board, I see so many postings that the guys are truly nice people who are willing to "fall in love" and give whatever money they have to the women. So, the pussy cats are the GUYS, they ARE the soft hearted ones. You talked about "ages of discrimination" and that men put "looks" above everything else. I would disagree with you.
1. "ages of discrimination" I can't comment on "ages" since I was not there ages ago. In my professional and personal life, I lead a life such that I respect women as co-equal. I hope you are not talking about monetary compensation like what they are talking about re: African Americans.

2. Putting "looks" above everything else. I don't see the evidence. Just look around you, most men are totally happy to marry a UFC or let their beauty queen (formerly) degraded to become UFC. Most men are happy to have a plain Jane and kowtow to her wimps. Personally, I only know ONE single guy who only date or marry a super model type woman. Fact is, many men are too happy to have a UFC as a g/f rather than go for the highest. So, the fact does not support your argument. So, men need to set a higher level of expectation from their women.
Now, let's ASSUME what you stated is true, that men are too anxious to go after supermodel types and neglected the "UFC with good hearts", the "smart plain Jane". What's wrong with that? If Joe Blow likes pretty women, women who take care of themselves, who dress nicely, well groomed, who eat right, exercise to keep fit and not degrade themselves to the level of UFC, that shows Joe Blow have a high level of expectation of himself, that he only chooses to date women who have high level of expectation of themselves. This is GOOD, this is how winners are made, leaders are created. Why do we have to settle for inferiority? Secondly, why do we have to assume a "good hearted" woman, a "smart" woman has to be UFC, plain Jane? This is as if to assume good healthy low fat food must be expensive and difficult to come by. In essence this is setting yourself a low expectation.

Also, "miller2k" your statement

"in the third world where women are only slightly more valuable than livestock".

What are you talking about? Is this your theory or factual observation? Now, honest to you, I have never been to all the countries in the third world. I have only visited Brazil, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, countries where there is a healthy, practical policy relating to commercial sex, I can only speak from my personal observation and experience. All of these countries, most sex workers got into business on their own volition and especially in Brazil, they are treated very nice. They drive expensive cars, live in upscale neigbourhood. I am NOT talking from a "dreamland". I know many of these girls and we are friends. I visited their houses and stayed part time with them. I hanged with them and their friends. I did not see them being treated as livestock. What are your talking about? I think you may want to be more specific and provide a factual, personal observation. Again, I have not visited all the third world countries and first hand observed the FACTs personally. However, beware of books/materials from the media which tend to exeggerate and report with a one sided incomplete view.

miller2k, a retort to your post....

"How many of the men who post messages about money-hungry, superficial women would be willing to give the plain-Jane woman a second look."

You ASSUME (spell the word, please) that each and every one of us overlooks the Plain Jane. I know better than to do that. I've done "investigation" into a few Plain Janes to see whether or not they'd be worthy company. Since they were NOT supermodels, I'd determined that they'd have to develop themselves in ways that lazy, uptight supermodels feel they DON'T have to.


"Women are experiencing growing pains as a gender and this, my friend IS a monster that we DID create because we held women as inferiors and took advantage of them for ages."

This may be true to a point, but also figure that WOMEN are the guiding force in mating choices. WE have nothing to do with it. THEY are the ones who wield the power. We are just product on a shelf to them. The more the product, the more likely it will be chosen.

"A civilized man will sit back, weed through the head cases, and find the female gems"

That's what I'm doing nowadays, pal.

"The PROBLEM that YOU speak of is the one where women refuse to be kept down and treated as equipment."

Say, didn't I just address that in an aforementioned paragraph?

"Women are so difficult because WE created a foul atmosphere for them and when they try to break out of it or when they respond with equally stupid actions, then WE curse them. Grow up."

Yes, the courts, the workplace, the media and SOCIETY have all made the poor women an oppressed gender. I'll try to sympathize with that bullshit while I'm removing the heel that they're grinding in our backs in an effort to "right" the wrongs of millennia of oppression. I'd go further into the INEQUALITY between the sexes and what today's actions could turn into "tomorrow" but you'd find it unbelievable and you wouldn't be able to process it. miller2k until you find a voice of your own, go back to your mistress who pulls your strings and speaks for you.

nofatso....I have lived in Mexico for more than two years now and have lived in the heart of Mexican society, away from the more Westernized Tourist areas. I have seen first hand woman upon woman have her dreams denied merely because of the fact that they had the "misfortune" to be born female. The toy stores here are filled with toys for boy, but only a few dolls for girls. Why? I was told that girls don't need to be playing, they need to help their mothers. Many fathers don't send their daughters to school because "they will only be mothers and wives anyway". Now, once these women are older, they have no education or leverage in their relationship. They have babies, cook dinner, and keep their mouths shut. Take the time to ask the average housewife here about her life, it will almost always start out "well, I wanted to be a .... when I was a girl." Then it will end, "but then I got married." Even when they are in the workplace, they make less than half of what a man would make. The playing field is getting more even now, but a "professional" woman such as a doctor or a lawyer is still treated with contempt and, if she is married, is still expected to be a domestic slave in the home. Beatings among ALL women are considered part of a normal married life. And if she goes to the police? She will most likely hear what a neighbor of mine heard when she got fed up with the abuse and went to the authorities. The officer basically replied to her charge of abuse by saying "...well, what did you do? You need to go home and work things out with your husband. Maybe he had a bad day and you did something to get him angry." Is this what you want? Is this your idea of utopia?

I don't know who you've talked with, but the VAST majority of the prostitutes that I've come in contact are in this line of business out of necessity. I would say about 98% are "pros" for reasons ranging from: they have children to support (a single mother here is regarded as a pariah, someone to be avoided. And even when they do find a "normal" job, they can't support their family on what a woman makes.) to: they have a drug habit to support. How many normal women without a dire need for cash (especially in very religious countries) would be willing to choose "prostitute" as a career choice? Even if they now live in nice houses and drive nice cars, does that make them somehow less victimized? If it makes you feel better to think that they are doing the job because they like it, then that's fine. It's a tough pill to swallow when we realize that we are, at the very least, participating in another person's downward spiral. I've accepted this and try to act accordingly.
...also, you said :

"2. Putting "looks" above everything else. I don't see the evidence. " and then a few lines later you mention a "UFC", as you say, as being somehow degraded. If looks were not put above all else, then why would she be considered degraded in your eyes? You proved my point. Are you somehow less of a man than your neighbor because he has the nicer car or bigger house?
If a man wants to judge a woman, why is it wrong when a woman judges a man? Is it wrong because now YOU are the one being judged? Judging purely on physical attributes is not how WINNERS are made, it's how RACE HORSES are mated. Why is an overweight or "ugly" woman "inferior"? Are you inferior if you don't have 10 million dollars in the bank? Listen, to some extent, we all judge on appearance, but this should not be the PRIMARY factor in deciding our future relationships. This may seem to be off-topic, but it has everything to do with why modern American women can be so difficult--they are merely being as superficial to us as we are to them. Of course, this is not right, but we shouldn't whine about our poor selves when we do the same thing to them all the time, just in different forms.

Sin...the last paragraph of your previous post just points out how much of a misanthrope you are. Why is it that you think I'm being controlled by my "mistress" if I don't agree with your bitter rhetoric? Maybe you've had bad dealings with women and now you've rationalized it as "all their fault". Well, I've had bad dealings with women as well, but am I bitter? No. You need to look inside and figure out why you are so full of rage. The courts, workplace, media, etc. didn't make women into an opressed gender, backward thinking men like you did. I know that there's no reasoning with people like you (you probably also adhere to various other conspiracy theories such as the tri-lateral comission, Roswell, etc) because there are some people who will ALWAYS blame their own short-comings on others. Whatever allows you to sleep better at night.

Listen guys, we are all in the same boat. American women ARE difficult, but bitterness and hatred are not what is needed. We need to be grown ups and accept responsibility for what we've done (or participated in).

miller2k, lemme break it down to you reeeeeeeal simple like. am i pissed at the doublespeak that american women engage in yet expect american men to crack like the code based on the navajo language in the second world war? yes. am i pissed at the stupid games they play (wasting a man's time and resources without so much as a single thought that they may be acting like the gold-digging leeches that give american women their well-deserved bad name) when all one is trying to do is to treat them with the respect that every human being deserves? yes. to go further on that note, i was taught by my folks to respect women. i actually do that, but a lot of american women do not deserve my respect, much less common courtesy. am i pissed that they [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] and moan and wish for things that are not within the realm of possibility (finding and marrying a single fabio lookalike who is a billionaire and slavishly dotes on her)? yes. pal, we live in a country where it is the accepted norm for society to bash men without fear of reprisal or an angry, justifiable retort. this society on the other side of the coin will fall all over themselves to help women by attempting to bring down men, with you in the lead. if they didn't enjoy being so devious and rep001hing and bragging about it to their girlfriends as if it were some profession in which they take great pride, i would have no problem with american women. however, i live in the real world. i cry dry tears for american women. as for laying blame, i'm all for calling it like i see it. besides, where did you see me absolve myself of any blame? you didn't. you ass-u-me... spell it again pal and maybe you'll get the message, but since i live in the real world, that would be asking too much.

Boy, PAL...the 'REAL WORLD" you live in is bitter, angry, and hateful. My REAL WORLD is full of positive encounters with women who appreciate being treated nicely without being expected to roll over and have sex for the price of a movie ticket and a dinner. Of course, I've had my fair share of negative experiences as well, but I guess I'm better equiped to handle these things. You fall apart and blame the world for your own lack of charm,sensitivity,etc.

"I was taught by my folks to respect women."

...Wow! You're folks would be so proud of you now.

If women have taken advantage of you, then accept your own culpability. If you take a woman out to dinner, lavish her with gifts and/or attention, but she never wants to take your relationship past friendship. She is wrong for leading you on, but you are also wrong because you only showed her 'RESPECT' because you wanted something in return (sex, affection, whatever)

Pal, lemme break it down to you REEEEEEEAL simple like: You are the type of person who will never be satisfied because you are rotten from the inside. Why would any self-respecting woman want to be involved with a man so full of loathing?

Yes, many women are awful, but how will your moaning about poor, ol' victimized you help the situation? You're just trying to affirm your own sad state, to justify your own failures ("it's not me, it's them). To use your own words: "Am I pissed that they [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] and moan and wish for things that are not within the realm of possibility?" Yes, you should be because you are the biggest pisser and moaner of them all.

Keep up with the self-pity and bitterness and I'll just be here hanging around and having a wonderful time...Happiness is the best revenge.

From: The Happiest Man Alive.

My response to the gentleman from mexico.

1. The LOOK thing. Statements about the "look" and my UFC illustrative, you are still writing from "impression" and "belief" and can't relate facts to support your points. If your contention is UFC is not politically correct, I grant you that and here on out, how about "alternatively looking lady with wide body shape (ALLWiBOS)"? :) OK, back to our dialects, your contention is men put look above everything thus they suffer from men/women relationship. I state to you that you are wrong because there is NO fact suporting your statement, your statement is pure hearsay. How to get the facts to substantiate this? Just look around you, your friends, your male relatives, male co-workers, go to a shopping mall, anywhere. Majority of men are dating or married to plain Jane or ALLWiBOS? Thus to say that men put look above all else is not supported by facts. NOW, if you say, most men WISH they have supermodel gf or wives. that I concur. However, here you are talking about WISH versus ACTUAL BEHAVIOR. Wish does not count, it's the behavior.
2. Sex workers are Demeaning and nobody wants to engage in that profession. My friend. First of all, I never stated that every sex workers are happy. Just like not every lawyer is happy, every physician is happy, every McDonald cashier is happy. The discussion began when you stated in your posting that women in third world are treated a little better than "livestock". I am contending your facts that this blanket statement must not be true because you are talking about ALL WOMEN IN THE ENTIRE THIRD WORLD. That's a huge generalization. Dialectically, this cannot be supported by facts and this is not logical. Now, since you brought up the "sad sex worker" scenario. You are right, all my amigas in Brasil wish to leave the profession and every time I ask them to leave the profession for other work they will tell me about the "necessity" story. The reality is, my friend, there are lots of jobs they can get that pay very little wages. However, they don't want to do it. You are too easy to be persuaded by their statement of "necessity". The truth is, there are lots of single mother who toil in low paying jobs and support their kids. So, THIS IS A VOLUNTARY CHOICE they made. Many of them are happy doing it since the money is great, life is easy and many love sex! Would they want to leave the profession if money is not an issue? Yes! Hey... I have a good career and I love my job, but if money is not an issue, you bet I will quit tomorrow and move down to Rio de Janeiro :)

My gentleman friend. I do respect you a lot. You seem to have the heart and the kindness. I like that. However, I suggest that you tend to view thing in black and white terms and put in too much wishful thinking w/o verifying that with facts of reality which is almost always in spectrum of greys.

mr sinjumaster. You stated the truth. Behold!!

Again, Mr. Miller2k twisted your statement to fit his gentle theory. What you are stating is a simple fact; if a guy takes a woman out for dinner, movie, whatever because he has romantic or sexual interest in her. It is just ethically correct for the woman to let the guy know in no uncertain terms on the second or even first date whether his interest will be reciprocated. Simple as that. What Mr. sinjumaster stated is a common phenonmenon that many women, even they have no romantic or sexual interest in the guy, they still string him along for freebies. I have had women sharing with me stories that they "like" the guy "as friends but I can't imagine sleeping with him or see him as a b/f". So, I said to these women, "wait a minute, you know the guys is interested in you romantically and sexually and you also know you are not interested in him. So why not tell him point blank?" The women's point is "well, may be we can develop something in the future but in the mean time, I like his company. May be he is just interested in me as a friend" I said, "yeah, if a guy wants bonding, he calls his buddies. Also, when is the last time you find some "friends" developed into a "laid" (fat....Oops I meant Wide Body chance). Furthermore, you like his company ONLY when you have no other dates and ONLY when you are so bored and even then, you are not giving him sex." So, sinjumaster. You spoke the truth.

nofatso, how is it that you can understand with crystal clarity what I was saying, but miller2k (He's had far too many Millers) twists what I said more than any pretzel could be twisted? He will ASS-U-ME (miller2k, you made an ASS out of U not ME) that from a couple of posts that he knows me in my entirety. But alas, I was hoping that after my initial anger (perhaps I responded too quickly, but American women are a button pusher) that he would be able to provide intelligent debate supported by the facts that you, nofatso, called his bluff on. In fact, I'm wasting my breath even further discussing this idiot who refuses to acknowledge that American women are guilty of the bs I charged them with and that you reinforced through your post. Keep up the good work nofatso.

Thanks sinjumaster. Me too, I am tired to continue with this discussion. Afterall, we are trying to offer "the light, the truth, the salvation" such that nobody got hurt by buying into all these little trickeries. I had a woman friend (we only slept together from time to time and not dating) who told me that women can be more dangerous than men since when men are "evil", they knew that. They knew they are doing "evil", as in cheating on a spouse, being a player etc. However, she said, when a woman is being evil, she does not know that. She is being so successful to internalize the entire "evil" act as good, honesty, nice. They said the best liar is those who truly believe, live the lie. Thus, we keep having these "good friends", "necessity" and most men buy this :)

Anyway, as I said, case close. Let's go back to hunting and "heaven on heart" issues. Have a good day!

just a couple of more things and then you can go about your bitter "realities" in peace.

Nofat...you are a reasonable person, but YOU are the one making broad generalizations. You assume (ASS-U-ME, as sin would say) that the generalizations you make are correct , (but mine aren't) solely because you WANT for them to be true. Listen, there is no way to proven ANYTHING beyond a shadow of a doubt so we go on what we see and experience. I've experienced a lot and I've formulated opinions based on those observations. If you put filters over your eyes, you will only see what you want to see.

Your example of men who are married to "normal"women is true. But are they married to these women because of true desire and appreciation...or is it because they've "settled for less" (as you say)? If it's the latter, then they will never be really happy. Their lack of happiness is due to the fact that they have been tricked into believing the commercials on TV and the ads in the magazines.

"women don't know when they're being evil?" C'mon, nofat...that is just borderline sociopathic. What will you say next: "Women are animals, 3/4 of a human being?" You're more intelligent than that.

Sin...no amount of "facts" could persuade you to stop "pissing and moaning". Opinions are just that...opinions. If you choose to dwell in your own dark heart, then have a ball.

What you've both failed to realize is that I've said in every one of my posts that women are guilty as well as the men. But you refuse to acknowledge that because you feel more comfortable putting ALL the blame on women. I would've gone on about how women are fucked-up as well, but that opinion was well represented already and I wanted to point out that we have responsibility in the matter as well. Over the last few days, you've proven all of my theories to be correct.

This is over if you wish because you don't want to hear the truth...the WHOLE TRUTH. I'm wasting my time trying to have a discussion with people who are only interested in dwelling in their own misery. I'll send you a box of Kleenex and a blow-up doll so you can be happy.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by nofatso
ALL WOMEN IN THE ENTIRE THIRD WORLD. That's a huge generalization. Dialectically, this cannot be supported by facts and this is not logical.


I am surprised to see a discussion about woman in Third World in the forum of topic about american woman. Moreover Friends some people (in USA) do not know what is third world. The third world is called most of the Asia (leave some advanced countries like Japan) and Africa. For Americans who has born in America & Grown up in America it is impossible to understand the realities of third world. In most of the muslim countouries - woman can be thrown out of home with three time reciting Talak - Talak - Talak (Divorce Divorce Divorce), no court, no judge and compensation as agreed at the time of marriage. Some countouries determining sex before birth is banned legally becuase people will kill the duaghter before birth. The daughter are sold for a mere 2 USD or 5 USD. Mostly no education for girls & no good food. That is a real shame and the condition of woman - mostly in third world. So this generalised statement is actually a fact in Third world.

To miller2k, nofatso, sinanjumaster:

I just wanted to say I love this debate between all of you. I feel that you all have valid points. As far as some of you disagreeing with each other on certain points I think that's cool. Not everybody will see eye to eye on the issue of American women. I'm writing because I want to put my two cents in on this debate.

I was the guy that posted:
"The American woman is a monster created by the American man."
I forget if I worded it exactly like that but you get the point.

What I wanted to do is further explain what I meant by that. Some of you brought up the point of women using men in the dating arena, etc. That kind of goes with my statement above. In my opinion the American man has made American women this way by catering to their every whim. I once read an article talking about how in all of the wealthiest societies throughout history, the richer a society became the more it catered to it's women. And I would like to add the more spoiled they became too.

The best way for me to explain it is like this: In my mind, women are a lot like children. If you are raising a child that you let play and have fun but you set some ground rules on what you will accept as far as the child's behavior, then that child will more than likely grow up to love and respect you because you let them have fun but you also set some code of disclipline up for them to abide by.

On the other hand, let's say you have a child and you let them do what they want to do all the time. Anything they want, you give it to them. One day you come to find the child drinking rubbing alcohol and you try to stop him. The child is going to have a fit, because you won't let him drink the rubbing alcohol, even though you are trying to save the child. The child is so used to getting waht they want that they will get mad because you won't let him drink the rubbing alcohol, even though you are trying to protect him.

In this example what I'm trying to show is that in a way that is what has happened to women in this country. Our society has catered to women , mainly because of the feminist drive, as a way to apologize for all of these years of oppression. Now men just bend over and give women what ever they want. A monster has been created to the point that even when a man is trying to help or protect a woman, she doesn't want to hear it. She wants to do what she wants to do.

Basically what I'm saying is that American women have been socially conditioned to be this way. Just like the women of Brazil have been socially conditioned to be the way they are. In my dealings a lot of people think that I'm real hard on women. It makes me laugh because I feel that I'm normal and that a lot of men are too far the other way. They allow women to do a lot of the things that they do. I once told a friend, that was telling me some of his women problems, that I hold women up to the same moral code that I hold men to. He said he didn't agree with that because a woman can give you p-ssy, but a man can't. My reply was that was the main reason I did it.

What I'm trying to say is that when men cater to women just because they're women you create a selfish monster that will use you as a means to an end. And the ironic part is that women are so unhappy by this themselves. Because I travel I notice how it's a lot of unhappy women in America, especially some of these women who just use men. Notice how some of the gold-diggers, and real materialistic women act. Do you notice that you don't really see many happy gold-digger type women, even the ones that have succeeded in their goals? Psychologically there are many reasons for this which it would take forever for me explain.

The MAIN point that I'm trying to get at is that, there are some good women in America who see exactly what the men see, but they probably make up a very, very small percent of the general population. Unfortunately, I have to say that I have given up on American women. I presently live in this country for purely economic reasons: America holds exceptional opportunities for jobs and education. As far my as my life with women I only deal with girls in Brazil. I feel they match me better. I feel that it actually helps me stay focused on my job, career and college by knowing that there are some real normal women out there but they just happen to not live in this country.

Phil, my bad for not probing your mind and further questioning you to clarify your point. You hit the nail on the god-damn head with pinpoint accuracy in every point you made in this most recent post. I'm sure there are a FEW good American women out there, but they are as rare as the dodo bird, and I will NOT budge in my opinion on THAT. I gotta admit though that reading you elaborate further on your point was like reading the freshly inscribed stone tablets from Sinai! LOL Yes, I will concede 100% that in that respect, it is OUR fault for the social conditioning of American women today. What I was trying to communicate to miller2k (although I didn't do that very effectively since I posted once or twice before I thought it through) was that I follwed the rules of not acting like a neanderthal and metaphorically knocking a woman over the head, dragging her back to my cave and demanding sex. So many times in the past, I did as instructed by the parental units and acted the part of the gentleman but the spoiled behavior made that a moot point. That can be extremely frustrating, especially whe they (American women) will give you NO CLUE to help you out. Contrast that to when I have gone overseas numerous times not even looking for sex or even hinting at the promise of being a woman's "ticket outta here", and I would encounter women who were so classy that it made them seem that they were a totally different species from American women. So, now that I was able to better convey what I was trying to say, and admitting that I should have thought before I spoke, no hard feelings, miller2k.

phil

regarding your statement " that I hold women up to the same moral code that I hold men to". I understand your true meaning. However, be very careful. In this politically correct world, people of evil mind can hurt you with statements like that.

In fact, when it comes to dealing with ALLWiBOS (bear in mind that UFC is wrong and I plead guilty), you have to proceed with extreme caution. The MO is, smile, be exceedingly polite, speak in "value neutral language" and most importantly, create an impression that you are part of the feminist, liberal movement (doesn't hurt to tell everybody that you voted for Gore).

I had this personal experience which was truly awakening. I work in a major corporation. About a year ago, I had a secretary assigned to me who was truly a lousy performer. In addition to a poor performer, she came in late, called in sick all the time and I caught her sleeping on the job twice! So, I called HR seeking a replacement. HR told me that I have to be extremely careful when it comes to situation like this. The HR officer, who is a woman, provided detailed strategy as how I could get rid of her. Without going into details, the bottomline is, when I caught her sleeping on the job again, I quietly get another FEMALE colleague to personally verified the sleeping beauty, I documented the time and date and the duration of her sleep...... so every of her violation I get witness, not any witness but FEMALE witnesses. After about a monthy's wrangling, my secretary was finally fired but only after our company paid her one month's severance. Yes, I know, you will say this is amazing, I could have called her in and said, "You are a poor performer, we pay you well and you didn't do your job. You don't give a professional presentation. You come in with jeans and T shirt, hair messed up, cigarette stains on your fingers. By the way, god damn it, cut off that cheetohs and loose that 50lbs." No NO NO, can't say that. This is the world of political correctness, the world of "value neutral" where UFC is named ALLWiBOS or "NORMAL". So, you got to play the game.

Phil...you're dead right about almost everything you said, although I would disagree about the analogy with the child. This implies that women are somehow less wise or less savy than men. (I've found that to be almost the opposite). The real problem is that women often make unreasonable demands and the men, in their hurry to "close the deal" are too eager to give in. This is the reason we are left frustrated. Women have always had the upper hand when it comes to choosing who to be with...that's normal and reasonable. The problem is with us because we don't clearly state up front what we want. There are always the "lets just be friends" girls who will soak up all the attention and money, taking advantage of a man's feelings. But for every woman like that, there's a man who sits back and allows it to happen. Men need to be responsible for their own actions by stating up front, after the first date "I want a romantic relationship..how about you?" This is done in Mexico: The man has to "declare" his feelings for the woman and then he knows right off the bat what he's in for. My point all along was that women have their own reasons for acting the way they do and that we should just worry about ourselves and cleaning up our own acts instead of crying about the "evil" American woman.

Sin...No hard feelings. We are in the same boat. I was merely being the Devil's Advocate, trying to point out our own culpability in the matter.

Nofatso--I understand your frustration. I worked in corporate America awhile too. But what you need to remember is that those stupid details were put there for a reason (it's been blown out of proportion, though). There was a time when a woman was indeed told to lose a few pounds or lose her job...or to sleep with the boss if she wanted to keep working there. These are facts. These crazy PC laws are there to make sure that these attrocities never happen again. Sure, women take advantage of them all the time, but until we can think of a nice middle-ground, they could very well be necessary. There is some truth in the "PC" aspect, though. People SHOULD be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin, the size of their ass, etc. Sure, things get out of hand sometimes. But once again, I'd rather play the PC system than go back to the days before woman's rights, civil rights, etc. The only "game" being played is the one of RESPECT.

So, I love a good fight, but I think that we're all pretty much on the same side on this issue....

"People SHOULD be judged by the content of their character not the color of their skin, the size of their ass, etc."

A friend of mine complained I am being harsh on overweight folks. He said, "Hey, you don't know, my genes did it to me. I can't change" I laughed and responded, "NO, your genes did not do it to you. Cheetohs did it to you, KFC did it to you, Super Big Meal did it to you, "Super Size" did it to you. Chulapa did it to you....."

We judge people by their content of character. Best benchmarking of character is by looking at the person's behavior. Weight is manifestation of years of behavior pattern. Reports from US Surgeon General and US Dept. of Health state that weight is a bahavior issue. Thus unlike skin, race, sexual orientation which is a born trait, weight is a behavior trait.

Now, why weight is a good reflection of one's character? Weight management involves only two issues. Diet and modest amount of exercise. Diet, keeping a good diet requires good pattern of healthy habits, good discipline of maintaining a balance diet. Exercise, modest amount of exercise, as in walking, light weight lifting, playing balls etc. requires some personal discipline, time management and motivation. If a person is overweight. This is a protracted results of laziness, undiscipline, gluttony. When people say, please look beyond the weight and see the person's heart. I say, "no need, his/her heart is already there in front of you. Just judge the behavior"

To put weight in the same category of race, gender, sexual orientation bias is mimimize the civil rights movement. Yeah. I bet MLK fought for our right to sit around, get fat and stuffing chalupa to get to the Jumbo Size Shape. :)

nofatso..who says that everyone has to adhere to YOUR idea of what's right and proper? What if someone decides that they don't WANT to eat fruits and vegetables or exercise (not that they are lazy, but they are exercising their freedom to be indviduals)? If someone doesn't want to be exactly how you want them to be, does that mean that they are lazy and worthless?...or does that mean that they are merely making a life choice? Of course, you're also free to make idiotic generalizations. (religion is also a personal choice rather than a biological..are Jews bad people just because you might be Christian..wait, don't answer that..I don't want to know). Being overweight is a behavioral problem with its roots in genetics. Similar to alcoholism, a person is pre-disposed to that certain behavior. Of course that doesn't mean that the person HAS TO over eat. Also, It's clear that a having a healthier diet and life style is better for you physically. You most likely will live a longer, healthier life if you are in better shape. But if a person chooses to live a certain way and it doesn't hurt you in any way, then why all the condemnation?

Prejudice against fat people is the last refuge of the racist. The only acceptable prejudice now is against fat people, but it's EXACTLY the same as other forms of prejudice. It's the judging of a group of people based solely on appearance. "Fat people are lazy because they don't exercise" is like saying "Black people are lazy criminals". It's making a broad generalization based entirely on appearance. You assume that a person who looks a certain way MUST act a certain way--That's so judgemental that it's ridiculous. Not wanting to lift weights has nothing to do with other types of work. I'm overweight myself and I routinely put in 16 hour days, working double of what the slimmer people did. Even now, when I should be relaxing in Mexico, I put in 12 hour days during the week and most weekends I'm travelling to smaller towns to volunteer with orphans. Sure I eat a lot, but I enjoy it. Sure, I have sex a lot, but I also enjoy that. I don't judge people solely on their appearance (people with glasses are NOT necessarily smarter, blondes are NOT necessarily less intelligent, etc). It's the sign of a small intellect to think that EVERYONE must have the exact same set of standards. I like the fact that others have different values. The world is a beautiful place BECAUSE we are so different...

miller2k

You still FAILED to address the FACT that race is a born trait and fat is a result of a protracted behavior trait. Being "black" is born, genetic. Being "fat" ....you truly need years of entrenched behavior to get to that sorry level. So, your lumping fat with race is false. By the way, black people, provided they are not fat, are pretty and attractive, whereas most fat people (except a minority few) are ugly. Thus most SW (sex workers) are fit and trim and fat SW usually see their pricing drop by more than half. Market pricing rules!!

As to your reference that "hey, I have a right to do what I want and I want to be fat.... so what?" Just like what if I choose to be messy, to be lazy, to go on welfare and become a burden of the society, to do drugs, to get heart attack, to get diebetis. Yes, so what? As I libertarian, I would say that's none of my biz and it won't borther me a bit (except my tax $ is wasted on these people...but there are lots of injustice around so I am not going to worry about this). However, if you say as an employer, is it right to judge a person who is fat/overweight knowing that he/she has all the bad behavior traits? You bet. I am paying $ to hire a person and I want to know that this person has a high level of expectation of performance. This is NOT discrmination but have discrminating standards.

The Fat community has been trying to lump their cause with the gay/race issue. It's not sticking because everybody knows that being fat is unhealthy, unethical just like nobody wants to be perceived as lazy, gluttony. Thus weight reduction is a $3billion business here in the U.S.

Now, it is alright for you to continue to claim being discriminated while at the same time keep sitting around with a sedate lifestyle and stuffing fat into your system. That's your life choice. Just that you will continue to fight this so called "discrimination" of yours for the rest of your life and even many fat people do not buy your cause.

once again, in the tradition of so many bigots, you refuse to see the forest for the trees. You make broad, sweeping generalizations based on appearance. I'm not seeking any special treatment, nor would I accept any, but to be perceived as "inferior" or less than valuable as a person, is just wrong...and unconstitutional. Maybe the health/fitness industry is so big because of the way insecure tyrant wannabe's like you want everyone with a few extra pounds to feel like they are committing the greatest sin of all time. Hatred is hatred, bigotry is bigotry..show me someone who hates and judges a group of people for no reason other than appearence and I'll show you someone who hates MANY groups of people. And why is being fat unethical? That's just plain silly. Ethics has to do with what's in your heart and soul, not with what's around your belly. The REAL issue around here is WHY exactly are you so full of rage against a particular group of people? I don't neccesarily care, but you should. It's not healthy to carry around all the rage. If some day I get REALLY overweight and die of a heart attack, why does that affect you? I have my own money that I WORKED for and I can support myself...why do you even care? You're a hateful person and hatred is a lot more dangerous than fat, but I wouldn't deny your right to live as you see fit.

Prejudice is Prejudice...Judging people solely by appearance is wrong. If I said "People who work out are dull, because they spend all their time in a gym"...that would be wrong, stupid, and ignorant. Why? Because I'm associating two behaviors that don't necessarily have anything to do with eachother.

And, by the way, to assume that I have a sedate lifestyle shows your ignorance. You don't know me, you've never seen me...what makes you SOOOOOOO intelligent? Do you believe that ALL must act and think the same as you? Wow...you must be perfect! I would compare my lifestyle to yours anyday and we can see just how "Sedate" my lifestyle is.

It's no wonder that you have problems with women...You must have a sad, sad life...

With regards to the whole race v.s Behavior debate. Forget about the other person...YOU are responsible for your OWN actions. What if you say "I won't hire Catholics (or any other group of people) because they are stupid."? Is that right? Are you judging an individual based on your OWN set of morals? Is it correct to assume that all people who look a certain way must act in a certain way? If you say "I won't hire that woman because she's fat," you're making a moral judgement based ENTIRELY on appearance. How is that different from saying that blacks are lazy, Polish people are stupid, gays are perverts, etc.? Forget about the person you are judging and how they became "different", you are ASSUMING that ALL people who look a certain way MUST have the same characteristics. That's the EXACT SAME thinking that forced blacks to the back of the bus. Stop hiding behind semantics and face your sad, pathetic bigotries. There is NO justification for bigots, racists, and small-minded fools....

miller2k

:)

wow, you are really angry now. Interesting. Emotions and Labeling aside, I think you have just concurred with me that fat is a behavior trait. A trait developed over years and years of bad behavior. Now that we settled this fundamental point, the remaining two questions are "I want to be fat, so what?" and "fat people are being discriminated like the blacks and all other minorities...."

I want to be fat so what? Unbeknownst to you, we have settled this too. As I said, you can do whatever you like and that's none of my business.

Fat people are discriminated like the blacks. NOoooo. Again, you tried to lump yourself with the "I am black too" to achieve the coat tail effect. Problem is, the rest of the society doesn't buy this since we already accepted fat is a behavior trait. Even the fat community does not buy this line. They know fat is a choice whereas being black is a born trait. You are certainly free to make the choice but like any choice you make in life, the rest of the society will hold you accountable to the choice you made.

Last time I checked, there was DWB (driving while black) but we don't have DWF (not divorce white females :).

Now, as to your labeling of "hate" "bigots". This is so typical of left wing ideology that every time when we hold people accountable to their behavior they call it "bigot" "hate". What they want is value neutral so that the rest of society has to adjust to them, to make provision for them, to accommodate them, special treatment. So, some fatso is suing the airlines that the seats are too small and that the airlines could not grant him two seats for the price of one. So, my company's health insurance premium is up because a couple of fatso got heart bypass surgery and since the fatso is in a group plan, MY health insurance goes up. That's OK with me. I don't mind to help out a fellow co-worker for the bad choice he made in his life but to lump fat as a civil right issue? Not sticking my friend.

Now, you can keep getting emotional but you can't deny the facts. :)

Let me note that fat is *usually* based *mostly* on behavior. There are exceptions however ... I will note two.

1) My mother. If she eats 1500 calories a day, she just breaks even (she is approximately 5'5" and 220 lbs).

2) There was a special on TV (I think it was on "Aqui y Ahora" on Univision) about a man who ran and biked marathons, and yet who would still be considered about 100 lbs over weight.

My point isn't that behavior doesn't effect weight, but rather, that weight is not *totally* dictated by behavior.

For that matter, even if it is, who are we to criticize their behavior. Sure I might not be attracted to a heavier woman, but I don't have the right to say she's lazy ... I just don't know.

Smiles,
David

P.S. Miller2k, I'm with you all the way.

David.

The attached link from US Surgeon General report provides a glance of fat in America with major causes identified as BEHAVIOR patterns.
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/fact_glance.htm

"the rest of the society doesn't buy this since we already accepted fat is a behavior trait."

...Whoah, Einstein, who is "we"? When did you overthrow the United Nations and become dictator of the world? Does the "we" refer to your own little group of pseudo-Aryans? Or does the "we" refer to the voices in your head?

Whatever the case, sure as hell I'm emotional because you're making a blanket statement about EVERYBODY who is overweight. You don't even know me. How would you feel if I said that all prejudiced people were gay...would you feel that I'm making an unfair generalization about you?

I'm NOT left wing...so there's another one of your generalizations that can be discounted. I don't agree that airlines should be forced to sell two seats for one or make larger seats to accomodate people. That's silly. I want EQUAL treatment for ALL people. That means that it's not right to give fat people (or any other group of people, although white males have received special treatment for centuries) preferred treatment, but it's also not right that a person can be denied the right to support his or her family just because some moron thinks that they're a little on the chunky side. Where the hell did you learn your morals? Is it okay to deny someone the opportunity to make a living just because they don't adhere to how you think all people should be?

The whole concept of "civil rights" is that you are judged on your abilities not on your apperance.

"Now, you can keep getting emotional but you can't deny the facts. "

...Facts? Now when exactly did you provide any facts? Your case is as follows: "In my OPINION, ALL fat people are lazy. I THINK that they have sedate lifestyles. I FEEL that they want special treatment, etc" These are all opinions. Do you know ALL the fat people in the world? Half of them? One third? One percent? One millionth of one percent? Unless you have first hand knowledge of what you are talking about, being so eager to discriminate is insane. The desire to hop on an exer-cycle does not transfer over to the desire to work. I know people who are in top shape who are lazy as hell. Just because YOU are closed-minded and bitter, that doesn't mean that you can't do your job very well. I'm sure you do a good job at work. So, one particular defect doesn't necessarily transfer to other aspects of life. And, yes, I do consider it a defect. But does that mean that an extra Twinkie now and then proves that I'm lazy?

I know that I will never convince you because bigotry in all forms is basically irrational. So, I'm wasting my time with you. I don't care how many links you provide, I KNOW that it's an unhealthy lifestyle...so is being a Pro Football player or a fighter jet pilot...but these are all choices. Maybe you don't agree with them, but who the hell are you? Who the hell are you to decide who can and can't be allowed to make a living? I think that you have some deeper issues to deal with and that all of these "facts" that you are providing are just a cover for a hatred you had all along. So, first you hate women, now fat people? who next? Let's hear the whole laundry list.

As for being lazy...people who make broad generalizations about a group of people are LAZY. You're LAZY because it's a lot easier to say that ALL of these people are this way or that way, instead of taking the time to judge every human being on the content of their character and the depth of their intellect...

To the rest of the board: I'll bet the you guys a nickel that he doesn't get this.

miller2k

:) calm down. calm down. You are going to get heart attack to be that emotional. OK, read this website and you should feel a lot better. OK? Don't be upset and emotional. This is just a discussion. At the end of the day, you continue your way and the world moves on. Nothing is changed, why get upset about it?

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/fact_glance.htm

can't we all just get along?

nofatso,

I checked out the website you listed. However, I wasn't disagreeing with the Surgeon General.

I said "weight is not *totally* dictated by behavior. "

The Surgeon General said "For each individual, body weight is the result of a combination of genetic ... influences". (Genetic ones apparently ususually play a small role, but they do play a role, sometimes not so small).

Furthermore, I really like the presentation that website precisely because it *doesn't* evaluate fat people. It sticks to the facts, never once saying fat people are "unethical, lazy, or gluttonous". I agree that there are many very good reason that a person wouldn't want to be overweight, but I don't think we have a right to cast a generic evaluation of their morality.

David

P.S. Miller2k ... I do agree with you, but you do seem to be getting a bit emotional. While this isn't necessarily wrong, it is counterproductive, if you do want to convey your point.

David

:) thank you for your comments. I appreciate whether you agree with me or not. My premise is this. This is a fact based discussion. At the end of the discussion, more facts will illuminate the truth. Flat earth theory may be appealing hundreds years ago but it is better for everyone to realize the facts. So, I thank you for your calm and gentlemanly demeanor.

OK, Back to the topic of concern. Are you telling me there is a 80/20 effect?

Irrespective of all the reports on fats/obeseity, you just graciously informed me that although 80% of fat is behavior induced but what REALLY caused FAT is the 20% (assuming there is a 20%) environmental factor? For that, I am appreciative but wait a second, let's assume 20% of this environmental factor causes fat. Let's also assume the air we breath, the water we drink, the "culture" we are in and let's also throw in the "the gene makes me do it" arguments. Let's say I accept all these and also I don't mind to disregard the fact that two generations ago, Americans were much leaner. However, having accepted all these assumptions and disregarding of historical facts, I still cannot explain why the Surgeon General's Call to Action (listed below) nothing but behavior modification strategies to lose weight. Now, you are a polite gentleman with a preference of facts. however you also seem to have a preference of minimize the effect of facts when it makes the heart better. I am just confused.

I thank you for offering your thoughts. :)

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/obesity/calltoaction/fact_whatcanyoudo.htm

David..Thanks for being the voice of reason. Yes, I was upset. But for the same reason that a Jew would be upset at an anti-semite. It's frustrating to deal with someone who is so lazy as to judge an ENTIRE group of people based on little or no first hand knowledge. But you are right, hate never ends hate, ignorance never diminishes ignorance.

Nofatso...I would never deny your right to be a jack-ass. To the contrary, I defend your right to be however you like. Just as long as it doesn't interfere with my basic rights. That's where we differ...I would never judge you as a person until I get to know you and find out for myself. You are quick to lump ALL people who look a certain way in the same pile. At best, that's short-sighted. At worst, its deadly. Even, if being overweight was 100% behavior, does that mean that an overweight person should be denied the right to support his or her family? Does one negative behavioral trait automatically transfer to all other traits? Do ALL smokers cheat on their wives? Do ALL vegeterians preach to you? Are ALL choco-holics foul-tempered? C'mon, NOFATSO, you're smarter than that. All of the "facts" that you have provided are things that we already know. Ok, it's better for your health to be in shape. But does that mean that overweight people should be discriminated against? Should ALL smokers be judged as harshly? Are they all addicts who will always look for the quick-fix? Of course not.

The point of the analogy of smokers v.s overweight people is this: If there is no harsh judgement against smokers as compared to fat people, that's solely because the bad behavioral trait with fat people can be seen and the smokers' bad behavioral trait can't be seen (usually). So, this IS indeed a visually-induced prejudice. (and visually-induced prejudices are exactly the same whether it's due to sex, race, size, etc: It's about judging a person SOLELY based on appearance).If that's the case, then your prejudice is entirely based upon personal preference. Sure, you may not want to date a fat woman, but should that very fat woman be denied opportunities just because you don't like her appearance?

This is my last word on the matter (probably!). I will never convince you because, as I said ALL prejudices are basically irrational, so there's no hope.

To everyone else, thanks for indulging my diatribes. I'm not seeking any special favors and I don't want anyone to receive special favors...but I absolutely despise people who so desperately want to hold people down and diminish them for the horrible "sin" of being different...

I was angry for a while, but I'm back to being....

The Happiest Man Alive.

P.S. I have to get back to my "sedate" lifestlye. I never knew that being sedate was so much work, 12 hour days and two new businesses opening up. All this sedation is giving me an ulcer.... :)

miller2k

Welcome back! I was nervous that you get too upset. As I stated, a fact based non emotional discussion illuminates the truth. So, a hearty welcome back!

First of all, let me say, I am not a "jack-ass", i am "nofatso" :)
Also, thank you for saying that I am "smarter than that" to indicate your goodwill (I presume whatever "that" is, must be super good) :)

Second, I appreciate the overall tone of your posting much better even though you still used lots of languages as "hate", "bigots", "discrmination" "prejudice". Feels like you are speaking in LOUD tone if not yelling. You continued to lump born trait with behavior trait. You continued to confuse proper "selection/screening/benchmarking" process as being "prejudice", "discrimination". Nonetheless, I applaud your goodwill and the overall improvement in tone which is more discussion oriented.

Thirdly, Discrimination as in one is unfavorably treated due to one's born trait, as in race, sexual orientation, ethnicity. This is different from laziness, sedate lifestyle and lack of motivation, which is a behavior trait. I cannot change my race but can change my behavior. A bahavior based selection criteria is not discriminition. Denying someone of a job because she is black is heaven and earth different from denying someone because she lacks motivation, as manifested from her body weight, which makes good business sense. Havings said that.......... ==>

there is NO EVIDENCE that overweight people are being "discriminated". The fact simply does not support the argument that weighty people are discriminated. Just look around you. In government, the corporate world, lots of alternatively weighted folks have senior high paying positions. From entertainment industry (Rosie, Limbaugh - all 300 pounders) to government (Armitage, Bennet, also close to 300#). So people are accorded with all the benefit of equal opportunity and weight does not seem to be a factor.

So, recap. I am nofatso, not jack-ass. Born trait vs. Behavior Trait. Discrimination of black is bad, selection based on behavioral trait good. No fact supporting weighty people were discriminated. Free choice is good. Holding one accountable to the choice s/he makes is not discrimination, it's accountability. All good. Flat earth theory no good. Fact based discussion good.

Glad that you are back to your happy self. Super good, keep it up. :)

miller2k

You mentioned that you are troubled by ulcer. According to Center of Disease Control, 9 out of 10 ulcers are caused by a certain bacteria in your stomach. In such case, a doctor's antibiotic prescription will correct the symtom. The other 1 out of 10 ulcer would be caused by the placebo effect whereby the patient "felt" she has ulcer, this is probably caused by stress and other psycho neural issues. To that, doctor recommends stress reduction therapy (as in meditation, yoga, exercise) and counselling. I hope you feel better soon. :)

[thinking that this has gone on too long and that SinanjuMaster will have to act the part of Moe to nofatso's and miller2k's Larry and Curly] Double eyepoke and/or loud slaps

master

Not so fast now. I prefer to be Moe. Moe is always my main man. :)

Sin...if you give me the poke in the eye, then I will simply use the standard, hands up defense and split those fingers apart. If you continue the attack I'll give you the ol' belly-bump, into a mule kick move...Speaking of the stooges, you can tell a lot about a man by what stooge he likes best. Nofatso likes the abusive Moe, makes sense :)

Nofatso, I was just kidding about the ulcer. I was trying to illustrate the fact that I was feeling a lot of pressure due to the "sedate" lifestyle of almost 18 hour work days. By the way, I meditate every day. You should try it. It opens up the mind and would release your inner rage.

I'm so glad that my tone is to your liking since the Earth does indeed revolove around you and your personal preferences. With regards to your "facts"...you assume (ASS U ME) that ALL negative behavioral traits are related. What about my example of the smoker? Smoking is a bad behavioral trait yet there is no rush to judge smokers. There IS a rush to judge overweight people as "lazy, unmotivated, etc" Why? Both are negative traits, but only one is visible. What you fail to understand is YOUR responsibility in the whole matter. Sure the object of your judgement, if he/she is black had no choice in the matter and the overweight person (for the most part) did, but YOU are the one we're talking about. YOU are judging a person based entirely on a stereotype that you have developed. So YOU are committing the same error that a racial bigot would make: Assuming that all people with a certain appearance MUST act a certain way. This a major problem in today's society. People just don't accept responsibility for themselves. It's always the other person's fault. You stereotype and hate, yet it's the other person's fault for being that way. You have no responsibility in the matter. Physician, heal thyself.

I never said that fat people were being discriminated against. I was responding to your judgement of potential employees and how you assume (ASS U ME) they must act a certain way. ( I sure hope you don't work in Human Resources) Like I said, I'm overweight and I've never suffered from a lack of motivation, nor laziness. I finished college with a Masters Degree and in the top 5 percent of the class, I studied boxing (and had one pro fight) for four years, I've written 3 novels and two collections of poetry, I worked my way through a major corporation from a summer, mail room intern to a junior vice-president, I moved to Mexico and opened an English Academy, I'm opening another branch of my school, I volunteer with orphans in a nearby village, and I'm opening two other businesses. And I'm barely past 30 years of age. (All this, and I still have time for my "hobby"). Now, I'm not bragging because many people have accomplished a lot more than me, but I know to expect some snide remark. ( I really don't like to give out so many
personal details). I just wanted to point out the flaw in your prejudice. I am NOT lazy or sedate, yet I'm overweight!!! How can this be? Do I like to eat? Hell, yeah. Do I like to sleep with beautiful women, Hell yeah. But my over-eating and my reluctance to run on a treadmill has never affected my desire to bust my (fat)ass to do a great job at anything and everything I try.

Your so-called fact-based discussion is just a series of opinions that you have formulated. Don't try to pretend otherwise because there are NO facts to point out that ALL fat people are a certain way. Show me one "fact" that supports your irrational prejudice...

So, recap. Opinions passed off as "facts" are bad. Judging people on your own personal experiences with them is good. People believed in the Flat Earth theory because they only had opinions, not first hand facts. They were proved wrong by somebody who actually took the effort to discover the truth first hand. Judging people on the content of their character is good. Insisting that someone be "held accountable" for a behavior that may or may not be relevant to the task at hand is bad. Freedom to be a "jack-ass", good. Forcing your personal preferences on others, bad.

Have a SUPER day. Here's an olive branch: You're as intelligent and reasonable as you are tolerant. :) :) :) :) :) ;)

miller2k

Thank you for your discussion. I recognize and appreciate that. To reciprocate your goodwill gesture, I am not going to repeat my discussion on "discrimination" versus factual judgement. I would, however, address two questions you raised.

1. Active but still overweight, why?
I probably eat more than you. Yes, I eat a lot. The average American food is very unhealthy, filled with cheese, sour cream, cream, high fat milk, meat paddies and the like. The cooking method is unhealthy too, lots of deep fried, lots of fats with animal fat etc. So, I tend to do my own cooking. Also, I eat a lot but also very little portion, but I eat a lot of meals during the course of the day. Avoid processed foods (as in foods or drinks with high sugar), if you like sugar, eat lots of fruits. Try fish, chicken and all sorts of veggies. Also, bear in mind "fat" as in meat fat is NOT the only culprit. Refined sugar too. When you look at the packaged food available in grocery, the sugar content is huge. Case in point, a 16 ounce bottle CoCa Cola will get you 150 plus calories and to burn this much energy, you have to walk briskly for 90 minutes! A small bowl of honey glazed cereal has 100 calories of sugar! So, diet is a critical step to weight management. Again, I am not saying this is your diet. However, according to all the reports I read and observation of my overweight friends, their diet is the number 1 culprit.

2. Exercise.
I am not talking about trying to win the Olympics gold medals nor am I referring to how busy you work. You can lead a very busy life yet still have a sedate lifestyle. Last month, I worked so hard at the office and got lazy and failed to do excercise, I gained 20lbs in a month! Working hard in your business has nothing to do with motivation to manage a Life (as so brilliently stated by Tony Robbins). For exercise, I mean modest exercise and a motivation to make exercise as a lifestyle. What do I mean by lifestyle? Like parking the car four or five blocks from the office, and walk a distance, as in climbing the stairs to the apartment. Take time out to brisk walk everyday for 30 minutes. If you like, do a 30 minutes jogging every other day. Do 20 minutes light weight lifting every other day. I work in the third level of a six storey office and I notice many of my colleagues would take the elevator commuting even from ground level to the first. Their lifestyle or life pattern is very sedate. In fact, climbing the stairs gives you a good excuse to exercise. Also, as a first step, don't pressure yourself to do everything all at once, one step at a time. However, make sure the consistency is there. Motivate yourself to make every tiny step counts. Focus on one pound per week, per month.

Now having said all this, weight is a personal choice. As you make a choice, society is to hold you accountable to the choice you made. It is much easier to manage weight than to change the society. In addition to that, even you have alluded to the benefit of weight management. I wish you best! :)

well...I'm glad to see that you've assumed a more reasonable tone...I'm also glad that you (maybe inadvertently) have seen the error in your initial statements...So, ALL fat people are not necessarily lazy and detrimental to the work environment....Not having the healthiest of diets is not an indication of being a terrible, inneficient person...it's merely a bad lifestyle choice...and who among us has not fallen victim to bad lifestyle choices? But this does not mean that we are somehow diminished as a person...There is a difference between being "held accountable" for a lifestyle choice and being discriminated against. It's the difference between :"She's so fat, no wonder she can't find pants that fit her" and "Look at her fat ass, there's no way I would ever hire that tub." The former is a direct, fair (but not necessarily sensitive) assesment...eats a lot+ no exercise= difficulty in finding clothes to wear. The latter is NOT a fair assesment, it is the assumption of guilt in ALL areas for the guilt in one. It would be like being convicted of a moving violation in traffic court and then the judge telling you that he will hold you for questioning in a murder because "ALL traffic violators are murderers."

Well...I wish you well. Maybe somewhere down the line we can debate again (Hell, we might even be on the same side the next time)

miller2k

i want to extend a hand of friendship and reconciliation to you. let me be honest with you, i was quite touched by your earlier posting. you came out and stated about the success of your business, your involvement in your community etc. it is your personal privacy and you don't owe anyone a "confession" ;like this on this board and you did that. i feel very touched by your writing. i felt, i could have presented the facts much better, in a more diplomatic form with you. throughout my discussion, i have chosen to use unbiased evidence from the behavioral science, medical science fields. however, sometimes in a heated discussion, dry facts can be annoying and i may be guilty of too many dry facts. case in point, oj was acquitted not by factual evidence but by emotional sentiments. so, i am aware of that and i felt you have been unfairly treated in this discussion. so, for lack of a better word, i want to apologize to you. having said that.........

it was in no way i want to discard the truth that obesity and laziness, lack of motivation, personal discipline is directly linked. based on every scientific evidence, they are. i do not want to be the italian guy (corpenicus? sp?) who had every scientific fact to say that flat earth is wrong but later retrenched due to political pressure from the vatican. so, it is not an "assumption" but "conclusion" based on long range scientific research and evidence. so, yes, lack of motivation/discipline/laziness is the cause of obesity. having restated that.........

i want to make sure you understand everybody is entitled to make their own choice in life and i am, from the very beginning, did not call on you to make a different choice. this entire discussion was started when you felt obesity is an inherited gene (i maintain it is a choice one conscienciously made) and that society discriminates against obese people as in discriminating of blacks (i maintain there is 1*. no evidence of discrimination and 2*. holding one accountable to the choice one made is no discrimination).

miller2k, i would say we agree to disagree. in no way our disagreement makes either one of us as being anything negative. this is the nature of any political discussion, . if you believe in your principle, hold on to it. the same for me. hey, may be you are winning! i heard on the radio that in california, where 40% of school children are obese, there were reported cases of "discrimination" where the "lean" children were being rejected by the fat group or experiencing peer pressure to get fat, to "get along" so to speak. so, i will not be the least bit surprised that one of these days, i have to get to 300lbs to avoid "discrimination"! would i do that, you bet i will if that is the only way i can avoid being discrimination. i wish you well. :)


yes, i know we are onhe same side on at least one issue, i.e. free to choose, free to make a

Nofatso,

Let us have one more go of it then (sorry for my tardiness, fast internet access is on and off with me).

My objection to your treatments of people who were overweight lay solely in the moral evaluation (as opposed to the "facts"). -- Lazy, Gluttonous, etc.

Clearly, being overweight is bad for your health. However, that *does not* mean you are lazy in general. For example, there are lots of overweight people who, while *physically* lazy, still work their butt's off at work (~mentally). Also (and more importantly), who are we to judge?!? If someone doesn't like exercising, we can't say their decision is wrong. It very well could be that their decision to not exercise was perfectly rational (too much effort for not enough gain...)

Likewise, calling someone "gluttonous" has moral overtones ... it is, after all, one of the seven deadly sins. There is a vast difference between saying "gluttonous" and "eats a lot". One has moral overtones, another does not. A glutton is a *bad person* because he eats a lot. A person who simply eats a lot might be good or bad.

*Sighs*. I hope I have successfully communicated my main problem with the phrasing of your earlier posts.

Sincerely,
David

P.S. I'm impressed with your composure. Thank you for engaging in civil debate. *Smiles*.

Let me continue (about the lazy thing).

To be lazy is immoral (at least according to older protestant teachings). To chose not to do something because you don't find it sufficiently worthwhile (be it excercise, getting a second job, etc.) is simply decision making.

It is really this distinction ... the difference between judging a person, and describing typical decisions made by people, that I am trying to emphasize.

As an example (you describing people who are fat, and me describing them).

You:

They're (typically) lazy, gluttons.

Me:

They tend to be less physically active, and tend to eat more.


Ah. I think I've done a better job explaining. Good. I look forward to hearing from you.

Smiles,
David

Nofatso...one clarification: I never said that I felt that being overweight was solely an inhertited gene. I DON'T believe that. I think that it, just as with almost every other behavioral trait, is a mixture of nature and nurture. Skinny people aren't always skinny just because they eat fruits and workout...Nature always will have her say in the matter. Even when I was in training, I still looked heavy. I worked out daily and ate all of the right foods (as prescribed by my trainer) and I still looked pudgy. I stopped training so hard after I realized that women would still want me, my employer would still value me, and life would still be beautiful if I didn't kill myself an hour and a half a day (3 hours on Tues. and Fri)

Having said that, my main point of contention was with your "They don't exercise so they must be lazy" generlization. Sure, maybe overweight people are "unmotivated" to work out, but this attitude does not necessarily translate to lack of motivation in all areas. You might LOVE chocolate and eat it like a pig, but that doesn't mean that if I bring over a few steaks you will devour them all. Lack of desire to be "in style" isn't laziness per se...sure, it CAN be, but you can't make a total generlization. Sure, you can point to the cold, hard facts that state "Lack of exercise and poor eating habits cause 99% of the obesity in the world." But, I was never disputing that. What I WAS disputing was your theory that lack of exercise always is laziness and laziness with regards to exercise is always a sign of laziness in other areas of life. There are no cold, hard facts to prove that point...because it's wrong.

I also disagree with another point. This one is more of an issue of personal preference. I will ALWAYS be exactly how I wish to be. So, even if the norms of society change, I will keep being me. So, if everybody weighs 300lbs, keep being yourself. I've found that holding steady, standing firm, and being "real" will always triumph over stereotypical judgements...Discrimination only exists when the "victims" tolerate the discrimination...

from: The Happiest Man Alive, deep in the heart of Mexico

David

I appreciate your comments on "non judgemental". Most of us lead a life of being non judgemental unless the issue at stake involves our personal welfare. It just happened that I dare to articulate what most of us hide in our hearts. Having said that, I do understand that people have feelings and feelings can be hurt. Sometimes, it is socially feasible to remain silent but when too many of us keep silent, the truth lost out somewhere. I do not intend to repeat the central thesis of my discussions out of respect to miller2k's feelings. You can track my discussions from previous postings if you are interested.

After 9/11, many of us are under even more pressure to speak up if the truth is violated. Case in point, I saw a middle eastern looking man in our building and the first thing I did was to call the security and followed up with the management. Is this racial profiling, you bet, would I do it again, a resounding yes. As I stated, I truly do not intend to hurt miller2k's feeling, but I did which I regretted. It is a tough stance as how to make truth prevail and not hurting others feeling. It is a fine line I am still learning to track. I appreciate your comments.

miller2k

Thank you for your nice comments. I surely appreciate.

Seems like you and I will continue to disagree on ALL the issues we discuss, in particular, judgement based on facts is informed decision, not "discrimination" and behavior is the cause of obesity.

However, as I stated, you are entitled to your opinion and I will definitely fight for your right to speak your mind, I think this may be the area you and I both agree. How about we settle on this :)

nofatso...we DO agree on the concept of freedom...you're free to be wrong (ha,ha)

..but let me clarify that my feelings were NEVER hurt. I was ANGRY. I wasn't weeping because you insulted me. I was angry because you judged all fat people based on your limited knowledge. Opinions are alright, but they aren't alright when they stand in the way of someone making a living for their family. That's where I felt you crossed the line from "opinionated" (good) to "hateful" (bad)..and I will never remain silent with respect to something that I know to be wrong and dangerous.

YOUR truth did not prevail because it was just that ...YOUR truth. I respect the freedom to express opinions (moreso than most), but I don't respect the arrogance to assume that those same opinions are facts just because you believe them strongly.

I just can't understand why you don't understand my central point: Judging based on facts is reasonable, but making a correlation between one bad habit and all others is just plain wrong. If you say, "she is fat, she is lazy to work out, so she will be lazy at her place of employment" that's just the same as saying "He is black, blacks are criminals, so he will steal from his place of employment." You are making an assumption about a person's abilities and/or attributes based SOLELY on appearance. And behavior IS the cause of being overweight, but there is a genetic component as well. This IS a fact, but I'm not releasing all overweight people from responsibility...

I'm glad that your tone has calmed down (as opposed to the mocking, hateful tone you assumed much earlier in this section, when you assumed that everybody would rush in to join you and nobody would call you out), but you never have to "worry" about hurting my feelings.

Like I said, I respect your right to live as you see fit and I would defend with my life your right to freedom...

Let's end this because it's obvious that we're just repeating ourselves now...let's agree on this:

WE LOVE OUR HOBBY!!!! AND WE LOVE WOMEN!!!!

miller2k

Great! so we determine that =>

1. Both of us support the freedom to choose
2. Both of us support the freedom to speak our minds
3. Both of us like women and we like to have fun.

So, let's get back to the area we agree. Thank you.

I wouldn't believe it if I didn't see if with my own eyes. A friend of mine showed me this whole website (we're both female), and I can't believe guys spend so much time looking and paying for sex. I'm not some man-hater, but I've never heard guys talk about girls like this. I know there are some real stuck-up snobs out there, but some of these posts are lumping all American women together in the same category. There are some real jerks of men out there too you know but not all girls think of all guys that way. Why do you let the few rotten apples speak for the rest of us? We're not all out to wring you out dry and walk all over you! I will tell you though that the minute you let a girl walk over you, you're buried. Be nice to us but don't be spineless. Some of us are really nice and really cute too!

USBabe, you wrote:
"I will tell you though that the minute you let a girl walk over you, you're buried. Be nice to us but don't be spineless. "

Thats where the problem is for a lot of us guys. Be nice to us, but dont be spineless, sounds easy enough right? Not when you have to keep guessing what role she wants you to play and when. I was born outside of the US but have lived most of life within the US. Generally, women outside of the US are more comfortable with men playing the traditional "man's" role, which I think makes it a lot easier for guys to just be themselves and not have to worry about whether they are on that fine line of nice but not spineless.

Hi US Babe,

Thanks for your comments. Maybe there is hope out there.

I wanted to inform you that this topic goes far beyond just written statements on this forum. If you have read this forum and its archives, you'd find that American men are going overseas by the planeload to find women. The big target areas are central and South America, Asia and Eastern Europe in particular.

In fact, three friends of mine just returned from The Netherlands where they met women and had extraordianry sex. By the way, these are tall, good looking professional guys with two of them having incomes in excess of 100K. This seems to be a growing sociological movement and has been examined already in the news media. In fact, this "exodus" seems to be acccelerating. The women in the US who know that I go to Eastern Europe to meet women also become very livid and irate with me when this topic comes up.

What are your thoughts and comments???

Had I read the post by USbabe just a short while ago, I would have laid a mushroom cloud at her doorstep. Since I now try to think before responding to such a button-pushing issue (with ME that is) I'll try to calmy explain to her WHY her remedy to the situation works the OPPOSITE.

USbabe, I won't go the past route and say that ALL US women are Greedy, Rude, Obnoxious, Arrogant and Narcissistic. A GREAT MANY of them are and I'll tell you why. I always keep my eyes and ears open and my mouth shut. Okay, the third one is more difficult to do, but I do it enough to be able to ascertain information about a woman when I listen to her directly (when she's talking to ME) or indirectly (when I hear her talking to her friends). I often hear what they expect from a man and it seems as if US women are expecting a man to lay his world at their feet. That would be no problem with me IF I found a woman who realized that it's a two way street and that you have to EARN that world. You gotta be worth your weight in GOLD to make those kind of demands and you must back them up without hesitation if you are to convey any credibility.

I have truly lost count of the women who have told me they want a nice guy, only later to learn that they TRULY want an "exciting" guy instead. It's the constant (and UNANNOUNCED) change of rules in the middle of the game that make men scratch their heads and determine that women are incapable of logic. Myself, I like for a woman to be up front with me regarding her feelings (or lack thereof) for me. Sure it may sting initially, BUT I will respect her and give her a wide berth if she tells me up front that she's not interested. (I once had a woman reject me firmly, but politely. I was astonished at such a RARE display of true class, but I kept my composure and acquiesced to her wishes) INSTEAD, they will leave the hint (STOMP IT OUT,IF THERE IS NONE LADIES) that there is the possibility of an eventual romantic situation between them. They're afraid that our egos will shatter if we are rejected outright. Better to stomp out a fire NOW than to allow it to run rampant because you didn't take care of things up front. [To digress, yes, all, I was stupid enough NOT to put two and two together and burn bridges that would never have worked in the first place!] Anyway, getting back to the desire for a "nice" guy: when the women hook up with their TRUE choice of the exciting guy, many times they end up with an "addition" to the world that they did not plan and the exciting guy keeps true to his form of being exciting, by blowing town and avoiding his responsibilities. At the very least, he will contribute to a broken heart (the woman's) and add another notch to his bedpost, which ends up having American women lumping those of us who DON'T treat women like dog droppings into the same category as the offending guy who DIDN'T respect them. Meanwhile (in many cases, not ALL) the one whom she thought of as worthy of "plantng the seed" in her field of fertility has blown town and NOW she seeks a CHUMP to take care of the harvest. Who's that, you may ask? The nice guy she turned up her nose at in the FIRST PLACE. I don't know about my compadres on this board, but when a woman sees me only as a means to alleviate the hardships of taking care of the result of her mistake, I get disgusted and see the previously sought-after silk purse as a true sow.

I now realize (I mean TRULY REALIZE) that each and every human being has their own individual tastes and that not every woman will like me. C'est La Vie. Being in this "battle" has taught me to cut my losses and move on. Actually, it's taught me to determine a loss BEFORE I waste my time with a double-speaking, fork-tongued "gamestress".

To my compadres who contribue to this board, I hope I've not produced a lifeless, radioactive crater as I have in the past. Like I said, for ME, this is a button pushing issue that would have in the past, caused me to launch a thermonuclear arsenal and be damned who gets hurt.

i went back and read all the posts on "american women." you guys sound like you've really been burned, and i'm sorry to hear that. it happens to women too though. i forgot who said it but someone mentioned that women are like little children and if you put up with their rotten behavior, they will keep giving it. that's it! i don't really think women are out to test guys, but if a guy doesn't put a stop to that kind of manipulative behavior, it continues. then, the woman doesn't respect the man, and vice versa. i get the impression that some guys are afraid of losing her, so they'll put up with anything, and that's where the problem starts.

brownie, you said, " not when you have to keep guessing what role she wants you to play and when." already your role is pansy (i'm not trying to be mean to you, but it's the truth). it's good to be flexible and to want to please women, but when you start really altering your behavior only to please her, you lose yourself and aren't true to who you are, and that loses respect with women, no matter what they say.

paddy, you said "the women in the us who know that i go to eastern europe to meet women also become very livid and irate with me when this topic comes up." okay, think if i said this, "i'm going to eastern europe to meet some real men because all the men in the us are either chauvinist pigs or wimps." wouldn't that put you on the defensive? if you said that you like to travel to eastern europe because you like traveling and meeting new people, and by the way, you just happened to meet a lot of very nice girls, only someone really insecure would take offense. it all depends on how you word it. if you say that you're going there because there are no quality women here, that obviously includes them, and i could see why they would be insulted.

sinanjumaster, it sounds like you've really been burned, and i'm sorry to hear that. please remember that there are millions of women in the us and just because a few are immature brats doesn't mean we all are. a friend of mine was raped a couple of years ago. it was devastating to her, and she's still in counseling. she is one of the nicest people in the world and i just want to hang up the guy by his you-know-what who did it to her. but she's slowly learning to trust again and is trying hard to realize that not all men are like that at all. you have to do the same. in fact, could it be that you're trying too hard? or that your past negative experiences are hidden just under the surface and women can sense that?

here's a question i have for you. do you usually get a definite sense of yes or no after you've gone out on a first date? sometimes i do, but not always. maybe women don't tell you that they're not interested because it isn't true. maybe they feel a tiny spark but not an overwhelming one. then later when any spark just hasn't materialized, you think that they were leading you on. i'm not saying that is what happened, but it's a possibility to consider.

you said, "actually, it's taught me to determine a loss before i waste my time with a double-speaking, fork-tongued "gamestress". i'm sure there are some women who play games. but i also think that sometimes men and women may interpret the same situation in different ways, and that might be contributing to your pain. i see you teeter tottering between two extremes, immediately putting up your defenses so that no woman has a chance and then getting rid of all defenses and leaving your heart open to beat in the raw.

okay, all women are different, but here's my prescription on how to attract the opposite sex while maintaining your own self-respect. you say that girls want men to be "exciting." well yeah, i mean, would you be interested in a "boring" girl?! be nice to her but don't be too vulnerable. don't ever bend over backwards to please her, it makes you look weak and kind of desperate, if you want to know the truth. at least in the beginning of the relationship, don't ask her to solve your problems. be flexible, but never give up your life for someone else. that makes us feel like we're responsible for your happiness, and that's just too big of a burden. think about it, would you be more attracted to a woman who a) is just stagnating in life, sitting around saying, "i have so much to give but no one to give it to, as soon as i meet mr. right, my life will be so perfect," or b) a woman who is currently happy and fulfilled. putting men in those situations, i'd much rather be with someone who leads a full life and is willing to make me a part of it, not someone who puts me at the helm and expects me to steer the vessel of his happiness and self-esteem.

(continued in next post)

(this is part 2)

Look at the guys who never seem to have problems attracting women. They're usually somewhat mysterious, in other words, they don't tell women everything. We read Nancy Drew mystery stories as children, and we want to find out what's inside! Be willing to please but not TOO much so. Do you really want to drive a girl crazy? After your first date, although I know what you really want to do (in most cases, anyway), don't attempt a good night kiss. Instead, kiss the back of her hand, and then leave without hesitation. It always works, and I'll tell you why. If the date didn't go so well, you prove yourself to be a gentleman of grace in the face of a not-so-great circumstance. If there were sparks, trust me, she'll be up all night and can't get you off of her mind! She'll wonder why you didn't try to kiss her on the lips. And, I know this will make no sense to you, you'll become more desirable. Guys are wired to want sex. So, if the date went well, she'll wonder why you didn't even at least try to kiss her on the lips! Make us want to know more about you.

There are millions of women in the US. There are some wonderful, sexy, brilliant, gorgeous ones and there are some ugly, man-hating, bitchy ones as well. Please don't let the latter get in the way of finding the real gems. As with any precious stone, sometimes you have to remove a few rough pebbles before you find the shining treasure. :-)

WOW! Something must be wrong with me! I instinctively wanted to punch holes in USBabe's analysis, but she was RIGHT

(accidentally continued from my previous post) WOW! Something must be wrong with me! USBabe, I instinctively wanted to punch holes in your analysis, but you were RIGHT on ALL COUNTS and I can't find anything wrong with your presentation! I'm gonna say something that I'll admit that I almost NEVER say to a woman:"You're right". In my defense (what little I have) whenever I've been to Europe, I've never had to labor to have female companionship (not necessarily sex). I was able to chat with the local ladies and not feel as if I were on the witness stand and being tested to see if I were somehow cloaking my intent or what have you. Here in the US, I feel as if I have to unnaturally keep on my toes and raise my shields. But since you so eloquently made your presentation, it made me think of actually BURYING the axe instead of just talking about it. Pass the Humble Pie, please.....

Yeah I wanted to put my two cents on the current discussion. First of all I would like to welcome USBabe to the forum. It's nice to hear a fresh feminine perspective on our topic of American women. USBabe, you were quoting me on one of my post in which I compared women to little children (but not in a derogotory way). One guy on here actually didn't understand where I was coming from so I'll explain it again. What I was trying to say is that if you spoil a human being, male or female, when you stop spoiling them they will get mad about not receiving preferential treatment. In another one of my post I stated that the American woman was a monster that the American man created.

Now what I'm about to say is not meant to offend anyone. I am not prejudiced at all but I must say this because it is the truth. America is basically a Caucasion nation. I mean it's mixed with a lot of races but white people started America. And the American model is to bend over backwards to satisfy their women. I really don't think it is only a racial thing. I think it's more of a monatary thing. I once stated on here that I read somewhere that the more succesful a nation became, the more power they gave to their women in terms of material gains. That is essentially what has happened in America. The reason I bring this up is because in other countries the men just don't treat their women like Americans treat their women. In a lot of these other countries sex is treated as nothing, just like sleeping or taking a shower.

The American man has elevated the American woman above himself when in actuality we all equal. I believe that in these other countries they sometimes go to far to the left and American men go to far to the right. What you have to do is find a nice equilibrium to how you treat women.

I am a black American male (pretty handsome one I might add, ha ha) but seriously I laugh at this whole situation as a whole: how black and white American men treat their women and how men in like Africa or Afganistan treat their women. I find it fascinating how we're basically all human beings but every nation has it's own unique WOMAN policy.

I'm about to go but let me add, I agree with USBabe not all American women are bad. But a lot of them have been socially conditioned to be idiots. And the women can't even see it. It's like the first time I went to Brazil it blew me away because, even though it's a lot of crime there, the people are nice. I mean everybody is. But they a socially conditioned to be that way. A lot of these foreign women are socially conditioned to be real feminine and sexy. A lot of American women are socailly conditioned to be real bitchy, moody, etc. Growing up I've never had many girlfriends; I figured out a young age that American women are basically acting moody, bitchy, etc. to get what they want and psychologically stay above men be seeming like they're not satisfied with nothing you do. Anyway I could talk all night about this subject as you can see, but the point that I must make is that a lot of Americans are SAD with the dating situation here. That's why I've given up on American women. You know that this situation is basically created one, because God made men and women to be get together and populate this planet. It's not supposed to be this hard; that's how you know something is wrong with this American dating model.

Sinanjumaster, you are very kind! You said, "I'm gonna say something that I'll admit that I almost NEVER say to a woman: 'You're right'." Could I get that in writing please?! I'm just teasing you. Actually, I'm not right, and I'm not wrong. I'm just relaying my experiences in life. I also know that quite often, people are easier to meet in some countries outside the US. When I travel by myself outside the US, men frequently approach me, but it isn't too often in the US. It's almost as if guys are scared or don't want to make the effort. If I were a guy and had been insulted by women much of the time when I approached women, I'd probably be a lot more wary, too. We tend to be somewhat of an uptight society, not only with romantic and sexual relationships but in general. In crowds, it's a fact of life that we get bumped or get our toes stepped on. Usually in Europe, people utter a quick pardon and go on their way, but too often in the states, people take it so personally, as if the other person had it all staged out, just to inconvenience them! I think the trick is to adequately protect ourselves yet not put up such a strong defense that it repels others. I really do think people sense negative vibes from others. And it's also hard to optimistic when you've been shot down quite a bit. To put things in perspective, I think of Terry Anderson, who was held captive for what, 7 years, or something incredibly long like that. Now, that is a guy who deserves to be bitter! But he isn't. We're a lot stronger and tougher than we give ourselves credit. Sinanjumaster, you sound like a cool guy. Please never give a girl the power of making you feel inferior.

AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH! Curse you, USBabe! You're right, and pleasant and graceful! DAMMIT! Yer NOT supposed to be! Just kidding! What's scary is that this is one of those moments in time (in MY life, at least) where something of value actually STICKS to my mind and the undeniable conclusion seeps into my mind because I HAVE to accept the logic of it. To do LESS would mean that I am being ILLOGICAL, and to do THAT would mean that don't have a leg to stand on. On a more serious note, you've made me question my female-bashing tendencies, uncomfortable as it is. My ex (a woman with whom I'm actually still good friends) once asked me why I hate women. I told her I didn't, but maybe I did. WELL... I have some work to do, but luckily, a lot fo it was done FOR me. Oh yeah, my attorney is drafting up that written proclamation of me being wrong! LOL

Hi US Babe,

I never directly tell women here that I'm going to Eastern Europe to meet women there. It's when they find out from friends and others that the firestorm starts. I must say that the response of American women is both harsh and consistent.

I make no excuses for trips abroad. We live in a free and democratic society and I'm exercising my rights. Hey, none of these women went ballistic on me when I bought my BMW.

It's just that I find women in Europe to be so much more friendly and engaging. Just walking around Bratislava or Prague, for instance, the women are slender, fashionable and very striking. What do we have here? Countless numbers of seriously overweight women who have given up on their appearance in many instances. When the US Surgeon General says that obesity is an "epidemic" here in the US I believe it. I work constantly on staying fit and in shape and women here can do it too. I think that you get my drift.

I hang out at a bar in Prague that is frequented by Brits, Scots, etc. They tell me that if you see a fat, masculine women in Prague - she's an American. You know what? This harsh generalization is often correct.

Been busy for a while and no time to engage my buddies on this site. Hey Sin...Master, how's going?!

First of all, USBabe. Where are you located? Let's meet for coffee and check out the possibility. You sound nice. But first of all, I like tight, fit pretty babes below 27 above 5'8". Brains optional. :)

Hey, guys. Talking about American women. Just keep an eye on the fire at Pikes Peak CO. So, this evil ALLWiBo, (yes, for lack of better word, she is fat) who went about setting fire and burnt everything. So, the cops arrested her and her first line of defence was campers, careless smokers, hunters (the traditional woes of the left wing liberal feminazis). So, the cops confronted her with evidence that there was no smokers, no hunters, no campers, so she stated her ex- made her do it (at least the letter from the ex). So the cops again confronted her that there was no trace of burnt paper and a check with her ex reported that the guy never even sent her any letters. Now detectives found evidence that the fire was deliberately set. I am waiting to hear her third line of defence. As I said, this is so typical of gringo ALLWiBos, first blame it on men, second blame it on society, especially the Republicans, third blame it on repressed memory. It always work. Now, what is so intriguing is the judge would let her go on bail for a few hundred grand. This is typical of the liberal bench when every woman is judged to be "kind" and "nice". It's reported that the fat chick may be suicidal. Typical of liberal media, every woman is a victim of the society and even when they are caught in the act, they are so repressed by society that they can be suicidal. Well, tell it to the home owners who lost their hard earned property. So, guys, be careful with when you are with gringo women, especially ALLWiBos, they are going to burn you :)

nofatso, can you tell me what ALLWiBo means again? I'm sorry I haven't the strength to search for it, but I've been up ALL DAY busting my ass at work and research is NOT in my plans right now.

I have to respond to some of the comments started off by USBabe.

First, phil (Afro Bro), you may be handsome and nice looking like my main man Denzel, however to an American ALLWiBos, you are just another potential victim if you ain't careful with them. ALLWiBos are EEOC. Just check out Tom Cruise... oops, I am wrong Nicole Kidman is Aussie. Oh well, what the hell, Aussie women are just as bad. Yes, Aussie and American are all bad.

Now to Paddy. Of course, the gringo women are ballistic to know that you went to Europe. You are making a loud and clear statement (i.e. you voted with your feet w/o even articulating it). The statement is, to hell with your messy hair, messy dress, SLOB (Saggy, Loose, Obese Body) and most of all, to hell with your attitude, I have better babes to dig then waste my time on you. Check out contemporary American history, when American corporation moved jobs to another country or allow more immigrants in to diversify the labor pool, the labor union fought (yes, violence) big time. Until today, violence is on going in some old line industry. Not so much in technology trade. Bottomline is this, I believe in free society, free competition. Let's face it, if foreign men flood to America to get all these ALLWiBos, more power to them. But let's be serious, who would want to waste time on these ALLWiBos? I have a few Brasilian guy friends who told me American women are fat and ugly. I am like, hello!!!? Tell me something new plezzzzzz.

Now, guys, when even Tom Cruise, the guy with 10,000,000 easy laids is dating a Spanish woman, that's your take home message. :)

hey Master. Nice to see my buddy here again. Yeah, I been totally busy finishing up two deadlines. Got done and preparing my month long trip to Brasil.... :)

ALLWiBOS (alternative looking lady with wide Body Shape). the political incorrect terminology is UFC as in Ugly Fat Chick. I was like UFC dig KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicks). :)

Sinanjumaster, sir, you are utterly doomed. If you keep making a habit of opening your mind like this, one day a beautiful, intelligent, and charming woman is simply going to waltz right into your life. What on earth would the neighbors say? Your reputation as a woman basher would be utterly tarnished. We can't have that!

Here, I'll help you get back on track by describing myself. I'm 4'8", 350 pounds (I'm big boned), 69 years young, and the proud owner of a framed genuine US of A hi skool diploma! Now, get the %$#@! out of my way before I mace you because you're oppressing me and upsetting my delicate sensibilities.

There now, much better! Please excuse me now because I have a hot date with nofatso. We're meeting at the Cheesecake Factory for a few appetizers, entrées, and desserts. Then, he's taking me to Big Bertha's Abode of Bountiful Tents and Awnings and treating me to a whole new summer wardrobe! Oh, don't let him fool you, I know the kind of woman he likes. ;-)

Seriously, I have to catch a plane in the morning and probably won't have time to get online for a week or so, but I'll keep an eye out when I return.

...I've been out of town for a few days and I actually found a discussion in here!

First, welcome aboard US Babe. You're proof positive that there are many good women in the USA.

I truly think that the b*tches are the vast minority. The problem is that we are indeed too involved in our own selves. "I want this woman, she doesn't want me, she's bad." That's a very simplistic approach without even the slightest concern about the other person's feelings and point of view. Maybe the woman is NOT stringing you along, maybe she is deciding whether or not to have a relationship with you. Then, because of all of the baggage and negativity that you bring, she decides that you aren't the right one for her. Is that not fair? A bitter person hardly makes for a suitable life companion. Later, of course, you try to rationalize the rejection by saying that she wanted a rich man or a handsome man, etc.

Here's a little story: After a few rough situations with women, the man becomes resentful and then hateful. At that point, any hopes of a healthy romantic relationship are gone. Then, the man hits the road and leaves the country. In the foreign land, he feels revived. The women appear to be friendlier and the world is beautiful again. The man attributes this to some sort of deficiency in the US women and/or a superiority in the foreign women. But he is wrong. He feels so happy and alive because he is in a new environment, a fresh start so to speak, away from the place of countless rejections and heartaches. He finds himself free of the baggage that he carries, but never correctly attributes this to the real cause: He's left himself for awhile. He is free to be someone different because no one knows who he is. The pressure is off and he can finally be confident and comfortable in his own skin.
...Of course this is just a story...nothing like this is possible, right?

I've never had problems with US women. Like I said before, I am not the epitome of American beauty, but I've never had trouble finding a good woman. Why? Because I don't take this too seriously. I've been played for a fool just like everyone else, but so what? Am I going to sit around and feel sorry for myself for the rest of my life? Am I going to let this "woman" continue to affect me forever? Hell no. If I get played, I get played. I learn from my lessons and move on. I leave my emotional baggage behind because no woman wants to deal with that. I start new and don't assume that ALL people are this way or that ALL people act like this. I get the feeling that a lot of people here have never recovered from little Mary-Ann turning down your invitation to the homecoming dance. I know that it's easier to blame all of your shortcomings on other people, but if everyone you encounter leaves a bad taste in your mouth, maybe the problem is not the the rest of the world, maybe it's you.

Man, Nofatso..do you work for the "Brother" office supply company? I've never seen anyone use so many labels. What a fascinating world you live in...:)

Hey miller, welcome back. Nice to see all my buddies here. Master and Miller. all here. just like the old days even the old days was not too long ago. Nonetheless it's been fun.

Time out, miller, i think you and I have no fight. I am all peace. So, how about this? "No fight." Now, if you don't entertain my offer for peace, let's do it again? :)

USBabe. Sorry, thank you but no thanks. can't do. 350#? You got big bone alright.

time out. miller i changed my mind. feel like fighting tonight. waiting for us soccer to play germany. so, time to fight.

you are like insinuating that guys here were "hurt" by american women so they "hate" women. don't think so. do i have problem with american women, you bet. i have problem with american women because most of them (especially if you live in the "fly over states or the southern states), are fat. second i have problem with american women for not taking care of themselves. they consider putting on make up, nice hair do, manicure as bad. this is all culture. last week, a local university invited miss usa to give the graduation speech. man alive, you wouldn't believe the level of condemnation from the student body. the comments were, a woman who was a winner of beauty paegent is not "smart" enough........ bottomline is, american women feel that taking time to make oneself look good is degrading, is dumb. the counter culture dictates. so, when miss usa spoke at the graduation ceremony, some students booed. this is the mindset of american women, fat/ugly is a virtue. pretty fit/tight dumb. so, everybody goes out to get fat. third, the attitude and the victimhood mentality. this theme has been repeated enough, no need to have more.

now, let's check out our options. in this internet age, like it or not, many men (may not be all) have options. same for women. if you have the means, the time and the look, there is no reason to fool around in hell hole. thus many guys go overseas. why not? from sex tourism to mail order bride. this is exactly like 20 years ago when american automobile got so lousy that german and japanese imports ruled the day. or even better, corporations moved jobs overseas where the cost is lower and quality is higher. our company just moved our entire engineering division to india where they have better engineers at half the cost. (just go to silicon valley, many us engineers are already indian imports). so, we are competing with the whole world. we no longer have the luxury of the "lucky sperm club", that just because i was born and raised in the good old usa, i "deserve" to have this and that...... same with women. if you are fat, ugly, not taking care of yourself, then you are at a competitive disadvantage when matched with a gorgeous foreign babe. unless the men set low expectation for themselves, these women are just last night's leftover pizzas on coffee table. let's face it. american men, irrespective of what we think, are not superior to men in these foreign countries. i read many postings on this board stating that "foreign women like american guys because americans treat women so much better....." b.s. o have yet to see a totally nice guy got laid all the time. most probably nice guys have the most problem to get laid. but back to our subject, bottomline is, most of us have some wealth (as in disposable cash). even here in the us, let's face it, not many wage earners can throw in 10 grand for a vacation. that 10 grand in a developing world can cause even more outrageous. so, right there, american men with a walking dollar signs are at a competitive advantage. this is no different from hitting a club in miami. tom cruise gets right whereas you and your buddies are still in line.... facts of life. so, yes, i have problem with american women.

i'm just about ready to head out the door, but i couldn't resist taking a quick peek. hi miller – your words are perfectly terse! if every man heeded them, the problems between men and women would become nearly non-existent. seriously, i would urge any and all men to read your post and to totally absorb it. unfortunately for a lot of people (both men and women), their own tunnel vision of negativity will cloud out any ray of sunshine that might be present, and ultimately their pessimism becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

well, i've really gotta run, and i know you do, too. with your attitude and disposition, you probably have women trying to tear down your door at this very moment! you're carrying some dangerously potent wisdom there, mister. ;-)

..Thanks US Babe...have a nice trip


Nofatso...seeing that the USA lost, I am also in a fighting mood :) (try living in Mexico after we eliminate them from the World Cup..that's really difficult)

For someone who hates the whole "victimhood mentality", you sure moan about your victimization a lot. "Boo Hoo. Poor me." I see just as many attractive women as unattractive ones in the USA. Maybe your senses have been distorted to such a degree that only pure perfection will do (I'd love to see just how much of a "perfect specimen" you are).

With regards to the whole Miss USA thing: Sure, people get out of hand. There is always a lunatic fringe of one percent that is the most vocal. Once again, you are guilty of mass generalizations. You see women protesting and you say, "See. That's how they ALL are" Extremes in anything is bad. It is bad to be too PC and it's bad to be too Conservative.

Nobody is saying that there is anything wrong with being attractive and physically fit. You make it out like everybody is dying to be obese. C'mon. How many obese women or men are on TV or in the movies? There is a definite prejudice in popular culture towards cookie-cutter beauty. This culturalization leads to warped ideas of beauty that very few women (even with the perfect diet and exercise) can attain. The only point that needs to be made is that not all of a woman's value is wrapped up in her appearance. Sure, you may decide that one woman is more attractive than another, but that's alright. But she isn't diminished as a person just because she is less physically attractive to you.

I hope you learn to deal with your anger because I see nothing but loneliness and frustration in your future if you don't tame your inner demons. Sure, foreign women may be seeing dollar signs when they see you. And they may want to be with you initially. You may change a little with them, feel less bitter...but you can't escape yourself and sooner or later you will have the same problems that you had in the USA. You deserve better than that. Putting others down is the clearest cry for help. I personally couldn't care less about what the future holds for you, but you should care for yourself more. Bad ideas and negative thoughts are as toxic to your psyche as junk food is to your body.

from: THE HAPPIEST MAN ALIVE

miller You the man! Love to have a fighting partner. OK, let's GO!

But serious business first. Regretted (not sad) to see USA lost. I think they could have won if the ref. is not blind. Second, the Germans always played a boring game and this year, they are no different. So, US lost but my second favorite Brasil won and they won beautifully. Ronaldihno was fantastic. Did you see how he got ejected from the game? I missed that part.

Next step, I am going with Brasil (they played FANtastic last night), Senegal (they played with lots of style and passion) and lastly I route for Korea. I think Korea will beat Spain tonight and go on to beat German. The final will be either Brasil with Korea or Senegal with Korea. Yes, I am not sure if Brasil could beat Senegal easily. By now you would surmise that I don't think the European have much of a chance.

Now, soccer done, let's fight it out on the ALLWiBos. (next)

miller. This is bad. I must be demented..... I found no disagreement with you on your earlier posting. You got to do better than this...:) Give me that nasty so I can fight. You can't fight when you have no partner.

So, yes, I ditto your summary about the extremists on both ends of the political spectrums. Problem with America is everybody is "my way or the high way". Fact is, in life, except for ALLWiBos, most issues are settled in the "middle". So, no argument there. HOWEVER.....

You got me all wrong. I am not an angry male who got burned by ALLWiBos. In fact, my romantic life is pretty good and easy, just that 99.99% of women I boned wanted to have relationship with me and that pissed me off. I was like "go make your own money, I need no one to help spend my hard earned $$$." I just need some bom bom, call me when I need that pussy :)...... and they are always like "what's wrong with you... I have been nice to you..... da da da" then I just tuned them out...... in fact, in the last 24 months, none of my dates are ALLWiBos (not a bad feat if you consider this area 99% of single women are ALLWiBos). Ooops, time out, one of the girls is married... well. what the heck, she is totally doable. So, I was like, "hello? Can I just bone you w/o having to talk about relationship and all that shit?" So, I am not angry. Yeah, may be I am angry. The Bill of Rights has ensured that all MEN should bone a pussy w/o talking about relationship. If you do good, I can throw you some $ but definitely not give you half of my asset. That's all. Do I sound angry? I am saying this with a warm smile though :)


But what the heck, I am going on vacation in a week. No complaint.

<getting custard pies ready to launch...>

hey Master. You got to say more than just launch a pie. :)

that's true to a point, nofatso... it's just that if this continues, I'll ACTUALLY launch 'em! After that, I'll hafta offer my extended fist that will be enticing enough for the two of you to hit, which will cause it to swing around almost 360 degrees and to hit the two of you on the head. Then again, on the extremely RARE occasion, it HAS been known to hit the maker of the fist! LOL

Pussy. Pussy. Pussy. Not interested in debating obesity. Fat people do clutter up the place and a lot of American women are fat (more so than in other countries I've vistited). I don't like to fuck fat women. I'd rather fuck an ugly woman than a fat woman. Your experience may vary. Some guys dig fat chicks. Now LET'S GET BACK TO PUSSY.

Dickhead

Hey. Dickhead. Tell me something new!

All political correct talk aside I have yet to know a guy who like fat chick. (to "fuck" fat chick to use your term). Even the fatsos I know like tight young chicks and steer away from fat chicks. The same for fat chicks, they don't like fatsos either. I know, I have a woman colleague at the office and she is looking for dates and I introduced my buddy who is overweight to her. She got the nerve to complain to me that my friend is FAT!! I was like HELLLLOOOO. You ain't slim yourself so why complain to me? She was like, "but ..he is fat......" So, all talks aside, like I said, they give the talk but don't walk the walk when it comes to fat.

I know two guys who prefer overweight women. One got pissed off and wouldn't discuss it with me but the other one said he likes them because they are "nice and soft" and he likes to do them from behind. I don't know if it means anything and I don't really care, but both of these guys are black guys who will only (and I mean ONLY) date blonde, plump (or fat I guess) white women.

Maybe you and I should trade handles, because I'm not fat either and you are even more of a dickhead than I am.

DH

OK, I am changing my handle name to Dickhead-2.

Southwest is to charge two tickets on passengers whose body "protrude excessively into the next seats" (their words not mine). It's about time!! I heard United and American had this policy for some time but I never seen it enforced. What's wrong with this country? We had laws and no enforcement? :) What's the point of having the rules to begin with?

So, last month I was on a business trip from San Antonio to Abilene TX on Southwest. It was one of those commuter plane deals where they uses those tiny propeller aircraft. There was this huge guy, I mean huge huge guy. The flight attendant walked around and asked everybody's weight to do the weight balancing for the aircrast. Everyone had no problem reading the number out, but this guy mumbled that he is 190#. Everybody knew he was lying including the flight attendant. She was nice though, she politely told the guy to move to the back of the aircraft where there was a row of empty seats. I felt sorry for the guy and volunteered to move. It was difficult for him to squeeze in and out of the seat to begin with. The flight attendant was so appreciated that she discretely gave me a $100- flight coupon. I like Southwest.

Nofatso...I think that this might be the sign of the approaching Apocalypse, but we've actually agreed on two issues!!! I agree with the additional fares for the people who use more than one seat. This is a good example of people having to deal with the life choices they make. (Your previous theory of: fat=bad=lazy, just didn't cut it. This is a concrete case of being responsible for your own actions: fat=more space taken=more money.) The only problem with this might be in the actual implementation. How fat is too fat? When will this extra fare be figured out? etc. The logistics could be a nightmare. Can you imagine the ticket agent thinking you were small enough to fly for regular fare and then getting on the plane only to discover that you weren't? Would you be more pissed about a fat guy next to you paying normal fare or tremendous delays while the flight attendants try to deal with this issue? Having said that, though, this might be a plus for the fat people. I'm not so fat as to not fit in an airline seat, but if I was I wouldn't mind a bit paying extra so I could have more room.

See? We agree...isn't that nice? Lets leave the whole "fat" thing aside...but I would LOVE to know why you are such a passionate fat basher. Your psychology fascinates me. The study of socio-pathetic behavior has always intrigued me.

I also agree with you that there is a lot of hypocrisy when it comes to physical assessments. How many people on this board (and in general) complain about shallow, superficial women when they would only be willing to hook up with a model-type?

So, this is a beautiful moment when we are in full agreement...I'll savor it because sooner or later you'll say something goofy again.

You guys wanna talk about fat people and airlines, go to www.flyertalk.com where there are currently several debates going on this very subject.

THIS board here is about PUSSY.

well...Dickhead...post something about "PUSSY" and change the subject!!! Or do WE have to do ALL the work?

Just for you Dickhead......

*Turning around*
*Bending slowly over the bed and raising my skirt*

OOPS...it seems I forgot to put underwear on......

And what's this?? It's a shaved...pink...NOT obese...definately NOT lazy...
....PUSSY! LOL :)

Ok, so it's Australian pussy not American pussy and the topic at hand is American pussy (or lack thereof), but did I at least manage to change the subject????

*cheeky grin*

Hey Miller2k.

Do you have an e mail address? Want to pick your brain on a few questions about Mexico or Mexico City to be exact. One of my Brasilian girlfriends is going to Mexico City for a year and I am concerned about her welfare. Let me know if you can offer some advice. Thanks.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN
[i]Just for you Dickhead......

*Turning around*
*Bending slowly over the bed and raising my skirt*

OOPS...it seems I forgot to put underwear on......

And what's this?? It's a shaved...pink...NOT obese...definately NOT lazy...
....PUSSY! LOL :)

Ok, so it's Australian pussy not American pussy and the topic at hand is American pussy (or lack thereof), but did I at least manage to change the subject????

*cheeky grin* [/i][/QUOTE]

Well, gee, thanks, Nursey but if you're doing it JUST for me then don't shave that thang. I've never really liked that; it kinda makes me feel like a child molester. Also what about nicks and cuts in connection with STD? Seems like it's not as safe.

Just trim it a little and let it go at that.

Hello. I actually found a hotel computer and a few moments!

I quickly read the comments here, and something really stuck out by fatso:

"just that 99.99% of women I boned wanted to have relationship with me and that pissed me off."

Quite honestly, this tells how much you don't know about women. To you, sex can be physical and nothing more. But it's rarely that way with women. Sure, there are some women who want only a physical relationship with a man, but I honestly think it's quite rare.

It sounds like what you want is a female body with a male mind. To be quite blunt, we're simply more picky when we have sex. If the most perfect male speciman walked up to me and wanted to have sex, I'd turn him down with no hesitation. To most women, there must be an emotional connection, as well, and I think this is what most men don't understand. That's why you have to be very careful with women because it's easy to break our hearts. You may give us special attention to get sex and often women interpret that as a sign that you are attracted to us in more than a purely physical sense. And that's why you probably have to buy sex, if sex and nothing more, is what you want.

A hint to understanding life is to think of how the other person may think, which may be completely different from how you think. It may also ease a lot of your frustrations.

fatso, you said, "I felt sorry for the guy and volunteered to move. It was difficult for him to squeeze in and out of the seat to begin with."

Would you have felt sorry for a woman in the same situation?

I'm confused because you seem to think that obese women are disgusting, yet you felt sympathy for this man. Is it possible that you are a misogynist? If not, your words don't mirror your feelings.

This new forum sucks. It's boring and has way too many posting glitches. BUT ... fatass is not a misogynist; he is a misanthrope. Misogynists hate women whereas misanthropes hate people in general. He is not representative of the average prostitute seeker.

I think some of the posting glitches relate to long posts. So I will cut this off and continue with another post that may provide further amplification.

DH

Hey Dickhead

If you will look in the top right hand corner of your screen you will see a little "X". PLace your mouse over this "X" and push the button on the other side of your mouse !!

Tryin' hard not to get frustrated with the new board. I have two possible roles on the board: 1) provide reports and info on hookers world wide, or 2) stir up as much shit as possible. Since I am dormant travel wise right now, I will try for #2.

A lot of studies and literature say that many, even a majority, of women, cannot climax from vaginal intercourse ("straight sex"). This is because:

A) Men are technically incompetent (don't know how to fuck).
B) Woman are uptight bitches.
C) Men are piggish and selfish and don't care if she comes or not.
D) Most men are physically inadequate (dick's not big enough).
E) Most men are physically inadeaquate (can't last long enough to satisfy the woman).
F) Modern post industrial society has messed up the gender roles so much that no one knows what to do, and with which, and to whom.
G) Modern post industrial society has led to a concentration on economic success, leading to a neglect of one's relationship and/or sex life.
H) Most people are working too hard to have energy for a sex life (see also #G).
I) The existence of prostitution leads to the commoditization of sex, alienating women and anesthetizing men.
J) Same as #I but the men are alienated and the women anesthetized.
K) Stress of post industrial life lowers libidos.
L) Global warming.
M) Jacking off is a superior sexual practice vs. involving anyone else.
N) All of the above.
O) None of the above/ too soon to tell/ something else completely/ too stupid to know or care / other / refuse to respond.

Any votes?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Beavis
[i]Hey Dickhead

If you will look in the top right hand corner of your screen you will see a little "X". PLace your mouse over this "X" and push the button on the other side of your mouse !! [/i][/QUOTE]

Yeah yeah Beav OK the forum doesn't suck that bad and I'm just frustrated with all the lost postings. It's free and free is good and I shouldn't complain. I try to help when I can and I don't know why I always manage to [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] you off. But, I don't really care either. Look in the General Info section of Mexico. I recently posted something that might help your postings in particular.

PS, you always talk about how no one should pay too much and everyone should bargain so as not to fuck it up for everyone else. I basically agree but think about this: V = Q / P or "Value equals quality divided by price." Both are relevant.

USBabe

re: Would I do the same for a fat chick?

You bet. Why not? Yes, it is disgusting to let oneself grow so obese but it should not prevent us from practising random acts of kindness to a fellow human being. This is no different from me hanging out $1- to those "homeless" folks at street corners who claimed they are "looking" for work.

USBabe

Re: the comments on women you stated.

Thank you kindly for your comments. Let me be honest, I actually know women too well thus I have not been too bad with women. Bear in mind that, on this board, I speak from the bottom of my heart. I call this the id talk (as in Freud'psychoanalysis). Functioning in the corporate world or dealing with women, you are behaving and speaking in the politically correct approach (in Freud's terminology super ego and ego). To create an impression that you are fair minded, kind and the best of human being. The goal is to play the game to get what you want, i.e. overall kindness and nicety with calculated acts of mischievous nasty moves. Of course, once you get what you wanted you control the game. Bear in mind that women always has more strength in dealing with men in courtship, especially at the beginning and mid point of the game. fatso principle #1, one can only win when dealing from a position of strength. Since women always has the upper hand (i.e. strength), the only option is to play along to buy time such that once your get the booty, the balance of power is tilted toward you. As you so eloquently stated, after the sex women always come back for relationship, this is their nature. They can't suppress it. So, for men, you gotta be cool to play the subservient role until you get the sex and as men begin to get bored and the women wouldn't let you go........ now she will do everything you want.

I have a ton of work right now, so I can't make any long comments until later, but:

1) Welcome back US Babe
2) Nofatso, my e-mail address is [email]justice4pm@hotmail.com[/email]
(All are invited to e-mail me for whatever reason)
3) Maybe the origin of your problem, Nofatso, is with your general outlook. Romance shouldn't be a game, because games always have winners and losers. There are some people who are not as socio-pathetic and take the idea of relationships seriously.
4) Dickhead, most men can't satisfy women because they don't care about their woman and/or they don't have the gift of empathy.

...I'll be back later...

From: The Happiest Man Alive

Just gotta say, Dickhead, that as always I admire your deft positioning as the burr in the saddle, and only wish I'd thought to take the role, though I'm clearly tempermentally unable to play it as well as you. Thanks as well for the misanthrope delineation, as it's a critical distinction and one often overlooked. And I'd give you my vote, but you left off "All of the above."

All that said, I've been reading along here for quite some time and have refrained from commenting partly because I found the whole "fat" discussion rather tiresome and mostly shooting ducks n a barrel, but also because it's been simply grand to see some movement in thought and shameless flirting in this thread based on the participation of a couple of female posters. I just want to note that this latter fact pretty well sums up the general problem men have with women, and with American women in particular -- we'll say any damn thing possible to get some attention, and then will be pissed off at ourselves for doing so.

And since the comment also stood out to me when I read it -- Nofatso, let's see, you want to sleep with various women and then be surprised/pissed off because they want a relationship with you? Cripes, even salesperson will try to establish a relationship with you if you buy from them frequently. If everything is a transaction then nothing is a human connection, and as miller2k aptly noted, if everything is a game then nothing is truly romance. That said, I think there needs to be a clear distinction here -- is the discussion about getting laid with American Women or having relationships with them, or both? Nofatso's approach clearly seems to be the first one, but many of the posts here are from the other two categories...

JZ, your wish is my command (within limits!) and I have edited my post to provide the "all of the above" option. Note, however, that this would indicate that both men and women are both alienated and anesthetized ... wait a minute, that sounds about right, at least for the US of A.

And thank you for your admiration. I call this my 6'5" 275 lb behavior. Imagine what a dickhead I would be if I really WERE a great big guy instead of a scrawny little mick with more guts than sense.

Here's an American woman anecdote to get us back on track. My two favorite places to hit on women (in the US) are the produce section of the grocery store and the gym. I've had this one gal at the gym on preheat for a while and Monday I asked her if she'd like to go to lunch. Her response (verbatim): "Does lunch just mean lunch?" I was SO tempted to educate her as to how whatever a man says to a woman in this situation, it means "I want to get into your pants," but settled for, "At least until we've actually HAD lunch, lunch just means lunch." So she said she'd think about it. Well, tough shit, I ain't asking again.

American gringo women are killer arsonists!

Evidence 1. Colorado Hayman fire, started by a woman. Check CNN.COm
Evidence 2. Arizon fire, according to NPR (National Public Radio - Morning Edition), was "accidentally" set by a woman hiker.
Eividence 3. Four Oregon firefighters died in traffic accident. The woman driver drove the firefighters to Colorado to fight the Hayman fire but had everyone killed (except herself) in the traffic accident. According to reports by Oregonian (the largest newspaper in Oregon), the woman was attempting to turn around to grab some ice cream from the back seat and lost control of the vehicle which resulted in 4 deaths. Well, having someone killed while in the process of getting fat is something new to me.

Dickhead.
See, I have been telling you. These gringo bitches are just ....bitches, ain't worth my spit on them. What the XXXX is the response, "is lunch just lunch?" Now, if you don't want to go out with Dickhead, just say, "hey Dick, thanks but I am seeing someone" (the white lie approach), or if you want to be 100% frank, say "hey Dick, thank you, it's truly flattering, but let's keep our friendship just at the gym". "is lunch just lunch?" XXXx that, tell her "no! *****, i am going to feed you lunch and you are going to suck my rooster..... ":) ha ha!

joe_zop
nofatso is sex for short term, as in less than a week only. i may "go out" with the female cannine a couple of times and then split quick. I don't do last night's pizza. Time out! This is ************* forum. Of course, we are dealing with short term sex, as in less than one week deal. If you want to talk about relationship, I have the Oprah site for you :) The thing I don't understand is, I read a lot about relationship on this site. Are you guys serious? First, looking for a wife in a ***** house? :), doesn't make sense.

again, guys, be careful with gringo women, they are going to burn you........ :)

Now, one more

nofatso and Dickhead:
I don't even bother with American women anymore. Of the women of the world they positively rank at the bottom in terms of fun, looks, and personality, down there with the British and Irish. By the way I'm guy who loves to have a relationship with a woman and not just sex contrary to what USBabe said. I find it hard to keep up with most American women, most women I know are often to obessed with their careers to pay attention to their romantic lives. On one occasion I left work in the middle of the day to buy my old girlfriend flowers and left them on her door, and she called me almost a week later to acknowledge that she got my flowers. She made an excuse that she was too busy to talk to me. What a b*itch!!! You try to do something sweet for someone and they just spit in your face. This is typical of American women. Often, when I go into a social mixer and get introduced to a woman all they talk about is their job and career and then they just keep asking me about my job and where I went to school and where I plan to be five years from now. It seems as if they are looking for a guy that has a lot of money and success or will have a lot of money and success. There's never any talk about one's loves in life like music or art, or places in the world. In other countries women seem more interested in me as a human being and not as a money making machine. I was in Hungary last year and I met this gorgeous lady who was just amazing. We went into a long conversation over our loves in life. She couldn't care less about what I did for a living and how much money I had, she was more interested in my passions and fantasies. This is the typical European lady. They are often less materialistic and often less selfish than US women. Another thing about her was that she was extremely beautiful, I mean twice as beautiful as some of the most beautiful American women. She had a sexual energy that was hot, I mean hot. At the same time, she came off as a soft hearted person who liked sensitive, gentle men. I myself am a nice guy and am really soft at heart. She really digged the fact that I'm a softie and not a macho jerk. Thats another plus for dating in Europe, women tend to find softness and sensitivity in a man sexy and irresistable. In contrast, most American women want a rugged, physically strong, and assertive macho man who always goes after what he wants and gets it. Another important aspect of this lady was that she was open minded, especially with regards to dating someone of a different race. I happen to be a Hispanic with dark features, I find that in America it is often difficult to date someone of another nationality. I used to have a girlfriend who was Irish-American, who often behaved differently, she wouldn't openly display affection and wouldn't give me eye contact when we were out in public. Also people gave us funny looks, which I found distressing since we lived together in a culturally diverse and socially liberal city. This Hungarian lady wasn't really concerned about my skin color. She didn't care that I was of a different nationality and culture from hers. On the contrary, she found me intriguing and exotic. I was able to be myself with this lady did not have to pretend to be someone that I am not. Just my own personal opinion on this issue.

Fatass, don't let the facts get in the way of your analysis. There were several survivors of that wreck in which the female firefighter was driving. Just compare the driving records of women and men, any way you want to, and women are safer drivers. You need to get your hand off your dick and your thumb out of your ass and take an elementary statistics course. Three non-randomly selected events do not make a useful sample. Plus, you ain't funny. Go soak your head in a tub of SlimFast.

CBGB, I hear you and I feel your pain. I have the opposite problem. I am pigmentationally challenged ofay white bread and prefer darker skinned girls, especially Hispanic girls. I have pretty good success getting them to go out with me but they are reluctant to bring me home to Mom and Dad. That is fine with me, great in fact, but what I don't like is the bullshit excuses they give when I know what's going on. Dickhead did not just fall off a turnip truck.

Man, I am really getting to like my Dickhead persona. It's like an alter ego of sorts. I live a double life as it is. By day, a short-haired, clean-cut, straight-looking white collar professional in a helping profession but secretly stoned most of the time. By night, a debauched, dissolute, deviant Dickhead. Then on my *****mongering vacations, a sedulous, serious slave to history, architecture, and culture by day. By night, a sexual sybarite seeking sensuous sylphs, curvaceous commercial concubines, and random rapacious roadside relief.

With apologies to Winston Churchill, I find American women to be a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma, but foreign women to be almost as exciting as war and quite as dangerous. And like Sir Winston, I have nothing to offer a woman save blood, toil, tears, and sweat! Well, maybe a few other bodily fluids as well, but only as a reward for a job well done.

Hi CBGB,

Excellent posting and dead on correct. I, too, was startled by how genuine and wonderful women in Europe are and particularly those in Eastern Europe. It's a whole different reality there.

I honestly feel badly for all of the great guys in America who have to struggle with the overweight and bitchy women here. Until I began to hang out in Prague, I thought that this is how women naturally are. It also made me kinda sad because of all the years I've wasted on American women. Wish I could have all of those years and all of that money back.

Like you, American women are off my radar screen now and forever.

Dickhead
You should take some statistics. There are far more men driving then women. Don't tell me acturary science. Try this Mr. Head, call your State Farm tomorrow and tell them you no longer drive to work and on average, you only drive a couple thousand miles a year. Right there, you become a "safer" driver. So, when insurer states that "women are safer driver", it relates to acturary statistics that women drive much less than men and when they drive, they drive much shorter distance. However, when it comes to killer arsonists, (examples I stated), it's all women. Last but not the least, the accident in Colorado involved four deaths, isn't it? So, you want everyone to be killed before you are convinced that women are arsonist killers? Of course, I don't mind to meet you for lunch to educate you on this. That is truly a lunch and involves no rooster sucking :)

You didn't find me funny? Good! my intent is to save the huMAN race from these killer gringo women, you think this is Comedy Central? HELLOOOOOO! No wonder, the ***** said "is lunch just lunch...." Apart from statistics, you also need to learn spit on these bitches. :)

GBGB
You have just documented another crime against huMANity. That white canine disrespected you and she is a racist. When it comes to racism, gringo men and women are sure one from the same snake pit. Dark skin or fair skin hispanics, who cares? You were her date and she HAS to RESPECT you. Don't tell me you live in one of those "fly over states" or the south. Better move out. I have lived in many parts of the country, in terms of racial tolerance and interracial dating, I find the Pacific Northwest or Bay area the most tolerant. LA is not bad but still, tremendous racism in many areas. I am not hispanic or black but I can tell from my observation. So, if you are in those yahoo states, better move out. Also, in this internet age, racism like this truly unthinkable. This is what I will do GBGB. Next time you see a racist *****, don't confront her, just date her. Take her home, feed her, give her some good xxxx and then spit on her and kick her off your house. That's the best treatment for a racist canine. :)

Paddy.

You are right. Again lay the truth out simples verdade.
You have not mentioned one issue about gringo fat chicks. If you ever have a relationship with them, you have to worship them big time. I have know enough friends who are dating or married to gringo women (some are fat some aren't). One common theme is, whenever there is an important life choice, as in relocation for career, as in having babies, as in going places for vacation, some times even if the guy wants to bring me into the house for dinner..... all these the guy has to call in and ask for "permission". Now, that's the part I can't deal with. If I am the breadwinner of the family and I pay all the bills, when it comes time to relocate to better my career, I go! I don't have to plead with the canine and convince the canine. If I want to bring Joe home to join us for dinner, I will just call home, "hey, make additional portion for Joe, he is coming over for dinner..." Nope, all my buddies will be calling home like, "hi, honey, da da da da da can I bring Johnny home for dinner? would it mess up your schdule.... da da da??" I was like, are you a slave or a MAN? Stand up, be a MAN! The most amazing thing was last week, my work partner quit on me and left with his share of work, his excuse? Wife is got a cold and he is going home to take care of her. I am just thinking, if one of these days I got horny and wanted to go out and Fxxx some *****. Could I just leave my work to my partner stated that I am horny and need some bom bom? Gringo ***** ain't worth the toilet water...... :)

Good news for Modern MEN!

what this news story state is this. 1. preserve your asset and cash from your g/f or ex 2. women after 30 is like leftover pizza and 3. don't worry about age. as long as you keep your health and $$$, pussy are there ALL THE TIME. :) I am a happy man!

Study: 'Guys can afford to wait to marry'
June 27, 2002 Posted: 11:19 AM EDT (1519 GMT)

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- It's official. Men really are afraid of commitment.

Confirming what women have long known, an American study released on Wednesday shows men are dragging their feet on getting married.

Researchers say one of the biggest reasons that men are delaying marriage is that more and more couples are choosing to live together before marriage. As a result, sex -- traditionally one of the main reasons for men to marry -- is relatively easily available, they say.

"In a sense, with cohabitation he gets a quasi-wife without having to commit," said David Popenoe, co-director of the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University in New Jersey.

"Another big thing in addition to cohabitation is that these men are very, very concerned about divorce. It's not getting your heart broken ... the worst thing that could happen is that somebody could take their money," Popenoe adds.

The preliminary findings report on the attitudes toward marriage of 60 unmarried, heterosexual men, between the ages of 25-33. The participants, from different religious, ethnic and family backgrounds, were from four major metropolitan areas in northern New Jersey, Chicago, Houston, and Washington, D.C.

Researchers say both men and women are putting off getting married. The average age for men's first marriage is now 27, the oldest in history, the study shows. That compares to the average age of 23 in 1960, Popenoe said.

For women, the average age of their first marriage has risen to 25, a full five years older than the 1960 average.

And giving women even more reason to be impatient that their boyfriends are dragging their feet, researchers say the trend favors the men.

"Guys can afford to wait to marry. The older they get, the better their chances in some ways of getting married, while for women it's the reverse," Popenoe said.

"Once a woman gets into her 30s, it's more likely that she will have to marry a man who was married earlier. It's more likely that she will marry a man who brings kids (into the marriage) and more likely that she will have a child by herself," Popenoe says.

Copyright 2002 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Gang: A buddy sent me this today and I thought it was both funny and pertinent.

[Begin quote] We always hear "the rules" from the female side. Now here are the rules from the male side. These are our rules! Please note... these are all numbered "1" ON PURPOSE!

1. Learn to work the toilet seat. You're a big girl. If it's up, put it down. We need it up, you need it down. You don't hear us complaining about you leaving it down.

1. Birthdays, Valentines, and Anniversaries are not quests to see if we can find the perfect present yet again!

1. Sometimes we are not thinking about you. Live with it.

1. Shopping is NOT a sport. And no, we are never going to think of it that way.

1. Crying is blackmail.

1. Ask for what you want. Let us be clear on this one: Subtle hints do not work! Strong hints do not work! Obvious hints do not work! Just say it!

1. We don't remember dates. Mark birthdays and anniversaries on a calendar. Remind us frequently beforehand.

1. Most guys own three pairs of shoes - tops. What makes you think we'd be any good at choosing which pair, out of thirty, would look good with your dress?

1. Yes and No are perfectly acceptable answers to almost every question.

1. Come to us with a problem only if you want help solving it. That's what we do. Sympathy is what your girlfriends are for.

1. A headache that last for 17 months is a problem. See a doctor.

1. Check your oil! Please.

1. Anything we said 6 months ago is inadmissible in an
argument. In fact, all comments become null and void after 7 days.

1. If you won't dress like the Victoria's Secret girls, don't expect us to act like soap opera guys.

1. If something we said can be interpreted two ways, and one of the ways makes you sad or angry, we meant the other one.

1. You can either ask us to do something or tell us how you want it done. Not both. If you already know best how to do it, just do it yourself.

1. Whenever possible, please say whatever you have to say during commercials.

1. Christopher Columbus did not need directions, and neither do we.

1. The relationship is never going to be like it was the first two months we were going out. Get over it. And quit whining to your girlfriends.

1. ALL men see in only 16 colors, like Windows default settings. Peach, for example, is a fruit, not a color. Pumpkin is also a fruit. We have no idea what mauve is.

1. If it itches, it will be scratched. We do that.

1. We are not mind readers and we never will be. Our lack of mind-reading ability is not proof of how little we care about you.

1. If we ask what is wrong and you say "nothing," we will act like nothing's wrong. We know you are lying, but it is just not worth the hassle.

1. If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.

1. When we have to go somewhere, absolutely anything you wear is fine. Really.

1. Don't ask us what we're thinking about unless you are prepared to discuss such topics as navel lint, the shotgun formation, or monster trucks.

1. You have enough clothes.

1. You have too many shoes.

1. Foreign films are best left to foreigners. (Unless it's Bruce Lee or some war flick where it doesn't really matter what in the world they're saying anyway.)

1. It is neither in your best interest or ours to take the quiz together. No, it doesn't matter which quiz.

1. Thank you for reading this; Yes, I know, I have to sleep on the couch tonight, but did you know we really don't mind that, it's like camping.

Dickhead

Hilarious, Dickhead. Too many here for me to choose my favorite, as they're all dead on. Wait, I can choose #1!

god-damn!! i have two new heroes: nofatso and dickhead. it's in that order only 'cos nofatso posted his first, but not to say that dh is any less of a crusader against bs designed to keep us off balance and to belittle us simply because the bs works. a lot of these most recent posts are kinda eerie, 'cos it's almost as if a few of you peeked into my brain while i was asleep and posted it here before i awoke! dynamic duo (nofatso and dickhead), the guinness' are on me! lol

Part 1

Hello, I'm finally home, and it feels good! I have several comments, but I would like to say thank you for your kind acceptance in this forum. Obviously, the vast majority of you are guys and have probably been burned or disappointed with American women. It speaks well of you that you haven't written me off, as well!

Dick, I was surprised by your multiple-choice question about why the vast majority of women cannot achieve orgasm from vaginal intercourse. I don't speak about orgasms with my girlfriends too often (!), but there's one more possibility: the clitoris was not involved! I've never had a vaginal orgasm. In fact, I can't imagine that one exists! There are times when I love just straight intercourse with no clitoral stimulation. Of course I don't have an orgasm, but sometimes I just don't want to. I think sometimes men have problems understanding it, but sometimes a climax just isn't necessary for enjoyment (at least for me). However, if my clitoris is touched, watch out! I think, very generally, it probably takes women longer to become aroused and to have an orgasm, but once I'm on a roll, it's a major aerobic workout, and I'm not kidding. I love to have multiple orgasms! But they just won't happen if the clitoris isn't involved. I have no idea if I'm a rare case or like most women, but I know what does it for me!

Fatso, you said, "Functioning in the corporate world or dealing with women, you are behaving and speaking in the politically correct approach (in Freud's terminology super ego and ego). To create an impression that you are fair minded, kind and the best of human being. The goal is to play the game to get what you want, i.e. overall kindness and nicety with calculated acts of mischievous nasty moves."

Do you really think that most people are selfish and cruel? I don't. Maybe you'll think I'm naïve, but I do think that many, if not most people are fair-minded, kind, good human beings. I think our instincts are to protect and provide for ourselves, but to do so at the expense of others isn't just protective, it's cruel. I'm human and won't say I've never acted that way ever in my life, but I sure don't as a practice and I don't know many people who do. One thing that I've learned though is that sometimes people act the way we expect them to act. E.g., if someone is highly suspicious of me, I can sense that and unwittingly do something (that I normally wouldn't do) that makes me fit the mold that I was expected to fill.

Dick, I'm really sorry about the woman who was rude to you at the gym. You simply asked her out to lunch, not to donate a kidney! However, no one but she knows her motives. Maybe she was trying to string you along. Maybe she was trying to play hard-to-get. Or, maybe she wasn't interested but thought she was being polite by not giving you a definite no. I know the latter is actually more cruel than turning you down directly, but sometimes we don't think about that.

Fatso, what is a gringo woman? I've never heard the term before and am trying to figure his out.

Something else confuses me. There are literally millions of American women. There are beautiful, intelligent, loving ones and there are cold-hearted witches. And....the same can be said about the women of any country, any race, any religion, and any other group of women. Have you had the same exposure to women of other cultures that you've had to American women so that you can make an accurate assessment?

I remember as a child, visiting friends' houses for dinner or a sleep-over. Everything was always so perfect at the other house. No one ever fought or yelled or seemed to do anything bad. I always thought that every family was the Brady Bunch except mine. Then I grew up and found out that when visiting, hosts usually present their best sides. Maybe that is true when you visit women of other cultures, as well.

Maybe the same things that are said here about American women can be said of American men (or men of any other sub-group). There are some horrible men out there who have really burned and harmed women. However, I can't imagine any intelligent, reasonable woman who would place ALL men in the same category.

Another thought is that maybe some of those who think that all American women are cold-hearted just haven't been looking in the right places. Sometimes we get lazy (me, too!) and don't want to leave our comfort boundaries, whatever and wherever they are. However, when that happens, we can't expect any changes unless we expand our horizons. It would be great if everything we wanted was neatly packaged and set outside our doorstep! But it doesn't usually happen that way.

And.....sometimes the problem isn't the other "group," but it's us. I've eaten humble pie myself, and it isn't easily digestible, but life is easier and rosier after the meal.

(to be continued)

Part 1

Hello, I'm finally home, and it feels good! I have several comments, but I would like to say thank you for your kind acceptance in this forum. Obviously, the vast majority of you are guys and have probably been burned or disappointed with American women. It speaks well of you that you haven't written me off, as well!

Dick, I was surprised by your multiple-choice question about why the vast majority of women cannot achieve orgasm from vaginal intercourse. I don't speak about orgasms with my girlfriends too often (!), but there's one more possibility: the clitoris was not involved! I've never had a vaginal orgasm. In fact, I can't imagine that one exists! There are times when I love just straight intercourse with no clitoral stimulation. Of course I don't have an orgasm, but sometimes I just don't want to. I think sometimes men have problems understanding it, but sometimes a climax just isn't necessary for enjoyment (at least for me). However, if my clitoris is touched, watch out! I think, very generally, it probably takes women longer to become aroused and to have an orgasm, but once I'm on a roll, it's a major aerobic workout, and I'm not kidding. I love to have multiple orgasms! But they just won't happen if the clitoris isn't involved. I have no idea if I'm a rare case or like most women, but I know what does it for me!

Fatso, you said, "Functioning in the corporate world or dealing with women, you are behaving and speaking in the politically correct approach (in Freud's terminology super ego and ego). To create an impression that you are fair minded, kind and the best of human being. The goal is to play the game to get what you want, i.e. overall kindness and nicety with calculated acts of mischievous nasty moves."

Do you really think that most people are selfish and cruel? I don't. Maybe you'll think I'm naïve, but I do think that many, if not most people are fair-minded, kind, good human beings. I think our instincts are to protect and provide for ourselves, but to do so at the expense of others isn't just protective, it's cruel. I'm human and won't say I've never acted that way ever in my life, but I sure don't as a practice and I don't know many people who do. One thing that I've learned though is that sometimes people act the way we expect them to act. E.g., if someone is highly suspicious of me, I can sense that and unwittingly do something (that I normally wouldn't do) that makes me fit the mold that I was expected to fill.

Dick, I'm really sorry about the woman who was rude to you at the gym. You simply asked her out to lunch, not to donate a kidney! However, no one but she knows her motives. Maybe she was trying to string you along. Maybe she was trying to play hard-to-get. Or, maybe she wasn't interested but thought she was being polite by not giving you a definite no. I know the latter is actually more cruel than turning you down directly, but sometimes we don't think about that.

Fatso, what is a gringo woman? I've never heard the term before and am trying to figure his out.

Something else confuses me. There are literally millions of American women. There are beautiful, intelligent, loving ones and there are cold-hearted witches. And....the same can be said about the women of any country, any race, any religion, and any other group of women. Have you had the same exposure to women of other cultures that you've had to American women so that you can make an accurate assessment?

I remember as a child, visiting friends' houses for dinner or a sleep-over. Everything was always so perfect at the other house. No one ever fought or yelled or seemed to do anything bad. I always thought that every family was the Brady Bunch except mine. Then I grew up and found out that when visiting, hosts usually present their best sides. Maybe that is true when you visit women of other cultures, as well.

Maybe the same things that are said here about American women can be said of American men (or men of any other sub-group). There are some horrible men out there who have really burned and harmed women. However, I can't imagine any intelligent, reasonable woman who would place ALL men in the same category.

Another thought is that maybe some of those who think that all American women are cold-hearted just haven't been looking in the right places. Sometimes we get lazy (me, too!) and don't want to leave our comfort boundaries, whatever and wherever they are. However, when that happens, we can't expect any changes unless we expand our horizons. It would be great if everything we wanted was neatly packaged and set outside our doorstep! But it doesn't usually happen that way.

And.....sometimes the problem isn't the other "group," but it's us. I've eaten humble pie myself, and it isn't easily digestible, but life is easier and rosier after the meal.

(to be continued)

(part 2)

(Whoops, I'm sorry about the double post. When I first clicked on "submit," I received an error message, so I assumed that it didn't post. I was wrong!)

Something else to consider, and I know this is an old cliché, but sometimes grass really is greener on the other side. Who knows, there may actually be some men in the world who (oh no!) prefer American women! The problem is this: when you write off ALL women of one group, you're also writing off the good ones. You don't want to be put in the same category as men who have committed crimes and behaved horribly against women, do you? That's prejudice. Fatso, you mentioned somewhere about a racist woman, but really, is anyone any different if you're judging ALL American women by the actions of a few?

If you are going to judge all American women by the actions of a few, then I don't think you can blame women who judge all American men by the actions of a few, either. That's what the militant feminists do! You know you don't want that. Live by the standards that you expect of others.

It seems to me that a good approach is an optimistic, yet slightly reserved outlook. You don't want to wear your heart on your sleeve, but if you keep it forever buried, it will never surface.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by USbabe
[
Dick, I'm really sorry about the woman who was rude to you at the gym. You simply asked her out to lunch, not to donate a kidney! However, no one but she knows her motives. Maybe she was trying to string you along. Maybe she was trying to play hard-to-get. [/QUOTE]

To clarify, I didn't think it was rude; I just thought it was strange. Playing hard to get is a possibility but that doesn't work for me as I am too lazy and cynical and just move on to the next prospect.

I don't fall in the group that says that all American woman are all those nasty things that fatass says they are. I just think they are by and large sexually repressed, sexually unskilled, and overly materialistic. Of course, I've only been to thirty-some countries so far and it's possible that by the time I'm done hitting them all, American women will rise above the median.

Babe, I don't know how much you've travelled, but if you've ever been to Latin America, I would think you would realize that people there are just plain friendlier, and the friendliness is less superficial. I can say the same thing for Oz and NZ as well. Five years from now I hope to be living in one of these places permanently and none of this will matter.

hello dick, since you were only asking her out for lunch, it is very strange that she said she would have to think about it. to me, what she was really saying was, "i have to think whether or not you're important enough to warrant my time." unfortunately, this kind of response does not help the rest of us!

i've never been to latin america, but i have traveled all over the us (as well as europe and asia), and i think the region has a lot to do with how friendly people are. in the south, very generally, people are extremely friendly, almost to a fault. yet in nyc and other major metropolitan areas, people are sometimes so guarded that it's hard to get to know anyone. i've never been to aus. or nz, so i don't know.

what i do think is harmful, however, are the generalizations that are taken to mean all of a specific group. (i'm not saying that you are necessarily doing this, however). when militant feminists scream that all men are just out to push women around and exert their dominance and [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord123][CodeWord123][/url] and pillage, blah, blah, blah, that hurts men like you. when some men say that all american women are selfish witches out to step on and ruin men, that hurts girls like me.

it's hard when someone has been stung many times, especially by one group of women (american). but guys who discount all american women because of it are pushing away the good ones, too. the guys who never give up, however, and have some optimism left are the ones who win.

oh, i have to make a comment about the toilet seat. how about everyone putting the lid down? unless it's being used for its intended purpose, do we really need a view of what's inside? besides, if it's left down, then whatever fell out of your hands in the bathroom bounces off the toilet seat lid and doesn't "drown."

;-)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by USbabe
[i] Oh, I have to make a comment about the toilet seat. How about everyone putting the lid down? Unless it's being used for its intended purpose, do we really need a view of what's inside? Besides, if it's left down, then whatever fell out of your hands in the bathroom bounces off the toilet seat lid and doesn't "drown." ;-) [/i][/QUOTE]

Now, Babe, I think that is excessive. Putting BOTH parts down so that men and women alike must engage in time wasting practices? Surely Sir Isaac Newton or Ben Franklin or Mae West or whoever it was wasn't referring to toilet seats when they said "what goes up must come down"! Huh. If you think about it, that could refer to the penis as well.

I remember asking my mother when I was a wee lad why it was necessary to put the toilet seat down. She said, "Because ladies will fall in and drown." This was but the first in a long series of lies women have told me over the years. Fatass would probably say that the average American woman is far too wide for this to ever happen. Dickhead, of course, has less of an issue here but also did not flunk geometry.

Women are inefficient. Who needs laundry baskets? Isn't a washing machine just a big laundry basket? Who needs wardrobes or bureaus? Isn't a dryer just a big clothes dresser? Put the dirty clothes directly from your body into the washing machine and take the clean ones directly from the dryer and put them on your body. This is efficient, economical, and ecological.

Although I love women, I also think they are poorly designed. The intake is too close to the exhaust, and what engineer in his or her right mind would run a solid waste pipe through the middle of a major recreational area? To the god in whom I do not believe, next time don't put the shithouse so close to the snack bar.

But seriously, I agree that there is no such thing as a vaginal orgasm. Unfortunately, it is often difficult (awkward, uncomfortable, fatiguing) to maintain vaginal penetration with the penis while simultaneously stimulating the clitoris (and guys, it's CLIToris, not cliTORis!). Fortunately, this is one problem that can easily be licked.

That gets me to the next issue. What is all of this I hear from women about "fear of losing control" during sex? Aren't you SUPPOSED to lose control during sex? Aren't control and orgasms somewhat mutually exclusive? Isn't that why I tied you to the bed posts in the first place?

Now to pose a question for the audience: If men and women achieve true equality, would that make marriage an anachronism? (Fatass, you can look it up!)

Your loyal servant,

Dickhead

SinjuMaster
greeting to my friends. don't worry about who is first or second. let Dick go first. I am not into ranking but into having fun. This is like calling Michael Savage and blah blah blah. who cares?

USBabe
wrong again. From here on out, your name will be Grasshopper, no more USBabe. Let the ZenMaster enlighten you, you are wrong so many times and ZenMaster is going to save you. Fact is, only a minority few, may be one in ten, in the womanhood are real nice. 9 out of 10 gringo ***** suck. OK, you may be the only one who is nice but then I don't know you. If you are UFC, then you are still the "9"s.
human nature is evil? you bet. human nature by itself is very evil. talk to any religious person (I am not), they will tell you that human nature is evil. talk to any corporate CEO, they will tell you so. i was reading jack welch of GE's on corporate management, you can see he expects most of his workers as lazy, low motivation and slacking, thus he institutionalized a stringent corporate governance to keep track. same with Andy Grove, co-founder of Intel, he believes most people are mindless, lazy and thus devised a system and policy to control, to manage..... both gentlemen created two of the most successful enterprises in american history. look at the CEOs of worldcom, enron, imclone, tell me they are not evil. gringo women (when it comes to their attitude with men) are evil. women are more evil than men in the sense that when men committed evil act, they know they are evil doers (to quote the prez), for women, most would gauge their evil deeds as something normal, as something moral and kind. case in point, the Hayman Fire evil doer. She would gauge herself as an abused ex-spouse and that her ex- wronged her.........
the toilet seat. OK, i will leave it down for you. question is, what do i get in return? suck my rooster?

the South is friendly? get real!! friendly to you may not be friendly to a minority person. a buddy of mine from the bay area was badly beaten in a MS town. reason, he is gay. my african american friends who lived in the south told me about the blantant racism a person of color experience in the south until today, year 2002. yeah, friendly, when pigs fly. Personally I lived in Texas for a few years and I have observed numerous acts of overt racism and intolerance to minorities, including against gays. So, Babe, wake up and look around, if you need eye glasses, go to LensCrafters (yes, they paid me handsomely for this endorsement). Yes, I am a left wing liberal libertarian. Left wing liberal, when it comes to social policy, as in anti discrimination, anti guns, libertarian when it comes to my pocket book - STOP STEALING MY MONEY, ALL THE POOR PEOPLE OUT THERE GET THE HELL OUT OF THIS COUNTRY!! yes, I love Michael Savage but I think he is too liberal for me sometimes.

alright guys. i have to leave town for BabeLand. See you back here in august. have a nice and safe 4th. be careful out there cos the bitches are going to burn you like they burn colorado and arizona. and remember always, Hold on to that wallet when you see a ***** approaching you !! :) :)

Dick, I like your intellect and sense of humor. You don't write for a living, do you? Oh wait, I believe you said you were in a helping profession during the day but are usually stoned. Okay, I have it. You're a psychoanalyst for militant feminists and misogynists, and you have to stay stoned to keep yourself from losing your mind from all the incessant whining. I knew it!

What goes up must come down....well, does that apply to salaries and egos?! If so, I've paid my dues, thanks.

No, no, women aren't inefficient. Our job is to civilize society! I'm not calling you Neanderthals at all, but if you've ever seriously studied sociology or anthropology, you'd know what I mean. Of course, you want to roam from cave to cave to check out all the cute little loincloths, but cavewomen needed you to protect them and bring them food while they grew little cavemen to propagate the species. Instead of duking it out with other cavemen over who had what rights, women wanted laws and more civilized ways of getting along. Together, they formed families and clans and from there, cities grew. And to think, there are probably still some men today who probably still drink from the milk carton; for shame! ;-)

As for our design, I'm not too disappointed, although I wish men would be a bit more understanding about the frequency and duration of the time we spend in the ladies' room. Please remember that you don't have to deal with that "monthly" time or hosiery! Really, it takes extra time. And how on earth can you go hours and hours and hours without using one at all? I'm in awe, really, but when I need to go more frequently, it isn't to upset you, I promise! It would be kind of cool to just whip out the equipment without having to remove any clothing and be done with it, but unfortunately, it doesn't work that way for us.

You said, "Unfortunately, it is often difficult (awkward, uncomfortable, fatiguing) to maintain vaginal penetration with the penis while simultaneously stimulating the clitoris" Do you mean that you're trying the stimulate the clitoris with your "member" or your finger? Only rarely has a man been able to do it only with his member. Usually he or I just use a finger, and that works quite well! As for losing control, I've never had that complaint. I don't have sex with a man until I know him very well, and by that time, I'm not afraid of showing vulnerability with him. And yes, that does include being tied to the bedposts!

By the way, I think "equality among people" is an oxymoron. If we were all equal, we'd all be robots of one another! If I have the same education, experience, skills, and job position that you do, then of course I should be paid the same as you. But that doesn't make us equal. I'm not a man and don't want to be treated like one. I have some advantages that you don't have in life, and you have some advantages that I don't have. No legislation will change that. I'll bet you speak differently to your male friends than your female friends. Personally, I like it that way. Men and women think differently (and of course all men don't think the same, and all women don't think the same), and insisting that there are no differences between us, except for "plumbing," is asking for trouble. Personally, I'll opt for respect rather than equality.

USBabe, I might agree and disagree with you. There are many nice American women out there, in fact most American women are nice then again maybe not, but for certain the majority of American women have an attitude towards sex that is rather puritan but at the same time liberal. Liberal and puritan create a bizarre paradox. Here's an example, a women dresses up sexy to go to work and men make passes at her on the bus. She ignores all the advances and stares and sticks her nose up and whispers to herself, "These guys are pervs!!" If she wore a nice dress, a rather sexy one at that, what else did she expect??? If you go to a public place and show off the best parts of your anatomy, any man who considers himself human will take notice of you. I know from the social scene that a lot of women in America like to tease men which I find rather annoying. I have had women make friendly passes at me and then it leads to absolutely nothing. I was with a woman last week and we started kissing and all of a sudden out of no where she pulls away and says "Sorry!!! I got to go. I'll see you later." She has not returned any of my calls since. There is a major factor that allows women to tease men and get away with it, there are simply not enough beautiful women in the US. Lets face it when I go out maybe one in ten women I see on the street or in the office or in another place of gathering is attractive(7 or better). The fact that sexy American women are so few in numbers leads men to make a big deal out of them, and therefore the guys compete for the woman's favor. This competition among men makes it easy for an attractive American women to set minimum standards and reject men. The attractive American women knows shes hard to find and therefore she has more leverage over the potential suitor. In Europe, its a different ballgame, there are so many gorgeous women, in fact so much that men don't a big deal out of it The attractive European woman is easy to find. So therefore European women don't tease and play games with guys because they cannot. Its all supply and demand. This is a fact. In Europe, if a woman makes the move, thats means the man is going to get some hot sex. For example, in France, if a lady tongue kisses you, that is a prelude to sex. After experiencing romance and sex with European women I can just testify that American women don't satisfy me anymore. I don't have the energy, strength,patience, and perserverance to run through hoops to get sex from a woman in the States which in terms of quality and quantity is below that found in Europe. In Europe, sex is far easier, and far better, and far cheaper, and not as heartbreaking.

CBGB, I think how the man makes a pass at a woman makes a huge difference. If a man just grabs her rear, that really is inappropriate! However, if he smiles but keeps his hands to himself, then it's entirely different. A woman who takes offense at a man whistling at her is obviously giving mixed signals.

What exactly do you mean by the word "attractive?" I mean, are you talking about genetics or how a woman dresses? I'm just speculating, but I don't think there's probably a huge difference in genetics. However, I also don't think it's a secret that European women (generally) do dress better than American women, but generally doesn't mean always! Also, in general, I think Europeans are more slender than their American counterparts, but I also think that Americans have better dental and overall health than Europeans. And it's important to realize that unless you live in Europe, you're probably seeing Europeans at their best. How many European women have you seen weeding gardens, washing cars, cleaning out attics, and so forth? You probably see them in the workplace or in clubs or out on the streets, shopping.

I'm not saying that American women or European women are any more or less attractive than the other. But to make an intelligent comparison, you'd have to compare a HUGE number of them and also compare them in equivalent settings. And, if you've been jaded by a group, you're probably not going to look at them objectively, either.

Something I've noticed that confuses me: When European women give you sex, they're lauded for their openness and beauty. When American women give men sex (without much effort), they're called sluts! What's with this?

I'll tell you why some (I can't speak for all) American women won't give you sex. Many of us want to fall in love and get married. Men want to think they're special, and that a woman has pride in her body and doesn't just give a piece of it to everyone, that she's saving herself for a special man. Therefore, he's going to opt for a less sexually experienced woman nearly every time. So, a woman who puts out may be popular on the dating scene, but almost never for marriage. Do you really want the mother of your child to have had sex with dozens of men?

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Nicely said CBGB... your supply and demand arguement is one that I have noticed myself over the years. As more and more women become fat/lazy/bitchy, there are less women who are attractive to men... thus meaning women can have their pick of the litter. Men also seem to have no judgement of their self worth. If you walk up to an attractive girl on the street, while wearing a wife beater t-shirt and ripped jeans, have no job, and a sport a big gut then you're going to get shot down. These seem to be the guys who do the most bitching when they can't get a "quality" girlfriend.

Miller... When you first started posting I thought you were a self righteous dickhead (heh heh)... as I read your posts more I find myself agreeing with you on many points. Many men are spineless, or just blind when it comes to women.

nofatso... you could learn a few things from Miller. You seem a bit bitter to me and women pick up on that in about 2 seconds. Check out that heartless-bitches website I posted a while back for some help.

USbabe... I was pleasantly surprised to see another articulate woman (besides RN) here after my vacation. Perhaps you could convince some of your friends to join us and discuss their experiences. I think they would also be warmly welcomed and maybe we can all learn a few things from each other. In response to your question of what a "Gringo" is... As I understand (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong) it is a descriptive, in a derogatory manner, word attached to white people by Mexicans. Much like a southerner calling a northerner a "Yankee".

I'm from big city Canada and I now live in Florida. People here are better at the daily pleasantries but inwardly are no more or less friendly than anywhere else I've travelled to. This so called "Southern Hospitality" is an old-school myth that is being perpetuated by tourism officials. I've also noted that there are many more "looser" men living here than in the north and consequently the women are more distrustful of them. But don't get me wrong... there are plenty of trailer park girls to go around too.

I'm dating an "American Woman" at the moment and am quite happy with her. There are some sexual issues between us, mostly because I'm a hedonist and she was a sunday school girl. She has supported an observation of mine, and that is that the best women tend to be those who were raised in small town america (she was). I've found that city girls tend to be very superficial, materialistic, and unreasonable in their attitudes towards men and life in general.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by RN
Just for you Dickhead......

*Turning around*
*Bending slowly over the bed and raising my skirt*

OOPS...it seems I forgot to put underwear on......

And what's this?? It's a shaved...pink...NOT obese...definately NOT lazy...
....PUSSY! LOL

Ok, so it's Australian pussy not American pussy and the topic at hand is American pussy (or lack thereof), but did I at least manage to change the subject????

*cheeky grin*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dickhead
[i]

Well, gee, thanks, Nursey but if you're doing it JUST for me then don't shave that thang. I've never really liked that; it kinda makes me feel like a child molester. Also what about nicks and cuts in connection with STD? Seems like it's not as safe.

Just trim it a little and let it go at that. [/i][/QUOTE]

sheese!... what a dickhead... nothing but criticism. I'll take your pink little shaved friend Rub... but you'd better be careful... I still have that oral fixation thing going on...

FU, I agree small town gals are nicer, but would say they tend to be less venturesome and somewhat more narrow minded. BTW, you meant there are more "loser" men down South, not more "looser" men, right? Cuz how would you know about the latter!?! Didn't mean to criticize RN, just the shaved beaver's not my thing. I think Rubbie started the whole nicks and cuts discussion in re eating potato chips and such, a while back, so I thought I'd yank on her chain a little. I believe the Aussies call that "letting the [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] out."

Babe, thanks, but no, I am not a writer per se, although I do a lot of writing at my job. And as far as the awkward thing meant, it applies to both the phallus and the phalanges. I find I can stimulate the clitoris with the phallus during intercourse using certain techniques I decline to share (Dickhead is rather selfish), but the positions are awkward and difficult to maintain for too long. And, when using the phalanges on the clitoris while the phallus is inserted, I often fall victim to the "pat your head while rubbing your tummy" syndrome (Dickhead is not the most coordinated individual on the planet).

PS, I never studied anthro but I have a minor in sociology. My particular interest was stratification.

DH

USBabe, I have traveled and worked in Europe extensively over the past few years. I have also lived in some of the most cosmopolitan and glamorous US cities. (I spent 4 years in California living in both San Francisco and Los Angeles), I also go to Miami frequently, and I have lived most of my life in New York City. I have also been to Texas, Georgia, and the Carolinas. In Europe, I have been all over, London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Prague, Budapest, everywhere. Over the years, I have seen HUGE numbers of women, and living in NYC, you do see HUGE numbers of them, you also see HUGE numbers of them in the European cities I have mentioned. The cities I have lived in (NY, LA, SF, and Miami) happen to be considered the top 5 cities in the United States to meet and see beautiful women, NY is the fashion capital of America, Miami has its large latin population, LA is closely connected with Hollywood. So these are the most glamorous cities in America. I have noticed that in every city with the exception of Miami, no more than one in ten women I saw I would consider attractive, no more and no less. In Miami, the ratio is more favorable, its about 1/4th of the population. I have met women at health clubs, in offices, at restaraunts, at bars, at discos, at shopping malls,at parks, at colleges, at beaches, suburbs, and places of worship. In Europe I have met them in all of these types of locales, health clubs, restaurants, shopping areas, discos, parks, beaches, discos, university campuses, bars, in suburbs of cities, and churches. In my comparison of the two areas I have found over 3 out of every four European women I encounter to be attractive. Personally walking down the Champs Ellysees in Paris last year I saw more attractive women in 5 minutes than I do in 5 weeks on the Champs Elysees' New York equivalent, Midtown Manhattan between Park Avenue to Avenue of Americas to Times Square. In central Amsterdam I saw more beautiful women than I do in the Greenwich Village - Soho Section of lower Manhattan. On the Riviera, I see more beautiful women than I do in South Beach Miami and Malibu California. Another thing when I meant by making passes I did not mean grabbing a woman's rear end or shouting something obscene. We live in a civilized society, what I meant is that I have seen men make eye contact and give smiles to women they find attractive in public areas of gathering, and often the women themselves seem touched off by the fact that some strange man is making eye contact with them. This is just absurd!! What the hell did they expect??!! When I was in Europe, I would often see women trying to make eye contact with me, and if I did the same I would usually get a smile from them. Even in a big and bustling places like Paris or Frankfurt, if I simply just looked at a women, gave a hello, and smiled I would get a return smile from her. I've seen this all over the continent of Europe, women are just plain friendlier than they are in the States. Another thing, after spending a lot of time in Europe, when I returned to the States, I could not help but notice how fat and pale most American women are. Sorry USBabe, Europeans simply do it better. :)

CBGB, I was in Paris three times last year, so maybe you saw me! Or, maybe only the beautiful women go to Europe. ;-)

You've lived in and visited cities, but have you ever been to many smaller areas? Believe it or not, a lot of top models come from small areas (both in the US and Europe).

However, I'm still confused as to what you mean specifically by attractive , a person's genetics or how she is dressed (and how her hair is done, and things like that). I can't argue at all with the opinion that American women are generally a lot more casual than European women. I'm not sure how we got that way. But, please be careful in typecasting women, because a beautiful American woman just might walk right on past you, but if your mind is already made up that her simply being American means that she's unattractive, you're severely limiting your opportunities.

Unfortunately, as an abundant nation, I don't think there's any doubt that there are more obese people (men, as well as women!) in the US. And we're probably more pale. But on the other hand, if you compare the "average" middle-aged American woman with the "average" middle-aged European woman, the American woman frequently looks much younger. Sun is very damaging and aging to skin (as is smoking, which Europeans do a lot more than Americans).

Do you know that Christie Brinkley is almost 50?! It's incredible. However, believe it or not, she is an American woman.

However, instead of comparing American women to European women, how about just enjoying women because they're women?! Can you imagine women saying that European men were better lovers, better-looking, and much nicer than American men? I bet you'd feel defensive because you were being lumped together with everyone.

Prejudice and type-casting closes off far more doors than it opens.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by USbabe
[i]Can you imagine women saying that European men were better lovers, better-looking, and much nicer than American men? I bet you'd feel defensive because you were being lumped together with everyone.[/i][/QUOTE]

Gee, well in point of fact I've seen that happen repeatedly. I agree with your point about generalization, USBabe, but it happens on both sides of the fence. I've had friends -- truly nice guys -- who couldn't get the time of day from the same women who suddenly started drooling when a foreign accent was in evidence. Doesn't matter if to us the guy was an obvious bozo; to her, heck, maybe he's literally a prince!

I do think there are two rather natural tendencies at play - and I think both men and women indulge. First, there's a sort of exoticism that kicks in when someone's from a different culture. It's as if they're somehow going to fill the void that's not previously been filled, and whether they actually will or won't gets obscured because you've got to take time figuring them out. The second is something my friends and I used to call "new town syndrome" -- the fact that when you go somewhere else for a time you simply see more beautiful people. (Happens when you buy a new car, too -- you suddenly see a bunch more on the road.) I think it's something in our antennaes, how we imagine ourselves operating in the new place as opposed to our normal lives.

Underlying everything in this thread, however, is one very clear truth in the midst of all the other stuff (some of which is rather silly) and that's the fact that American women in general absolutely do treat men differently from the way women do in other countries. It may because they've got more equality than in other places, they're more independent, self-absorbed, paranoid, strong, whatever. But the fact is that men don't get the same level or degree of attention when talking to or being with most American women as they do elsewhere. The messages are essentially, "I don't need you" and "it's your job to keep me but not the other way around" and, as this thread demonstrates, those messages are very much understood and the feeling has become mutual.

Right on, JZ. Remember that bumper sticker that was going around a while back: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"? That encapsulated the sentiment quite nicely. SAnother symptom of this sad syndrome is the way single women are having children on their own. I have yet to see this outside of the US, Canada, and the wealthy countries of northern Europe. Really, I think this should be a last resort and not just another way to propagate the species. Actually, I think it's selfish. My niece did this and she could easily have a guy but says that a relationship would interfere with her career :(

The kid, now seven, is having a lot of emotional problems (besides from being the biggest sissy you ever saw in your life), which brings us back to the old adage: "Spare the rod and spoil the child."

Hi Joe, the "exoticism" of another culture is definitely at play, at least in part. I'm not ashamed to admit that a foreign accent touches a few sensitive spots in my body that a plain old American accent won't! The road runs both ways in that sense. I'd much rather take a vacation in Europe than a camping trip to my local park; wouldn't you?

I won't argue that, IN GENERAL, women treat men differently in the US, but here's another slant. It's very true that American women can probably economically make it on their own better in the US than almost anywhere else. Maybe some of the foreign women must rely on men economically or they'll never get ahead. In some countries, sadly enough, women aren't even thought of as human. Women in some third world countries are killed if they so much as talk back to their husbands. They're treated like cattle. I certainly hope no one here supports that kind of treatment of women. In other words, women in other cultures sometimes have no choice because they must rely on men.

I can't argue that some American women are very arrogant, self-centered witches. But, in some ways, they wouldn't become that way if men didn't allow it. I'm not putting all of the blame on men at all! But I've seen both men AND women put up with shoddy treatment, and at a guess it's because of a lack of self-esteem. The US is the land of plenty. I'm almost certain that no one posting on this forum is lacking in any comfort material possessions, let alone basic food and shelter. Sometimes some of life comes so easily that we take much for granted. And we become spoiled -- both men and women. Perhaps in other cultures, people appreciate more what they have because it isn't as plentiful. Many women in the US can fully support themselves, even in lavish lifestyles. How many foreign women can say the same thing? I'm sure some can, but my guess is that more American women are able to become self-sufficient than foreign women.

I'm not going to rant and rave about American men, but I'll tell you one thing that I've observed about European men that I haven't observed quite so often in American men. Often, European men seem more protective of women and not so afraid of us. I'm approached much more often in Europe than in the US. Unfortunately, some of the bad experiences that men have encountered here have made some men less likely to approach women. Very generally, men take rejection so personally in the US, and in Europe, men seem to find it par for the course but usually don't let it upset them. Both men and women in the US tend to overanalyze situations. I'll give an example.

This past winter, I was running on an indoor track at the gym. I had on a Walkman and was immersed in deep thought and was relatively impervious to everything around me. As I was about 20 meters past a man, it just dawned on me that he said something to me as I passed by him! Since I was pondering something, I'm pretty sure my eyebrows were furrowed and I looked totally unapproachable. The next time around, he was gone. I didn't see him for a few more days, but when I did, he totally ignored me. I felt so bad that he thought I was being rude to him, so I actually walked up to him and said something like, "I was on the track the other day when I passed by you. I think you said something to me, but I was so deep in thought that it didn't even register with me until later that you said something! I just wanted you to know that I didn't mean to be rude to you at all."

His reaction was something like I had just handed him a million dollars. He said he shrugged it off and it was no big deal, but the way he treated me after I explained the situation was the difference between night and day. I could tell that his perceived perception of me bothered him greatly.

The reason that I mention this is that sometimes things just aren't always as they appear. I have no doubt that the guy was thinking pretty much along the thoughts of many of you here -- that I was just arrogant and rude and snubbing him. But I wasn't! I was completely preoccupied and would have acted no differently if it were anyone else or even if there wasn't anyone there at all.

We can't change the behavior of others. But we can change our own behavior. If you want to attract successful, attractive people, then you have to be someone that successful, attractive people are attracted to! I dislike whining from others a lot. I usually avoid people like that and instead usually hang out with people who have more optimistic views on life. I like American men, but some of them are very unattractive because of their views on life. And I like foreign men, but some of them are very unattractive because of their views on life.

If you expect American women to be (whatever negative images you have), then you probably won't be disappointed. But really, don't you deserve better in life? I do, and I insist on it!!

Dick, you said, "Another symptom of this sad syndrome is the way single women are having children on their own"

If you're looking for an argument from me, you'll be disappointed! I completely agree. SOME women think that the only valuable part of a man is his sperm, and the problem with that is that children are paying the price. Both a mother and a father are needed to raise children. Sometimes unplanned pregnancies occur, but to plan a child out-of-wedlock is very selfish.

But again, not ALL American women think this way! Some of us actually like men. In fact, some of us actually like men a lot! But if you (in plural form) insist on judging all American women based on the actions of a few, you'll never find out who we are. :-)

Oh, I wanted to say to FedUp, thank you for explaining what a gringo is! I had a feeling it wasn't exactly an endearing term.... I actually did show this site to two of my friends, but they immediately dismissed it saying that these guys already had their minds made up and that nothing anyone said or did would make any difference. I really hope to prove them wrong! I think that the day I close my mind to new information is the day I quit living on the planet.

so, you were in paris last year three times!!! whoopee!!! i never talked to any americans while there, i spotted a few here and there, but, you know what? the ones i saw happened to be the archtypical fat americans. you really think i would be able to spot you in a city of 10 million people?? who the fuck do you think you are? you obviously sound like a ?itch so there is no need for me to talk to you anymore. by the way those beauties i saw i could identify 100 percent as french or european, they obviously were not speaking english. it doesn't matter what i define attractive to be, you're just complicating things like a typical american ?itch!!! too bad for you, that i am letting other men know about the opportunities to meet women abroad so they won't have to put up with the shit that bitches like you give us men. fuck you. enjoy your vibrator.

Babe, I wasn't looking for an argument as my position is rather unassailable! But, I don't think most of the guys on this board are judging American women based on "a few," but rather we are judging based on the MAJORITY of our experiences. I have thirty years of sexual experience with American women and there have been more than a few good experiences but the majority have been far inferior to my average experience with non-American women. I think that's the point that most of us are trying to make, in our own inarticulate, insenstitive, Cro-Magnon fashion. It is, after all, somewhat of a numbers game. In my field, we use a thing called "expected value." If you are not familiar with this, it basically means you have to multiply the value of each possible outcome by the probability of its occurring. Here's an example.

Dickhead meets a seemingly nice woman and is thinking about asking her out. Possible outcomes with values and probability:

1). Woman tells him to F.O.A.D. Value NEGATIVE $500 (damage to Dickhead's delicate psyche), probability 20%.
2). Woman says, "Sure, call me some time," and then gives a fake phone number. Value NEGATIVE $250 (some damage to psyche plus time is money), probability 15%.
3). Woman says yes, they go out, there is no chemistry, and nothing happens. Value NEGATIVE $100 (guy always has to pay), probability 25%.
4). Woman says yes, they go out, they hit it off, they go out again, and still nothing happens. Value NEGATIVE $200, probability 20%.
5). Woman says yes, they go out, they have sex, and then the woman acts strange, gives vague excuses, etc., and it never happens again. Value $100 (average value of average sex to the average Dickhead), probability 15%.
6). Woman says yes, they go out, they have sex many times, and then there is an ugly and painful breakup. Value varies from negative a whole bunch to positive quite a bit, with a mean value of zero; probability 5%.

These are the only outcomes I have personally experienced, although in #6, "many times" has lasted up to seven years.

Expected value of asking an American woman out = (-500 x .2) + (-250 x .15) + (-100 x .25) + (-200 x .2) + (100 x .15) + (0 x .05) = NEGATIVE $187.50.

And, I can get a hooker for less than $187.50 pretty much anywhere except the United States. Therefore, I'm better off even if the subsequent sex is WORTHLESS!

Dickhead can be romantic at times but at heart is practical and pragmatic like most men. Plus, the older I get the more valuable my remaining time becomes (I always thought I'd die young but now it's too late!)

Of course this is riddled with sarcasm as usual, but hopefully I made some sort of point.

"CB - GB" gives me the "heebie jeebies." Way, way out of line.

Amen Dickhead -- CBGB, c'mon!

USbabe -- absolutely, I'd rather travel elsewhere. I've had American culture stuffed down my throat my entire life, and it's like going to a restaurant where there's only one thing on the menu. Might be great, but you yearn for something different. I dearly love immersing myself in different scenarios and cultures because I learn a lot about and can better appreciate my place in the world. And one of the things travel does is gives you a sense of context for what happens around you -- you can see other perspectives and approaches, which is precisely why a lot of guys here have are complaining about the meal that's constantly set before them.

I agree with you absolutely that there's a power inequity in many countries in terms of economics, but there's more to the equation than that. Clearly none of us are advocating mistreatment of women, or wives committing ritual suicide on the death of their spouses or any of that. But relationships in other countries are simply very often founded on different foundations. Yes, in places it may be based on a male-dominated societal model, but it's also present in various places where matriarchy is strong. Some of it is purely and simply a core understanding of how others ought to be treated, and, frankly, this is where things in this country too often fall short.

Let me give you an example. One of my best friends had his marriage of twelve years fall apart a little over a year ago. Fine, that happens, and he wasn't always a saint, nor was she. I'd personally not want to be married to either of them, though they're both my good friends. But here's the part that was absolutely galling -- she signed a year-long lease on an apartment, moved out, and only then told him she was going, and that she wasn't really sure whether it was permanent or not -- she wanted to get back together with someone she'd had a fling with long ago when she was in the peace corps, and she wanted my friend to not only be okay with that, but to basically wait until she figured out whether or not she was coming back. She -- get this -- [b]forbade[/b] him to see anyone else while she was gone, and got very upset with him (and with me, I might add, when I advised him to tell her to take a flying leap) when he wouldn't agree to put his life on hold while she basically decided his future. He pressed her to set a shorter timeline, saying that a year was just not reasonable, which she refused to do, and then basically said, fine, it's over, I'm not going to agree to give you permission to make me a cuckhold dangling on a string.

(I should note that this friend's first wife -- another friend, now dead, another dear and wacky woman -- cornered me many years ago and asked me point-blank what I would do in her position. Her position at the time was knowing that the two above were deeply involved in each other. I said to her that if it were me I'd give him an ultimatum and if it weren't heeded, I'd change the locks and throw the bum out. She changed the locks the next day.)

So here we are a couple of months ago, a year later in the process. They are divorced, he's dating, her old flame turned out to be the same immature idiot he was when they were in Tonga, and she's filled with bitterness at my friend, who she holds responsible for the profound emptiness and loneliness that now fills her life, because he was unreasonable. Me, I get to listen to her cry about it and not only not understand what went wrong, but still be unable to comprehend that the whole process wasn't all completely about her.

I have seen this exact same kind of behavior time and time again from various female friends, who have thrown away men who these women clearly acknowledge are the loves of their lives over the most idiotic kinds of things -- everything from one guy having the temerity to actually want to get married after six years of an intense (and on his part absolutely worshipping) relationship to one woman who dumped the guy she'd been with for a year because he spit on the sidewalk repeatedly one week because he had a sinus infection (she simply couldn't be with someone who did that.)

This goes beyond being self-centered or being b*tches -- this is about being self-destructive in terms of relationships. It's not about "allowing" certain kinds of behavior -- good lord, some of this stuff is far beyond predictability or sense. I personally don't have the same completely negative view of American women as many here do in terms of thinking of all of all as terrible and hopeless, but I do believe that there's something generally wrong here.

You might be right about American men and women overanalyzing things, but in terms of taking rejection too seriously (and your example on at the gym) I'd simply say that when one is kicked where it hurts repeatedly one tends to cover up so as not to take the full force of the next blow. It's a survival instinct.

Just to be clear about where I'm coming from -- I'm someone who's been in a relationship for forever, fairly happily for the most part, and I don't expect perfection from anyone. Lord knows I fall far short in that regard. But if anyone is to end up at all happy in the male-female jousting process, some degree of equity and clarity must be present in the rules.

The men I know who wreck and ruin their relationships do so in the usual classic ways of catting around or being immature louts, etc., but the difference is that they usually are willing to take the blame fairly immediately for screwing things up. Not so with the women, for whom that process may take years, if it ever happens, and this is a very key difference.

(And, btw, let me also thank you for your presence and reasoned responses, and for managing to ignore most of the baiting that goes one here.)

USBabe you said

"But on the other hand, if you compare the "average" middle-aged American woman with the "average" middle-aged European woman, the American woman frequently looks much younger. Sun is very damaging and aging to skin (as is smoking, which Europeans do a lot more than Americans). "

What a bunch of bullshit!!! The average middle aged American lady more attractive than a middle aged European lady???? Christie Brinkley almost 50?? I'm sure a plastic surgeon had something to do with it. If you want to meet a poor plastic surgeon, go to Europe. Plastic surgery in Europe is rare. Okay, what about Sofia Loren??? She's much older and seems to defy age. One of things I've noticed about Europeans is that they often look young for their age, especially the French, they defy aging better than anyone in the West. While in Paris I met a women who I thought was 25, she turned out to be 40!!! As far as Americans being healthier than Europeans, please explain this: almost 35 million people in the States don't have access to healthcare!!! Also the HIV rate in the US is twice that of the European Union and four times that of Canada!!!Uh huh sure whatever. Oh yeah Lennox Lewis, he's European, and he kicked the crap out of Mike Tyson!!

Another thing to ponder, what about this discussion board? There is a whole topic dedicated to the subject of American women in the WSG, much of it seems to be complaints about them.

Oh another thing I think it might me more entertaining to have sex with vampire than with an *b*itch like you USBabe.

USBabe, yer e-mail address please.....

CBGB... lighten up... your recent tirades make American Men look bad. I can see that vein in your forehead about to pop.

Sinan... are you serious??? After that last post we'll be lucky if she comes back at all.

Dickhead... Yes, I meant loser... without the second chance to change things in the new forum it's easier to make mistakes. No hard feelings on the shaved Rubber thing I hope... I thought it was kinda funny. On the small town girl issue: I would agree that they are more close minded and less venturesome than others in daily events, but the reverse is true when in bed.

USbabe... too bad about your friends. While it's true that most of the posters here have made up their minds about US women, I would have thought they'd want to know why. I find it likely that in a few years, once their good/youthful looks have failed, they will sit together at the coffee shop and wonder why men no longer want them. They will likely put men down as "assholes" when the real reason is that they no longer have good looks to counter their bad attitudes. I applaud you for sticking around and trying to find a few answers.

Joe said:

"I'd simply say that when one is kicked where it hurts repeatedly one tends to cover up so as not to take the full force of the next blow. It's a survival instinct."

Nicely said Joe. As a guy in his late 20's I'm tired of being constantly shot down. I'm clean cut, well dressed, articulate, and wasn't beat with the ugly bat; yet I'm constantly turned down by women. The most given reason? "Sorry, I'm seeing someone right now". Well I know that's bullshit, a recent survey done in the US states that 50% of people between 18 and 35 are single. The result of this constant failure is that I no longer bother to ask US girls out. The only reason I have a GF at present is because I moved to a new town and wanted to meet some people, so I took out an ad on a singles site (which is a fantastic way of crushing ones self esteem by the way). She has many of the qualities I look for in a mate but it's only been 3 months and as we all know it takes longer than that to get to know a person. She is my final attempt at an American Woman... if she turns out like the others then it's off to South America I go.

FedUp, I think that USBabe has caught on that I'm no longer willing to blindly bash American women, so, I think that she's intelligent enough to read the cards on the table and engage me in intelligent conversation away from the board.

As for your post and the ones you pasted, they hit the nail on the head. MY frustratiuon is that the parental units taught me to respect women and in my approaches to them, I did JUST THAT. However, they seem NOT to respond to that and after so many times of being metaphorically kicked in the nuts without a cup, one rasies his shields (Yes, I like Star Trek! LOL) to fend off their daily rejections. The paradox amazes me: they (American women) crave the "exciting guy" (I'm by no means boring if you ask my friends, law enforcement, and my former commanders in the military but that's another story NEVER to be told) who will more often than NOT stomp on their hearts like a dried out eggshell and dump them like yesterday's stool sample, while the guy who considers their feelings and treats them as a human being (GASP! This is the beginning of the end for the well-mannered guy!) will be seen as last year's fashion; unexciting and unworthy of attention. These days, I merely say that American women are intelligent, BUT they must live with the choices they make. If they take a risk that they know deep in their will end up creating emotional havoc in their lives, SO BE IT. DO NOT come crying to ME and ask to use my shoulder and my ear simply becasue you were STUPID enough to do what you knew would cause you pain. I no longer care that they make such stupid decisions. THAT, in and of itself shows me that they are not capable of making wise decisions in the arena of dating, and I don't wanna be with a dumbbell. To go a bit further, Fed, your scenario of the future when these women sit around bitching about American men being assholes was one that I thought of for a long time, myself. What is it with this board?? Am I transmitting my thoughts as I sleep?? LOL Anyway, this scenario is the inevitable END to the unwise decisions American Women make. They end up at the cafe with their gf's blaming American MEN for their mistakes while not admitting that their attitudes and their current (and ever present loss of physical attractiveness) is the problem for their lack of a significant other. Like I said in a previous post (and even before this NEW forum came to fruition) I don't find it difficult at all to scare up female companionship (not necessarily sexual) whenever I've gone to Europe or the Republic of Panama. I know it wasn't financial, either, 'cos I NEVER had some visa ***** hanging on me. All my encounters were of GENUINE interest. An example was when I was at a New Year's Eve Party some years back. I was at a disco and (I was enjoying the body of a blonde barmaid who I was staying with for the week) a brunette walks up to me and starts to chat me up. I knew within a minute that she wanted to drain me of my bodily fluids and I started to walk out the disco to go home with her, but my fucking conscience got the better of me. GODDAMMIT!!! Anyway, my efforts will be focused on foreign women from now on, but I won't totally refuse American women. If they reform themselves in my eyes, I will be proven wrong (happily, but unlikely). If they DON'T reform themselves, I will be proven right and the focus of my efforts will not be mistaken.

I am posting this for some friends of mine, Dufus and Ed. It’s quite long. Hope it can illuminate – Angus.

[Dufus: Dufus speaking, been reading the forum for a while. Trying to bring some objectivity to your worthy discussion. It’s been interesting but a lot of personal anecdote. Like it’s been said, we need more Am. Women to voice their opinions – keeps us honest to a certain extent.

I think I can get around her reluctance to join in. I have a foolproof way to plumb the depths of the American woman’s soul and get her take on things, how she really views men, herself, love, sex. I’ll present 16 transcripts from the personals section of a local [San Francisco Bay Area] Bulletin Board, culled from hundreds of Am. Wom. presenting their best face to the world (they are trying to attract a mate?). A statistical random sample. Obviously the methodology biases giving the Am. Women the benefit of the doubt since she gets to describe herself in her own words. I’ll annotate them to elucidate their meaning.]

[ed: editors note: Dufus, this isn’t objective. You ignored hundreds of decent women and only picked out the one’s that got under your skin]

[dufus: are there just a lot of weird chicks in the Bay Area?]

[ed: it’s partly demographic. US Census reports that there are cartloads of excess males, in the horniest 20-40+ demographics, over available females. The women get to name their price. It’s high.]
[Dfs: apologies for the length. But this is objective and requires a large sample. This is science. Or is it sociology?]
[ed: you spend the whole Saturday Evening into the wee hours, writing this drivel. Dude, you need to get laid.]

transcript one:
----------------
What do you want in this world, Honesty?
[Dufus: honestly? I want sex]

If sex is what your looking for then don't respond either there is so much more to companionship then sex
[Dufus: it goes like this. A city in Brazil declares a holiday in celebration of orgasms – if you can combine urban planning and sex why not companionship and sex?]. Personally I find it real primitive if people base relationships on sex
[Dufus: OK, let it be built on mutual love and respect…40 foot pilings driven deep into the bedrock, the foundations are solid. You get them, the ground floor thru the 5th story… floors 6 thru 120 about sex. deal?].
It is like saying that it is okay to cheat cause that is human instinct or that men and women can't be friends cause they will want to sleep with each other
[Dufus: we can be friends and we can sleep with each other]. He slept with me so he must love me, is another example
[Dfs: look, you reap what you sow – you made prostitution illegal, right? To get sex I either become a criminal or make you believe I love you. It’s just the lesser of two evils]. No these are neither good nor healthy attitudes towards life or relationships. No this isn't a hang up this is just being real.
[clue me in , this a personal ad, right? aren’t you supposed to be making yourself attractive, like even 3% attractive]

BTW I am 27 so please I don't need my dad to reply. [Dufus: She ain’t a sand-dune she’s a whole f…ing BEEEAACCH!!!!!!] [ed: didn’t you steal that line?]



transcript 2:



In search of a sleeping/cuddle buddy...




I'm a 22-year old student here in Oakland until mid-August, when I go back to school….
I can't stand sleeping alone, and maybe some of you all know what that's like? ….
So I'm looking for someone who wants to get together and just sleep, as weird as that sounds. Cuddle to sleep, actually….No strings attached, and it wouldn't be every night...I do snore… I don't want to be doing this with anyone old enough to be my father….
Nothing else, though...just cuddling to sleep. No kissing, no sex of any kind. ….

I'm 5'6", 250 lbs, blond hair and blue eyes.
So email me if you're interested! =)

[ed: I mean, isn’t there DIAL-A-TEDDY-BEAR for perverts like you? What a dangerous, infantile fantasy] [Dufus: But even so, Guys are so hard-up for sex here that she’s sparked a mini-construction in the Bay Area of guys reinforcing the floors of their apartments so they can accommodate her][ed: I’m not hard up]


transcript 3:
I want a really smart boyfriend
[Dufus: I’ve got an IQ of 100. It’s 30 points higher than yours. Relatively speaking I’m Einstein]


I'm 24, single, and sick of boring yuppies with nothing to say!! I am attractive(I think), friendly, and very very very very very very very sick of meeting the wrong type of guy. I would love to meet someone who is really bright and well read [ed: she actually wrote that very,very…cr*p][D: I don’t make this up.]

[ed: Anyway, this one is progress. She doesn’t say she doesn’t like sex. No cheap shots at guys in their 30’s]
[Dufus: I’m really, really, really,really,really, really, really smart and I have many,many,many,many interesting things to say. We’ll have sex after I’ve explained you what’s in a rainbow.]



transcript 4:
...fun, excitment, new friends and maybe a new relationship. I am easy on the eyes, can hold up my end of the conversation and tend to have a sarcastic type of humor (just to warn you)! Oh, and I am 32 years old. If you are smart, funny, and tall (at least 5'11")

[Dufus: Darn! only 5’10” 15/16th’s],

I'd love to hear from you.

[Dufus: do I have to be a stand up comedian to get laid around here]

[ed: quit whining, she wants a tall, stand up comedian.][Dufus: what’s with the “sarcastic sense of humor” – isn’t sarcasm the lowest form of humor – how does she get away with it?][ed: She probably has large breasts…they make up for a multitude of sins. ][D: while they’re firm?]


[transcript 5:]
Any smart, handsome man free for a date?



Hi! Thanks for stopping by. I'm (unexpectatly) free tonight. Would be nice to be in the company of an interesting and attractive man in his 30s (at least to keep the wolfs away)[ed: that’s “wolves” – but I’m being a humorless pedant][Dufus: and humor’s big, see below]. Please be unattached, easygoing, and possess a sense of humor.[Dufus: How much do you charge when you’re not free?…hehe] If nothing else, maybe we'll both find a new friend... have some wine, interesting conversations... maybe check out some music.[Dufus: then again, maybe we’ll find we have only one thing in common: we hate each other’s guts]

No weirdos, cranky guys, complainers, or those who just like to hear themself's talk [ed: doesn’t describe anyone on this forum][Dufus: I agree], but have no interest in someone else's ideas.. [ed: I’m fedup complaining. I’m emigrating][D: right behind you bro’.]


transcript 6:

Can you help me remember what there is to like about men?
[Dufus: Sorry, as a general rule I don’t usually date men. Plus I wish all other men would shrivel up and die and leave all the world’s women to me][ed: to put a more pseudointellectual spin on your question – it’s a question of comparative advantage. I’m built for sex, you’re girlfriend’s shoulder is built to cry on. Use each in a manner befitting their abilities: cry on her shoulder, have sex with me.]
transcript 7:

Where are the nice, respectful men?
[Dufus: a lot of them are chasing tail in Thailand, Brazil, Argentina,DR,CR, Malaysia, …]
[ed: but doing it respectfully…out of respect to you they’ll pretend to have no interest in sex whatsoever.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
transcript 8:

Attractive 32 y.o. SF seeks Worthy Friend
Attractive & wicked intelligent SF, 32, 5'3", graduate degree, top school-educated, seeks tall (5'9"+), reasonably fit, well-educated, and masculine/handsome *single*, …man, 27-38... East Coast transplant who moved here a few years ago...
[Dufus: Woe is me! multi-degreed career woman. I am not worthy. Unless I can trade you very fit for only a bachelor’s degree? I’ll send you my transcripts. Come to think of it who wants to screw around with Sheepskin. Do I really need a Phd to get laid?]
[ed: It’s called assortative mating. For you, that means smart people have the hots for smart people. Since I know what assortative mating is I’m in already]
[Dufus: funny, I usually associate wicked intelligence with the likes of Hitler, Khengis Khan, Caligula, the Borgia’s. None of whom get my rocks rolling]

I have many diverse interests [Dufus: Lady, I’ve got one and only one hobby…] and am an inquisitive and adventurous soul with joie de vivre to spare [Dufus: Joe de what?] .
Let's enjoy each other's company for a little while, no pressure, no strings[Dufus: OK, no strings. How about handcuffs?]. And who knows... if it's "love at first sight," maybe you could even convince me to leave this superficial (albeit beautiful) place and move back to the East where we can enjoy the Seasons again together. [Dufus: aren’t 3 out of 4 seasons on the East Coast frigid?][ed: that’s Minnesota]

[Dufus: would that there were a pinata big enough to stuff you and your inflated ego in]
[editor: violence is reprehensible and will not be condoned. Oh look! there’s a giant pinata. How pretty! All I need is a big stick to whack it with]


transcript 9:

young SF wants generous SM.

[Dufus: generous, ma’m, in which department, precisely?][ed: Dufus, there, see that big bulge in your pants][D: yeah, but that’s only my wallet!][ed: Exactly, Dufus.]


transcript 10:
Sexy Female, bored at home tonight and looking to lick and be licked tonight....would prefer within the next 2 hours

[ed: mirabile dictu, she’s horny…][Dufus: Whoaaa!! maybe I’m in][ed: then again maybe you’re not … got this from the Dyke’s personals section, Sorry.]

transcript 11:
Looking for someone who is NOT perfect. Do you have 'issues'?
[Dufus: No Really I don’t. Honest. Back issues, sure: Playboy, Penthouse, Big Jugs…but, they don’t count right?]
Do you have "issues"? Low self-esteem, over-weight, whatever...perhaps longing for someone to fill the void in your life who may be able to help you get on the right track? If so, we should talk. Maybe we can help eachother out. :)

[editor: Ma’m, I do have one issue. I wasn’t breast-fed as a baby. When does therapy begin?]
If you aren't going to send a genuine response (ie: no "copy and paste" response), then please don't waste my inbox space. [editor: Yes, ma’am][Dufus: what’s this thing women have with keeping their inboxes clean?]

transcript 12:

if YOU are bored as well, and (hopefully stumbled
upon this because you were searching for a job as was i;
as opposed to checking this section relentlessly for new
additions to give your assortment of diseases to; and/or
collect pictures/jack off material--)

send me your picture and be under 26.

[editor: Hell hath no fury like a woman’s scorn]. [Dufus: Sung to the tune of: “American woman, get away from me…”][ed: Look, like USBabe says, you can’t tar everyone with the same brush. USBabe’s very nice][Dufus: I’m dreaming what she’s like in a gossamer negligee. HOT!][ed: I meant her character, Dufus, so in a pool of 150 million Am. Women there’s bound to be another nice one, there’s more than one in every bunch]

transcript 13:
Imagine the odds...
[Dufus: I did. About 1 in 150 million][Ed: Dufus, let her finish] that someone I could want to get to know and vice-versa was actually reading this right now [Ed: let me see, picky self absorbed, and pigs might fly][Dufus: Or prostitution is legalized in the States]

transcript 14:
I shop at Lane Bryant, The Avenue, and the Plus-sized section at Ross
[ed: Check her out, she’s good-looking from a distance][D: like, how far?][ed: like 10,000 miles, below the horizon, dark-side of the moon, namely a safe distance]

transcript 15:
bored! help me :)
Where is everyone?? I'm so bored hehe.
23 yr old girl, bored out of her mind. Live in downtown SJ. Someone entertain me! And I don't mean sex!
[Ed: Kids, todays word is: quid pro quo][Dufus: yeah., pro’s!!!!; back on topic!]


transcript 16:

Very specific man... You out there somewhere???
I am pretty specific as to what exactly I am looking for
The worst thing that can happen is I won’t find it [Dufus: then what? back to your cats and vibrators]…
Must have a good job….I only like tall men with wide shoulders…
funny but not cynical.[D: Oh! the shame of it, I disqualified myself already]……
I am looking specifically for a man with little to no baggage [D: bags are packed] …. I am looking for a permanent addition to my life [D: have you considered getting a St. Bernard?]………..
I am in my early 30’s and my life is good. Must be a good listener and enjoy and respect women’s conversation[D: (example conversation) her: yack, yack, yack, yabba, yabba, yabba. Don’t you agree, Fido? (fido) Yes, honey.(her) yack, yack, yack, yaba,yabba,yabba]. So being self centered or an ego monster won’t work either.[D: Lady, tell me about it]……
Well, if you made it this far I hope to hear from you… Oh ya I don’t like beards, they’re scratchy…

[editor: Dufus, I am at a complete and utter f…ing loss. Where did all the charm go? This is supposed to be the personals. There’s more romance in the obituaries section of the newspaper. Did it evaporate. Really, I think it all wound up in Latin America. Check out those Colombiana personals. “creo en el amor por que lo he sentido”]

[D: What does that mean?]

[Ed: Who knows! We are talking hot. She could pop the fig leaf of a Greek statue just reading her shopping list]

[D: which supermarket? Safeway’s or Albertson’s?]

[Ed: Not the list, Dufus, the language, Spanish! – el idioma del amor]

.
.
THIS IS WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND .......

WHY ARE ..... SO MANY MEN .... willing to PAY $200 / $300 / $500 AND EVEN more UP TP $1000 / $2000. IT is just NO WAY any SEX is worth that price, and worst of all you are only getting a few hours of sex at BEST. As BEAUTIFUL as some of these women are .... it is still just SEX .... AS GOOD AS IT "FEELS" it is still just SEX.

....... SOME of the men who pay this price are BIG BALLER & SHOT CALLER .... but even they should know better. The some man who will NOT pay his employees a cent more, and would rather close his business than pay his employees .... will pay a HOOKER $500-$2000 per/ NIGHT. He will even short cut a project to save money .... WILL BIG SPEND ON A HOOKER.

....... LOOK at the Bunny Ranches in Nevada .... the two times I was there going to a Bunny Ranch was out of the question. I have a very good job, but I refuse to PAY ... those kind of prices for SEX.

....... HELL ..... Most men would DIVORCE their wives, if they had to pay them those kind of prices for SEX.

....... I DO THINK ANYONE SHOULD PAY MORE THAN $100 FOR "SEX" FROM ANY WOMAN HERE IN AMERICA, AND WORLDWIDE.

.... IF you are paying more they should be staying for hourS (that is more than just 1-2 hours). Top pay should be $50-75 for an hour, and you should be paying for the time, NOT per NUT.

....... I have turned down some REAL FOXES because they wanted TOO much. As I saw them on a slow night, they gave in and I got all I wanted far less.


.... FAR TOO MANY MEN especially Foreigners gave in and pay CRAZY prices for SEX ... whether good or bad.

.......CUT THIS PRACTICE SHORT .... REMEMBER YOU ARE THE ONE PAYING ... they are NOT paying you. Good service is rewarded with a TIP, NOT BAD.

>>>>> and STOP gaving up the money first .... IF YOU MUST GAVE ANY MONEY GAVE A 1/4-1/3 not HALF or FULL .... EVEN IF YOU KNOW THE WOMAN.

>>>> LASTLY ..... DON'T take your SW into nice neighborhoods. you are making the neighbors MAD and they are calling the cops. Keep your business in the business area of the SW.
Doing this will stop these sudden untimely crack down's.
.... YOU GET MY DRIFT ???????


>>>> PAYLESS ... GET MORE .... IT IS "YOUR MONEY."




....... ((((((( WORD ))))))) .......

The vein in my forehead is about to pop because I am plain frustrated. I find that here in America, my romantic life is the pits. Maybe its the city I live in thats too impersonal. I find dating is too slam bam thank you maam where I am. I met a woman in Europe who just showed me another world, the sweetness and kindness she showed to me a stanger was unbelievable, her inner beauty had highlighted her outer beauty, I would never find a lady like that where I live, NEVER! The thing is, she wants to remain in Europe. I am really willing to sacrifice what I have to be with her. After years of heartbreak I found someone. So I am in total agony now that I know this women is an ocean away and I just have to be with her, but I get pressure from friends and family to stay here in the states.

CBGB -- New York [b]is[/b] another world for dating, that's true. But sounds like you should stop thinking and just go, especially if your posts here are any indication of how your frustration is affecting the rest of your life. You'll make new friends and family will always be family, no matter where you are. Grab being happy wherever and whenever you can -- nobody gets enough chances.

Yo fatass, they just arrested a person ALLEGEDLY (innocent until proven guilty in the US; no Napoleonic code here in at least 49 of the 50 states) responsible for one of the Arizona fires and the suspect is male. Hope that doesn't rock your world too bad.

The vast majority of arsonists are male. Arsonists are frequently bedwetters, although that does not imply the converse. Deal with it.

Wow...I leave town for a couple of days and look at how this discussion has grown. It's almost as if everybody was waiting for me to leave...

Well, there are many new posts, but all have the same message: "Boo Hoo, nobody loves me and it's all THEIR fault!!!" We all need to grow up a bit and realize that WE are ultimately responsible for the way people perceive and/or treat us. If every morning, a different person kicks you in the crotch on your way to work, then it must be something that YOU are doing that brings about such a response. The whole "I am the center of the universe" thought process leads to a pathetic, sad life.

As men, would you want a woman who has let every little negative experience in her life cloud her way of thinking? Would you want a woman who always finds that cloud in the silver lining? Would you want a woman who has a one track mind and refuses to be budged from her self-centeredness? Would you want a woman who carries grudges to the extreme? NO? Well, if you don't want a woman like that, why would a woman want a man like that?

US Babe touched on this in an earlier post (and I did as well). The glory of being in a new place clouds your perceptions. Most Americans, when on vacation, visit the more touristy, up-scale areas and these places are generally filled with the "beautiful people". I am an ex-patriate myself. When I first came to live in Mexico, I was in paradise. I felt like Hugh Hefner. But soon reality sinks into your day to day life and whatever good or bad habits you have eventually return, just in a new setting. There is no plane trip long enough to get away from yourself.

Like I said earlier, I've never had problems with American women. I'm neither wealthy nor handsome . I've been without a car for most of my life and I live a very simple existence despite a fair share of up-scale jobs. Yet I've always found good women. How can this be? Am I the only one here who is lucky enough to find the "good ones?" There is nothing spectacular about me. Can it be that maybe women aren't generally as evil as you all say? Maybe American women are more difficult to deal with for some men because American women, unlike many foreign women, aren't ashamed to ask for what they want. Sure, many women's expectations aren't realistic, but are ours? Personally, I like a woman who is my equal and acts accordingly.

CBGB...man, you crossed the line between debate and just plain insanity. I believe the story about your "lady" in Europe, but I also believe in the Loch Ness Monster. Then again, most women ARE attracted to really inappropriate bursts of rage.

Sin...most women don't keep posting on boards like this because sooner or later they will get hit on by a desperate male who confuses common courtesy with flirtation.

FedUp...Glad that you don't still thiink that I'm an ass. Although, that may change pretty soon. The last time you were posting, you were sounding as self-pitying as most of these guys. Of course, YOU snapped out of it.

Nofatso...If you could only be as polite here as you are in e-mail. But we love you anyway, much like we all loved Archie Bunker despite his being wrong all of the time. By the way, did you tell your friend about what I said?

US Babe...Don't go away. We need a voice of reason to break up this pity party now and again.

Well, gotta run...

From: THE HAPPIEST MAN ALIVE

miller2k, I WAS gonna believe that you WERE truly the happiest man alive, but as I suspected from a long while back, you seem just Pollyanna to me. Your constant label as such after your posts made me suspect. You remind me of an ostrich. Each of us IS the center of our own universe and we need to look after ourselves and needs to a point, but not so much that we totally disregard those of others. Did I let negative experiences cloud my perceptions? Sure. Am I gonna ignore them and act like they don't exist, like you seem to do? No. My negative experiences (and recent acceptance of USBabe's logic) are a learning experience that act as a rudder. My behavior in the past may have seemed desperate, but from things I've learned recently BEFORE I began posting to this board, THAT will never happen again. Lay off the Millers...

I',m the HAP-PI-EST MAN ALIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE.... yeah, the check's in the mail, I love you, and I won't cum in yer mouth. Get real you bonehead. Is there a REASON you live in a country where there are not as many American women as there would be North of the border? [awaits the vilification from the HAP-PI-EST MAN ALIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE, since I've kicked him in the balls!]

miller2k, i wasn't a tourist while in Europe, I was living and working there, and I found a substantial difference in the attitude in people while working there, people tend to think in terms of the group, not thinking in terms of the individual, thats why socialism is so strong over there. You sound like a guy from a small town so you probably wouldn't know any better. Dating in a big jungle like the city, is not easy. The dating scene where I live is very superficial at best. From what I experience in Europe, women often approach me without any reservation, they tend to like softness in a guy, which I am a soft guy. And another thing, the attitude towards people of the other races is in general terms more tolerant. You see more interracial dating, and it isn't frowned at the way it is in America. I have been in quite a few relationships and they have simply broken because we were of two different ethnic backgrounds. If you deny this, I'm sorry you must be living on Mars or something, but attitudes towards interracial romance in America are much more restrained than they are in Europe.

Oh yeah, you say most tourists stay in the areas with the 'beautiful people', I happened to stay in more or less normal areas of the cities I visited. When in Paris I stayed in an area to the North of the city. Guess what?? There were plenty of hot women in this working class section of Paris. In Amsterdam, I was on the south side of town, guess what?? There were many beautiful women there, most of them locals. In Germany I stayed in suburbs of Frankfurt and Cologne, and I saw many beautiful women in normal mundane locations, not just bars and nightclubs with 50 dollar cover charges like in the States. And another thing if I would compare the looks of the people in the "beautiful people" locales in the USA such as NYC, LA, Miami, and so forth to those in Europe, such as Paris, Amsterdam, Cannes, and so forth, Europe's locales win over their glam counterparts in the States.

Miller2K, you mentioned also that you lived in Mexico and felt like Hugh Hefner over there, so obviously you went there to find women. And to feel like Hugh, meant that you felt succesful with women over there. Also reading between the lines by that statement you had more luck in Mexico than in the States and that the women there made you feel good. So by you criticizing me for preferring and rating European women as better and myself having better experiences over there, you're just a hypocrite.

CBGB, yer message is one I already knew, but it was refreshing to hear confirmation of what I already knew for ages. Your breath is wasted on that Pabst Blue Ribbon-drinking, pork rind-eating miller2k. He thinks that if there are LEGIONS of many like minded individuals who make basically the same statement, then THEY must all be wrong. I'd give him a dollar to buy a clue, but he'd think it was a pouch of magic beans. Oh yeah, miller2k. If you had ANY awareness about you whatsoever (I'm already disappointed, because there IS none) you'd have noticed how USBabe stealthily came around the back door into my now extinct metaphorical fortress, and calmly took it apart brick by brick until I was admittedly standing amongst a pile of rubble in my skivvies. I gotta hand it to her for her logic. You, however, play the brickheaded moron and continue to attempt to scale the castle walls with a frontal assault. Too bad there aren't more like USBabe out there.

I'm curious what bars you guys are going to and not finding hot women. Drop by any niteclub in Toronto, New York or Tampa and there are young, sexy, sweaty girls everywhere (with a few hounds thrown in of course). Just realise that they aren't going to talk to anyone more than 3 years older than themselves... unlike other countries where older men are seen as desirable. What I have noticed is a major lack of hot ladies over the age of 30 in clubs. Where do they all go?... or are there none left?

CBGB... Get out of New York. I thought Toronto was a hard city to find a date in... until I visited New York a few times. Everybody there thinks they're hot shit... even the losers. I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy done than live in New York. If you like this gal in Europe so much then go live with her for a while... fuck what family says. Are you expecting to hook up with her again in your second life? You're obviously miserable... go do something about it.

Miller said...

"As men, would you want a woman who has let every little negative experience in her life cloud her way of thinking? Would you want a woman who always finds that cloud in the silver lining? Would you want a woman who has a one track mind and refuses to be budged from her self-centeredness? Would you want a woman who carries grudges to the extreme? NO? Well, if you don't want a woman like that, why would a woman want a man like that?"

... Nope, the problem is that just as many american women act this way too, not just the guys. I'm reminded of a song by Pam Tillis called "All the Good Ones are Gone".

The more I think/debate about this, the more I discover that it's not american women I have a problem with. I will always have to sift through lumps of coal to find the diamond. It's the excessive bullshit involved in revealing the diamond that turns me off.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fedup
[i]. I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy done than live in New York. [/i][/QUOTE]
I'd rather have a free bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy :)

sinanjumaster, i don't question your motives for asking for my e-mail address, but kindly remember that you are asking for something which you aren't willing to give publicly yourself, either. with an abusive and hate-filled person like cgbg here, i would be a fool to give him any more information about myself. i understand that we all get angry, but when someone uses vitriolic language and behavior towards a person for absolutely no reason, he clearly has internal problems and needs to learn to control and manage his anger. none of my friends would put up with that garbage. it's amazing that a man would treat a woman like that and then wonder "why" women aren't attracted to him. we reap what we sow.

miller, i don't doubt your words a bit. the person who is able to look beyond himself is a happy, successful person. we're all self-centered to a certain degree, and of course it's good to want to protect ourselves, but completely self-centered persons rob themselves of the joy and true inner satisfaction that comes from true selflessness. personally, i am attracted to people who don't blame all their problems on others and who have enough self-respect to not accept bad behavior from others, either in personal or professional relationships. the men i know who have more women than they know what to do with are the ones who know how to treat a woman with respect while not allowing her to step all over them, either. it's very easy to wallow in self-pity. i've certainly done it, and it has gotten me nowhere. there are many, many american men who are [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord127][CodeWord127][/url], murderers, abusers (the vast majority of people on death row are men), and total sobs. but i can never fathom blaming an entire nation on the crimes and boorish behavior of a few! it's oh-so-easy to blame everything on the other person but much, much harder to look within ourselves to find out why we're being treated a certain way or why something isn't working.

it's also true that we see what we want to see. militant feminists blame men on everything and are essentially just waiting for a man to make a mistake so they can blame him and say, "see, men are all evil." quite frankly, i see an amazing number of similarities between militant feminists and many of the views here. i see the blame completely on women with men just being victims. there are many ways to protect ourselves without being completely vulnerable, and those who can do it well usually have very few complaints.

someone once described insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. if one approach is not working in life, i usually try another until i find what works. there are the doers in life, and there are the whiners. personally, i choose to spend my time with the doers. the good news is that anyone can be a doer! the optimistic viewpoint can be adopted by anyone of any sex, race, religion, and all that.

think about men you know who seem to have no problems with women at all. what do they do differently or how do they act differently than you do? i am very blessed to know some exceptional people in my life, and when i have problem with something, i wonder how they would handle the situation.

here's a secret. want to be known as an extremely interesting person? listen to other people and ask questions about what they've said to show them you have an interest in them or their activities. even though you've given almost no information about yourself, you'll be a person that others will go out of their way to want to know.

FedUp as soon as I get my Work Visa for Europe, I will finally leave the Rotten Apple. By the way, you mentioned there being a lot of hot women at nightclubs in NY. I hang out in Soho and Greenwich Village(in fact I was there last night) which is about as trendy and glamorous as you can get, I would rank no more than one in ten women a 7 or better. If you go clubbing in France or in Spain, especially around the Riviera, the percentage of hot women is more like 75 percent, enough so you have a chance of meeting someone. USBabe to each his own, I couldn't care to know more about you nor will I ever want to. But I will keep saying that a European woman will always top her American counterpart in every situation until I am blue in the face because it is true, contrary to the gross exaggerations of the media and Hollywood. I spent an extended amount of time over there to get a feel of what the place was like and it is a whole different world. A better world in fact. There's a saying that the truth shall set you free. And the truth that I discovered has set me free. You said I am an abusive and hate filled person, you don't know one goddam thing about me. Everyone has a good and bad side to them.

There is a big difference between truth and opinion, and unfortunately many seem to think that their own opinions are truth. I'd like to be self-centered enough to think that all my opinions are truth! But I know that it isn't so.

It is my opinion (and not truth) that your failure with women has to do far more with a closed mind than anything. You are judging millions and millions of American women by the actions of a few. You could be a victim of your own circumstance. I don't know many intelligent, educated women who prefer the company of a man who is not open-minded. Unfortunately, if your opinions here are indicative of what you truly believe, then you are sincerely prejudiced and close-minded. That, more than anything else, is a turn-off to any woman who is worth knowing.

Quite frankly, if you insist on making pre-judgements on any woman because she's American, then you can't complain about women who rally against all American men because of the actions of a few. Do you want to prove all the man-haters in the world right?! Unfortunately, you're playing right into their hands, whether or not you realize it.

I'm sincerely sorry about the rotten things that have happened in your life, but you seem to be creating your own circumstance by victimizing yourself. How about taking a fresh approach and rising to the occasion?! It can be done. But ONLY if you want it.

Negative thinking will almost always bring negative results.

As an European leaving in the US I would like to give my contribution to this discussion.

I have a "Love & Hate" relationship with this country.
Love si the fantastic opportunities you get, the true recognition of your achievements, the feeling you can really climb up in the social ladder.
Hate is the boring uniformity, the false cordiality, the shallow relationships, the conservative image.

In a few words I reckon there are many advantages living in the US for what relates to your professional life, many disadvantages, I guess, for what relates to your personal life.

So talking about American women I rarely found persons interested in really knowing the "other". Where other is somebody with different background, different culture and interests. Of course there are exceptions to this but in general terms I always perceive an initial interest (due probably to the exotic factor of knowing a foreigner) followed by a progressive "who-could care-less" attitude.

In this respect I think women just reflect the attitude of the American people. There is a generalized fear for whatever doesn't conform to familiar standards.
Do you guys notice that all cities here look the same? Same restaurants, same hotels, same shops all over the country. Isn't this boring? Isn't this the ultimate expression of a flattened culture?

You can call American women liberal if they are gonna give it you the first night out (and much more if they'll refuse it to you on the second) but isn't it by far more conservative that sense of superiority given by the ignorance of what exists outside of them?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur
[i]You said I am an abusive and hate filled person, you don't know one goddam thing about me. Everyone has a good and bad side to them. [/i][/QUOTE]

That may be so, but calling a total stranger a b*itch, telling her fuck you, enjoy your vibrator, and that it would be more entertaining to have sex with a vampire, isn't exactly presenting the good side.

It's a two way street -- you've certainly been quick enough to make a judgement based, frankly, on far more reasonably-toned posts than yours. I understand frustration, but a straight-forward personal attack coming from, as far as I've been able to figure out, a casual, "Oh, you might have seen me in Paris" is, at best, pretty poor discussion protocol.

Stranger99 -- I think you're dead on. Most Americans are essentially xenophobic. They're not particularly hostile to other people and cultures, just uninterested beyond the degree where it directly affects them personally. Not all -- I know plenty of folks who don't fit in that box -- but the majority basically treats the rest of the world as a show on television.

Stranger99:
"In a few words I reckon there are many advantages living in the US for what relates to your professional life, many disadvantages, I guess, for what relates to your personal life. "
You are so correct on this issue Stranger99, I have friends from Europe who say the same thing, as far as professional and economic opportunities go, America is great but insofar as personal relations such as love and romance, America is not so good. I have a friend from France who sums it this way he says
"America is a good place to work but France is a good place to live."

Sin...did I touch a nerve? Sorry. I'm not like an ostrich. It's just that I don't let my negative experiences control me. There are many assholes in the world (male and female), but I refuse to let them affect me. Why would you give someone so much control over you? If someone screws me over, I just let it go...I learn from my mistakes and chalk up the bad experience to the lack of character of the other person. What you do is symptomatic of someone with low self-esteem. You let negative experiences re-enforce your own negative feelings about yourself. By all means, continue...I am happy because I choose to be happy, you are a twisted, negative, lonely twerp because you choose to be that way. You are what you think.

CBGB...Is Chicago a small town? How about San Francisco? I was in the big city dating jungle just like you. And I went to Mexico to live a simple, non-materialistic life, not for the women. Of course, I love women of all races and nationalities so I'm having fun. Keep up this erratic behavior and travelling to Europe won't be sufficient anymore, you'll need to hop on the Space Shuttle and head out to the Moon.

Fedup...This is all definitely a two way street. There are just as many bad women as bad men and both sexes are equally responsible. But I basically write here to contradict the people who want to cry and moan about how ALL American women are like this, etc.

and assuming that you're all right and American women are indeed more selfish than other women...could this be because the USA has so many men who refuse to look past themselves and aknowledge that anybody else has desires. Could this selfishness among American men be the cause of any perceived selfishness in women? If men can't/won't satisfy their women then is it wrong for them to look after themselves?

Well, out of respect for Sin's little problems, I won't close by saying that I'm the HAPPIEST MAN ALIVE...I'll just say good bye as I sit here on my balcony, over-looking the mountains with sunshine everywhere and a gentle breeze on my forehead. It's about 80 degrees now and in a bit I'll be working and then I'll go for a moon-lit stroll with a song in my heart and a bounce in my step. Life is wonderful, you should try it sometime...

Perhaps this topic should be entitled "American Sexuality", or even "The Dating/Screwing Scene in the USA", just to make the distinction that the prevelant complaint is about how hard it is to find someone to be with, sexually and otherwise, in our present culture. I believe this is a complaint that US men and women share. It just so happens that all the complainers in here are men (well, it is a website about how to find prostitutes, so I guess that figures...US Babe, how the hell did you find us? ;-)

miller2k, don't flatter yourself. You didn't touch a nerve, you merely exasparate me. JUST when I thought that you had an understanding you go and fuck it up. You don't surprise me though. I DID allow past experiences (and the people involved) to "control" me, but the ongoing self-reflection I've been doing changed that. I'll STILL keep on my toes and weed out the lumps of coal, which are many, but on the other side of the coin, I'll lighten up and not keep up my shields 24/7. Low self-esteem? Nope. I KNOW what the hell I have to offer and you can bet yer ass it's worth its weight in Platinum.

USBabe, I can understand your reluctance to provide yer e-mail address, so, I'll do the honors from my end FIRST. Starlit1003sky@yahoo.com. Should you choose to send a response, a recap of the postings (yours and mine) will be forthcoming and an explanation of current things will be provided. Perhaps, you may be a bit surprised, maybe not.

CBGB, toss caution to the wind and GO FOR IT! When you look back on your life, if you have any regrets, regret the things you DID, instead of the things you never had the courage to do.

nofatso, I like your postings and I don't care WHAT the others say. If a man has an opinion, he shouldn't waffle on it unless he is proven utterly wrong.

I've tarried on this board for too long now. My purpose has been served and I actually got my point across to a lot of intelligent people (well save for one) who saw my point although they may not have wholeheartedly agreed 100% with my assessment.

So, USBabe, nofatso, Dickhead and CBGB, take care all, and I hope to bring to fruition my travel plans so I can share some stories.

PS
miller2k, you may even get YOUR wishes granted.... after all, Dorothy, the Tin Man, and the Cowardly Lion got THEIRS!

Hi Guys,

Could we keep the content of this area to "American Women" per se??? Some of you beyond macho characters are getting carried away and are way off the intended topic.

It's time to stop "banging" your dicks on your laptops everytime someone says something which offends your beyond macho male egos.

USBabe,
I was the only woman posting in this section for a long time on the old forum, (and I'm not even an American woman! LOL), and found after a while that being the only female voice in a topic like this can leave you open to some guys dumping ALL of their frustrations and anger towards women directly at YOUR doorstep. I wanted to say that I think you are doing a fantastic job holding your own in this debate. I was hoping for a long time that an American woman would actually join this thread, mainly because whenever I said something, people tended to think "Well yes, but you are Australian...women are different here". I don't think they are. You can ask any Australian male what he thinks of Australian women, and you will get the exact same responses as are given in this forum.

Men and women simply don't understand each other, and in many cases I think they don't even want to! I think often the differences between the sexes...which I don't personally believe amounts to much at all mind you...are blamed, rather than accepting that relationships fail because of our own mistakes and flaws. Finding that I was not compatible with one man, or even a succession of different men, does not mean that "all men are bastards". It means that I have yet to find the man that has all the qualities that I am looking for. Does that make me fussy? Probably. But does that mean I automatically despise every man out there who doesn't conform to my "standards"? Of course not.

I have mentioned many times (mainly in the Morality section), that my time as a sex worker gave me insights into the male psyche that changed my perceptions of men forever. The indepth conversations and the raw "expressions of self" that come from men in a commercial sex setting...aided by the anonymity...showed me that men suffer from the same insecurities, fears and desires as women do. They asked me questions about my feelings and insecurities as a woman, and showed genuine interest in the responses. Why can't that happen in the "real world". Why is it that when strangers handed me money, they were more open and honest than any prospective boyfriends were? We are all (both men and women) playing too many mind games in relationships...both trying to remain in control and both guarding against getting hurt. I think we would all benefit greatly from open conversations with each other about who we are and what we want from a relationship. Sounds corny I know...but how are we supposed to measure up to each others standards, when we have no idea what those standards are?

For example, the woman who won't "put out" on the first date. You may be thinking that she is a frigid cow or that she isn't attracted to you...but she may actually be very interested in a relationship with you, and trying not to give the impression that she is a sl*t! If you want sex with no commitment, tell her. She may be perfectly happy to do it on the first date if she knows that's what you want. If you want a relationship...tell her what that means to you. She can't read your mind.

USBabe...welcome to the WSG. I have agreed with everything you have said so far, in fact you seem to be a very similar woman to myself (and don't take that as an insult, seeing as I said I used to be a sex worker! LOL). Keep up the good work honey...the American woman needs you! :)

PS..Miller2k,
As always, everything you have said so far has brought a smile to my face. You have always been one of the most intelligent, compassionate and understanding men who post in this forum, and from your attitude it is easy to see why you are THE HAPPIEST MAN ALIVE. More power to you honey...the world (or should I say, the female population) needs more men like you.

Ok, you can all flame me and call me a rabid feminazi now... lol

I believe that all the women (and all the men) around the world have a common pattern.
American women for the majority of their qualities (and defects) are no different than any other woman in the rest of the western-culture globe.

Having said this, I think the purpose of this entire forum is the discussion on what makes them different (better or worse).

I am not trying to make an easy point saying that girls in the US as an average weigh 40 lb more than their European counterparts.
I am talking about class. This is what a man really likes in a woman. More than beauty. And this is what, I feel, women here lack. I am not talking about Armani clothing. I am talking about a natural self-consciousness that makes a woman leader, and not a follower in a relationship.

RN: We all tend to idealize "the perfect counterpart" that is going to live the rest of our life happily with us. Eventually life and love are a compromise between the idea of what is perfect and what is available out there. A relationship is a mutual acceptance of the way we are.

M2K: I admire you (as I had opportunities to read some of your other posts in the WSG) for the choices you made in your life. Of course it is also easier to live a non-materialistic life in Mexico than it would be to do the same in the US. Bottom line is that it's easier to live like a Mexican in Mexico than like a Mexican in the US. That would be an accomplishment.

Dear RN, what a very sweet welcome you gave me! Thank you! I haven't read any other forums here, so I hope you'll forgive me when I did a double-take upon reading that you're a sex worker. This is a very personal question, and if you feel comfortable answering, I'd really appreciate it (and if you don't, I understand and hope that you aren't offended). How did you become a sex worker? I mean, was it a conscious choice or the best of your options at that time? In no way am I trying to insult you, but the concept is completely foreign to me.

You said, "Why can't that happen in the "real world". Why is it that when strangers handed me money, they were more open and honest than any prospective boyfriends were?"

Here's just a guess. In a romantic relationship, feelings are vulnerable. In a "business" sexual relationship, it is different. What did they have to lose by opening up to you? Things are much more cut and dry. You may or may not see the person again. He knows that you are with other people, so the idea of "cheating" really doesn't apply. That type of situation is just very clear, whereas in love, usually nothing is clear!

I wanted to share an article that I think is absolutely brilliant. It's entitled "How to Argue," by Michael Crichton and first appeared in "Playboy magazine" in 1991. Too often when you argue (especially with a woman), a guy can come off as either wimpy or a complete jerk. This tells you how to WIN and keep your dignity and self-respect unharmed. It's a little bit long, but I think every word is worth reading.

http://www.crichton.org/howtoargue2.shtml

USBabe, you mention the term sex worker as if its a horrible connotation, or a low class person's occupation. In Europe, its a natural thing, by the way, there are just as many male prostitutes in Europe as there are female. Its just only in the United States where prostitution, in the view of the Christian right is considered morally repugnant, and on the other hand, the feminist left in the US feels thats its an exploitation of women. One of the things I noticed about prostitution in Europe is that more affluent and educated women take part in it. Why is this so? Because for one thing, sex is not evil, watch a television program or look at an advertisement, the European mass media is more sexually provacative than its American counterpart. American advertising and media focuses on being "warm and fuzzy" or humorous whereas European advertising is more sexual.
I found this to be true in South America as well. The second thing is legality, its perfectly legal to engage in this activity and there is no real legal stigma attached to it. Third is the issue of money, part time jobs are more rare in Europe than they are in the US, and therefore prostitution is a source of part time income. Most women in Europe work in this profession as a part time occupation. In fact a woman I met while in Paris, was a medical student, who happened to moonlight as an escort.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur
[i]USBabe, you mention the term sex worker as if its a horrible connotation, or a low class person's occupation.[/i][/QUOTE]

What words did I use to give you that impression? I used the word "sex worker" because that's what RN used.

I don't recall making any judgmental statements about RN at all. I'm completely unfamiliar with the subject, hence my questions.

"The indepth conversations and the raw "expressions of self"that come from men in a commercial sex setting...aided by the anonymity...Why is it that when strangers handed me money, they were more open and honest than any prospective boyfriends were? We are all (both men and women) playing too many mind games in relationships..."

AMEN, RN!!!! Men often feel more comfortable with "professional" women because there is a very simple, money for affection, exchange. Many men, even in this day and age, still have a problem with the complexities of a relationship.Many men want what they want and often have little regard as to how they get it
or who they have to hurt to get what they want. Blame part of this on culture and how we were raised. Men are taught to be goal oriented and we perceive everything as a win/lose situation. We want to get laid, so we engage in a head game to get what we want. Of course, many women play the same game, but with
a different objective. Some men (well-represented by many who post in this section) are emotional cripples, borderline socio-paths. They are buried in negativity and long ago lost the spark of life that seperates men from cavemen. These men would be paralyzed by the prospect of opening up their hearts and
letting the world see what they are made of (and, in many cases, they would be well within reason to be afraid). So they go through life pissing and moaning about how the world has let them down. Meanwhile, they grow darker and darker
inside. So dark that they lose any semblance of normal emotional stability. But if they go to a sex-worker, the deal is simple: Money for physical affection. They are so relieved at the simplicity of the transaction that they let their guard down and open up. Why? This is all based on the fact that this type of man has low self-esteem and would feel less humiliated by looking foolish in front of a stranger than a person they know. If they only realized that this intimacy is the secret to being succesful in relationships... Men that can master the skill of being honest have the most success...If you're an emotional cripple, admit it and you
soon won't be...

by the way, thanks for the kind words RN...I've secretly enjoyed your posts for along time as a lurker in other sections...


Bye Bye, Sin...

"I've tarried on this board for too long now. My purpose has been served"

Sin...if that purpose was to come off as a complete *******...BRAVO, Well Done...I can appreciate a man who sets realistic goals for himself and meets them....

So long, US Babe...good to see that the whackos in here didn't scare you off.

Now, now, Miller2k, that's a pretty broad brush you're painting with! While I agree with a lot of what you've said both here and elsewhere, portraying large portions of guys who use and open up to sex workers as emotional cripples is a bit much. Let's face it -- it's easier to open up to strangers in general, because there's a basic level of safe anonymity there. That's true whether it happens in this scenario, or whether it's my mother telling her emotional life story to a stranger on a bus or plane, or a customer pouring out their heart to a shoe salesperson. It's the very distance that adds a degree of safety.

I agree with you that honest expression of emotion is the key to a successful relationship, but I don't agree that emotive confessions to strangers, whether it be after the throes of business-based sexual activity or not, is in any way an indication of emotional capability or stability. (And in real life, it takes two to make that honesty process work well, also.)

Here's two other theories in response to RN's query that can be tried on for size:

1. After and around the process of sexual activity, which is an expression of physical intimacy, extending the equation to emotional intimacy isn't a large stretch, especially since at that point we've all got lots of endorphines running though our systems and are thereby literally often feeling no pain. Combine that with the safety of the stranger, as mentioned above, and plenty of people will be willing to open up, if only as a way of extending the moment as the physical afterglow fades...

2. The sex worker, regardless of all the other potentially negative perceptions that might float around, is definitely viewed as a professional in the field of intimate relations, and thereby given credence as one who might provide insight. When I go to a physician, I can only get the best treatment if I reveal everything of relevance. The same equation may well also be at work here.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree with your take on things; it just seems to me to be a rather universally negative rendering. Admittedly, some threads of conversation here can make one think that lots of those involved are mysoginistic rage-a-holics, but I think that's as big a mistake as the one-size-fits-all surface that often comes through about women in these posts. The truth is almost invariably more complex.

CBGB...It is not 100% accurate to say that in Europe prostitutes do not live at the margin of the society. They are, especially the ones on the street. The medicine student you are mentioning might exist but it is not representative of the large majority of prostitutes.
I agree with you on the sex-reference used in the media here vs. Europe. I believe both situations are, in reality, 2 extremes. Here there is a false puritanism, in Europe sex is used to the excess where a naked woman is put in a commercial advertising cheese.
In real life, here you risk a law suit if you make a compliment to a co-worker, in Europe (or South America) you can easily find situations where the boss asks his secretary to wear a mini-skirt at work.
Probably the right balance is represented by a few countries. The Scandinavian countries or Holland are the ones that come to my mind.

Answering to the previous posts: are you sure you can easily categorize people visiting prostitutes? I think that behind the same actions there are many different reasons and backgrounds. Not sure that they are all looking for the same thing. Actually maybe sex is not the prime reason for a vast majority.

Maybe an interesting discussion could be generated by an honest admission by us. I think most of has have or had been with prostitutes. What led or is leading us to do that?

For RN: while working did you ever think of one of your clients as a potential partner for your life. I know it is kind of a "Pretty Woman" situation but I am just curious to know if you had ever thought of imagining some of you private life coming out of your professional one.

Stranger99, I'm not too sure which workplace you were refering to where someone can be sued, did you mean the USA or did you mean Europe? Definitely in America, if a male worker gives any reference to a woman's physical appearance or sexuality, he can expect to lose his job or be sued, or both. I don't know about bosses in Europe asking such things of their female colleagues while I was working there. There is a strong feminist movement in Europe, however European feminists differ from their American counterparts in that they still enjoy men. That medical student wasn't the only case, there are many women who are pursuing education who work in this profession. In addition its not too uncommon to find men who offer sexual services, though in most cases these men offer their services to other men (homosexuals), in very few cases they are offered to heterosexual women. Case in point is Amsterdam, where 95 percent of services are offered to heterosexual and homosexual men.

I also agree with you Stranger99, that prostitution isn't exactly a high level profession but in most European countries it doesn't relegate the prostitute to the fringe of society. There are many people who do it for a while when they are young but it doesn

USBabe, I just thought reading between the lines when you mention 'sex worker' that it was something bizarre to you thats why I thought it to be a derogatory term.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by stranger99 [i] I think most of has have or had been with prostitutes. What led or is leading us to do that? [/i][/QUOTE]

Well, I've been with prostitutes (of course), and what led ME to do that is I needed some pussy and either wasn't dating anyone right then or was in a foreign country where I didn't know anyone, and didn't feel like performing the delicate emotional surgery necessary to pick up a non-prostitute and cajole her into the sack. Pretty simple.

But I bet some other guys have gone to prostitutes to get some specific service they couldn't get "at home." Since I'm a complete dickhead, I don't even bother getting into a relationship with a gal who won't give me BOTH of the only two services I absolutely require, which are fuck and suck. Pretty basic.

RN (and Miller2K):

As to men sharing intimite stuff with sex workers. I think the reason is twofold. Firstly, there is the ... airplane effect (I don't know what else to call it). Two strangers on an airplane (or bus or whatever) meet and share their intimate details of their lives, and then go their own ways. It is safe to do because they know it won't ... leak into the rest of thier lives (which can't be said about disclosure to anyone you relate with regularly).

As to people being more direct and saying what they want in relationships. Hm. I know what I'm going to say doesn't *directly* address your comment, but it seems appropriate none the less.

I think the games we play in relationships have a useful purpose. To take the example you meantioned (about the woman not wanting to be seen the slutt) ... I suspect that with most women in that situation, they would much prefer that it happened "naturally", and that words to that effect are not exchanged.

In another sense, let us assume an aquaintance approached you and said he *really* liked you, found you magnetic, and would dearly like to enter a long-term relationship with you. He is definitely being up-front and honest. However he short-circuits some of the more "normal" dating rituals which serve a purpose. I suspect that, while you would feel flattered, you also wouldn't feel as comfortable as you would if he had invited you to go to some musical event.

His forthrightness puts the burden on you to respond when (in all likelyhood) you don't feel similarly. While this probably works fine with more centered women (who might suggest a musical event...), with many women I suspect his approach would fail miserably.

Just my thoughts.

Smiles, best wishes, and it's been a long times,
David

I'm one of the few who hasn't been with a prostitute.


Stranger99,

"A relationship is a mutual acceptance of the way we are." -- an ... interesting, and in many ways, beautiful thought.


USbabe,

I'll throw in a welcome (even an offical one if you like). I have to admitt that I don't remember if I have of yet. But yes, it is very nice to have a bit more parity in the discussion.


Miller2K,

I'll chime in. (Also, let me note, that I am almost envious that your THE HAPPIEST MAN ALIVE -- *smiles* such positivity.).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by David
[i]I'm one of the few who hasn't been with a prostitute.
[/i][/QUOTE]

Then what is your purpose for hanging around on the board? The board is for guys who want to know how, where, and when to find prostitutes, wherever they may be in the world. It ain't a fuckin' tea party for vicarious thrill seekers.

Please go to the home page and read this:

"MISSION STATEMENT: This is the World Sex Guide. Our mission is simple: Finding women and getting laid. If you are offended by stuff like this, I don't care. "

I think David is simply in denial, this site is strictly to exchange info on how to get laid, its made for men simply put to get laid.

Yes, we want useful information from people who have actually been with hookers in different places. I have posted actual, hopefully useful information about Méjico, Costa Rica, The Netherlands, Hong Kong, Australia, France, Malta, The Bahamas, several of the United States and a bunch of other places I disremember right now. Locations, prices, local practices, etc. This is what we men want to know. Does she do the poison dragon drill? Is she good at reverse cowgirl? Does she look good in a pearl necklace? What's the address? What hours are they open? How is security? Is the room clean? Does the gal provide the condoms or is it BYOB (bring your own bag)?

All these philosophical discussions are well and good but if the input is coming from a bunch of fucking sorority girls or naive frat boys with Coppertone tans who wouldn't know a hooker from a kick in the ass, what relevance does it have?

I mean, if we wanted perspectives on "American Women" from people who did NOT participate in prostitution, we could just sit in any Starbucks and listen to a bunch of scum sucking yuppies ***** about their wives while they finger their dicks through a hole in their pocket.

Someone has needed to say this for a long time and I am just the dickhead to say it. Monger and contribute or sit your quiche eating ass on the porch.

joe_zop, David...

You both are right. Maybe I did paint with too broad a brush. I should've made it clear what I meant to say. I was refering primarily to the group of men on this board who have made it a habit of whining about the horrible women in American when they are unwilling/unable to do the work to make themselves better people.
"The Airplane Effect" is a strong factor, but I think that there's more. Not to get too psycho-analytical, but I think that the relaxed state comes from the attainment of their primary goal (sex) combined with the "airplane effect". However, to the person with emotional problems, this release is many more times more extreme. The completion of the "act" represents acceptance (even for that brief moment) and, therefore, release. (Aside from the obvious physiological release). For the vast majority: We feel good, off-guard, and happy...so, we are more willing to open up. For the few with psychological/emotional problems it is an extreme rush that can be very addictive. This is off-topic, I know, but I think that there are a couple of these "emotional cripples" in this section of the board.
Changing topics...I have used prostitutes to meet a physiological need (sex). I've been living a gypsy-like existence for the last couple of years and, while I don't have many problems finding women, I think that it would be unfair to initiate relationships with women just to have sex when I knew that I really didn't want to be in a relationship at that moment. Instead of seducing women and making them think that I love them, I simply go to a sex-worker and take care of my needs. Right now, I have a girlfriend so my "hunting" days are over for now. I've been in one place for a while and things are going good and I'm in a position where I can give a woman all the attention she needs/deserves. Sex-workers play an important role in the world. If it wasn't for them, who knows what my bodily needs would've forced me to do. I might've been one of those, "love 'em and leave 'em" guys or, worse...some guy who whines on a message board about how terrible all american women are...

The stars are out tonight, big and bright. A girl is being serenaded by Mariachis down the street. I feel like ...

THE HAPPIEST MAN ALIVE....

[QUOTE]Originally posted by miller2k
[i]I have used prostitutes to meet a physiological need (sex). I've been living a gypsy-like existence for the last couple of years and, while I don't have many problems finding women, I think that it would be unfair to initiate relationships with women just to have sex when I knew that I really didn't want to be in a relationship at that moment. Instead of seducing women and making them think that I love them, I simply go to a sex-worker and take care of my needs. [/i][/QUOTE]

Exactly! I'm a dickhead, not a liar, and I believe that (most) men (in general) give love to get sex while (most) women (in general)give sex to get love. This may work in the long run in certain cases, but leads to PRETENSE in the short run. And jacking off gets really boring and is not as satisfactory as meaningless sex. Although, I must say, no one jacks me off as well as I jack off myself. Before I read this board, I never realized that anyone would actually pay for a hand job and I am astounded that anyone would.

USBabe,

"I haven't read any other forums here, so I hope you'll forgive me when I did a double-take upon reading that you're a sex worker".

Don't worry...it happens all the time. I guess it seems strange to most to have a discussion with a sex worker, because a) most people presume that all hookers have very little education or intelligence (otherwise they would have a "real" job) and b) most sex workers do not speak out in the public arena, so it is odd to have a conversation with a woman who actually readily identifies as one. I'm not saying that you thought either of these things...just that it would be pretty commonplace if you did. :)
"This is a very personal question, and if you feel comfortable answering, I'd really appreciate it (and if you don't, I understand and hope that you aren't offended).... In no way am I trying to insult you, but the concept is completely foreign to me".

Please don't feel that you have to walk on eggshells around me. I am not easily offended, and I'm more than happy to answer any questions. As a matter of fact I appreciate when people ask questions, rather than just relying on myths and ugly stereotypes.

"How did you become a sex worker? I mean, was it a conscious choice or the best of your options at that time?"

Both. I was newly divorced with two children to support, and in severe financial difficulty, so I guess it was the best option I had at the time. BUT, it was also something I consciously chose to do to solve my problems...I figured it was a way I could get out of debt fast and still have the time to spend with my kids, at a time when they really needed their Mum (to adjust to the divorce). I could have just got a "normal" job if I'd wanted to, but that would have meant longer hours to make the same amount of money. Once I had started I found that I actually enjoyed it...and stayed in it for 5 years. I am not working at the moment, but I know it will always be an option for me in the future.

For the record, I have never done drugs, never worked the streets and never been arrested or involved in any other crime.

CBGB and Dickhead,

Now c'mon guys...I think your attack on David was pretty harsh. He has been posting here for a long time, from memory longer than both of you, and has always had something positive and interesting to say. If this board is only for "men looking for sex with prostitutes"...does that mean I should also leave? I have been here for a long time too, with Jackson's blessing. At least David has a penis!! LOL

Dickhead, you said: "All these philosophical discussions are well and good but if the input is coming from a bunch of fucking sorority girls or naive frat boys with Coppertone tans who wouldn't know a hooker from a kick in the ass, what relevance does it have?"

That's what these sections are...philosophical discussions and opinions. As far as I know, David doesn't post in the field report sections, and neither do I (other than a few bits of local info in the Oz section). But these opinion pages are for people interested in the subject of prostitution. Maybe David doesn't have any specific experience in the field to talk about...but does that make his thoughts on American women invalid? Are hookers and wh*remongers the only ones who have an opinion on the Morality of Prostitution?

There are two reasons why we should be more willing to allow "outsiders" into the Opinions and Editorials section of the forum....
a) We need to have opposition to create a debate, and we need to be questioned in order to create discussion. How mundane would it be if we all had exactly the same level of experience and the same opinions? and
b) Because the more "outsiders" learn about the industry, and pass that info onto others, the more chance there is that one day prostitution will be accepted by the community and sex workers will be able to work without the soul-destroying stigma that currently comes with the job.

Ok, I'll step back off my soapbox now. :)

Stranger,

"For RN: while working did you ever think of one of your clients as a potential partner for your life. I know it is kind of a "Pretty Woman" situation but I am just curious to know if you had ever thought of imagining some of you private life coming out of your professional one".

That's a really tricky one. I would like to have dated someone who, as a client, knew about my past...there's never a good time to say to a prospective partner "Oh yeah, and I've worked as a hooker for the last 5 years..."
BUT, it is also frightening to have a partner who DOES know about your past. If you break up badly they can ruin your life by telling everyone, they can throw it in your face in arguments and having them around is a permanent reminder of "what you were".
As far as Pretty Woman goes though...No. I was never looking to be "rescued". :)

And here is a strange thought, (one that really should be taken to the Morality section, rather than here)....just as he may view me as "damaged goods" or a sl*t or untrustworthy because of the stereotype of hookers, I would be just as likely to hold the stereotype of a client against him too. I would be unlikely to trust a man who I know has tasted the "forbidden delights" of the sex industry...I would always wonder if he was still seeing hookers behind my back, just as he would wonder if I was still secretly hooking!

And Joe....I think I just answered my own question to you in the other section! LOL D'oh!

And, to get myself back on topic...

David re: being brutally honest about what you want out of a relationship.

You're completely right about being TOO honest. If a man I just met told me he wanted to marry me and have ten kids, I would freak out and run! LOL What I was really getting at though, was honesty about OURSELVES. Dating has traditionally meant a lot of lying and trying to be someone we aren't. Why shouldn't we discuss issues of prostitution or politics or religion when the topics come up in the first stages of a relationship? Why should we tell someone that we love them just so we can get them into bed? Why do men say "Oh yeah, I love kids" to a single Mum when they really can't stand the sight of them? I'm not saying that we should be brutal...just honest.

You know, if a man I was attracted to kissed me at the end of a date and said "I can't make any promises about tomorrow, but right now I really want to sleep with you"...I would do it in a flash. I would appreciate his honesty and I would know where I stand. (And feel free to take that line and make it your own, boys...LOL)

I wish you wouldn't all post at once...it takes so long to catch up! :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN
[i]Why do men say "Oh yeah, I love kids" to a single Mum when they really can't stand the sight of them?[/i][/QUOTE]

Because they really do love the concept of having kids and would like to be in a relationship where they do so -- it's the reality of dealing with someone else's (meaning walking hip-deep into a nest of responsibility) they can't handle. No, it's not nice or fair, but it's not intentionally dishonest. As always -- and unfortunately -- there are several levels of truth, and everyone speaks the one they see best. It's the gods of relativity at work.

[QUOTE][i]And Joe....I think I just answered my own question to you in the other section![/i][/QUOTE]

And with devastating accuracy, as always...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN [i]CBGB and Dickhead,
...I think your attack on David was pretty harsh. He has been posting here for a long time, from memory longer than both of you, and has always had something positive and interesting to say. If this board is only for "men looking for sex with prostitutes"...does that mean I should also leave? I have been here for a long time too, with Jackson's blessing. At least David has a penis!! LOL

Dickhead, you said: "All these philosophical discussions are well and good but if the input is coming from a bunch of fucking sorority girls or naive frat boys with Coppertone tans who wouldn't know a hooker from a kick in the ass, what relevance does it have?"[/i][/QUOTE]

I hardly think what I said qualifies as an attack. I am just amazed that someone who has no experience with prostitutes would hang around on this board and I question their motives. I don't know anything about cricket, so when I am hanging around with Ozzies and Kiwis and they are talking about it, guess what I do? I shut the fuck up. YOU can stay because you have knowledge of prostitution. I mean, David posts in the Morality of Prostitution section as well as the American Women section. At least USBabe sticks to the latter. Anyone who has no experience with prostitution knows as much about the morality of prostitution as I know about the morality of menstruation.

This is my opinion and I am sticking to it. You won't find me in the Africa section, cuz I've never been there and you won't find me discussing the morality of homosexuality, or heroin use, or bashing Martha Stewart.

Dickhead,

Ok, so attack was maybe a strong word to use :) I didn't mean to attack YOU either with my post, but I wanted to defend David's right to be here. I wasn't really going to say this....but then I figured it's documented in the archives for all to see so I may as well....originally David came to this forum asking questions of a personal nature that were very much to do with the purpose of this board. He was looking for information on commercial sex services. Then from memory, he stayed around for a little while longer to defend me in a very volatile situation with some extremely cruel flamers. By that time he had become "part of the group" and joined in our conversations.

I was not saying that you don't have a right to believe he shouldn't be here...because of course, you do...but I felt I needed to defend David as he has done for me in the past.

And as for the Morality of Menstruation...there is none! That was a very cruel and spiteful stunt pulled by the God In Whom We Do Not Believe, and I for one am very pissed off at him!!

I'm not saying that David (or anyone else) doesn't have the right to be here (my country and your country, at least, are REASONABLY free countries and I don't know or care what country he is from). I'm just saying 1) the opinions of people with no experience in the matter are considerably less valuable than those of people with experience, IMO; and 2) I wonder why such people have an interest in the subject other than seeking cheap thrills.

Maybe the subject is of considerable "academic" interest to some people. I am willing to consider that possibility. BUT, if I had an interest in let's say skydiving, I wouldn't just participate in a chat room devoted to skydiving; I would JUMP OUT OF AN AIRPLANE!

Now maybe some of the people without experience in prostitution, who are participating on this board, are talking to people who have "jumped out of the plane" to decide whether or not they want to jump as well. That is fine, but eventually if you don't have the guts to jump out of the plane, you should leave the board to the jumpers. This is my opinion, but of course whenever one is judging my opinions, one must remember that I am, of course, and remain, and will probably remain, pretty much of a

Dickhead

It's a tough job, but someone has to do it!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dickhead
[i]I'm not saying that David (or anyone else) doesn't have the right to be here (my country and your country, at least, are REASONABLY free countries and I don't know or care what country he is from). I'm just saying 1) the opinions of people with no experience in the matter are considerably less valuable than those of people with experience, IMO; and 2) I wonder why such people have an interest in the subject other than seeking cheap thrills.
[/i][/QUOTE]

*Smiles*. I never thought this would cause controversy. Well, I'll respond (just this once) and hopefully this "thread" will die soon thereafter.

1) My inexperience is a large part of the reason I post so infrequently. I post on issues I can discuss intelligently, Morality, and American Women. While my perspective might not be the same as a ... john's, it is still (I believe) typically relevent.

2) Hey, don't knock cheep thrills *smiles*.

David

P.S. Thanks for the defense RN. It's a pity to clutter the board though. I'll send you an e-mail.

USBabe, you mention that there is an "exocitism" to European women that is a factor in play with many men's attraction to them. You say that there is something attractive about a foriegn accent. I've never heard such bunk, its interesting how you try to deconstruct and analyze everything. Are you writing some kind of dissertation on this or something? Let me just rip your 'exoticism' argument to shreds. Look up north at our neighbor Canada, on the surface, Canada isn't too different from the US, in fact in many ways its similar. Yet in contrast to the USA, in Canada relationships between men and women are far more harmonious than they are in the States. Case in point is that Canada has a lower divorce rate than the US. I have spent time in Vancouver and find that there is no exoticism at all to Canadian women yet I find them to be on average, very attractive. They tend to be on average more attractive than their US counterparts. On a side note, to anyone on the East coast looking to meet women out West, forget about LA, go to Vancouver instead!! Its much better in Vancouver. The real factor in play is how a women takes care of herself. And European women on average are easily healthier than their American counterparts. After spending a over a year in Europe and returning to States I just couldn't help but notice how overweight and pale so many people were, and then when I returned to Europe for a brief visit with my fiancee, I noticed how healthy and attractive people looked. What this all boils down to is economics, in the US there is WIDE disparity between economic groups and therefore people in the lower economic spectrum don't have access to high quality healthcare, a healthy living environment, and nourishment and such. There is also more egalitarian access to education in Europe than in the States, where college students pay minimal or no fees to get an education. There have been studies that prove that individuals who have access to high quality healthcare and education tend to be overall healthier and, in addition, they tend to maintain their health better than those who don't have such access. So with more social equality people are better able to care for themselves. In addition, they have higher self-esteem as well. But lets face the result, USBabe, the proportion of physically attractive European women is much higher than the proportion of physically attractive American women. Even a good number of friends from Europe who live in the States keep reminding me of this.

CBGB... As a Canadian I can tell you that you are, in my estimation, only half right about Canada. Yes... there are more fat slobs in the US (and the largest in Canada cannot compete in the same class as the largest in the US) and I think the reasons are that 1) Canadians are better educated (as you mentioned) and 2) that Canadians are actually embarrassed to be slobs (whereas Americans have the arrogant "I am who I am and fuck you" attitude). I don't agree with you when you say that generally Canadians are better looking though. I see just as many hot girls walking around Tampa as I do in Toronto... the difference is that, statistically speaking, there are more slobs per capita in the US to which our eyes are drawn. I have also found that there is most definitely an exoticism in Toronto and Vancouver. White folk are a minority in these towns. When I enter Toronto from the US I'm stunned by the amount of colours I see on the street.

The more I pay attention to peoples ideas and values in the US the more I realise what a fucked up country it is. It has natural beauty (and money) but, as Stranger pointed out, it's BORING. The same bland restaurants, the same bland architecture, and the same bland (brainwashed, xenophobic, and paranoid) people from east to west. I mentioned before about finding the diamond amongst the lumps of coal and I think I can expand on this metaphor a bit further. The problem with American Women is not that there are no diamonds to be found: the problem is that there is too much coal to sift through to find the diamonds. There's a simple economic principle involved here. Why should I mine diamonds in the US, where the cost is $20 per tonne of coal vs profits of $100 per diamond, when I can go to Europe where the price is $10 per tonne of coal vs profits of $100 per diamond.

At this point I'm not totally bitter about American Women... I'm still able to pick up easily enough so I'll keep trying to sift through all that coal and find the diamond. Yes, the cost is higher, but apparently I'm either a glutton for punishment or too much of an optimist.

CBGB also said... "USBabe, you mention that there is an "exocitism" to European women that is a factor in play with many men's attraction to them. You say that there is something attractive about a foriegn accent. I've never heard such bunk,..."

Sorry... but I agree with USbabe. Hearing my German friend's breath whispering in my ear as I slipped my cock into her was enough to send a ripple down my spine. It's not just the accent, it's the slight differences in mannerisms and inflections that make a foreign girl seem more attractive.

Hey Dickhead... I'm still young and inexperienced in life, mongering, and dating. At what point do my opinions, and the opinions of others, become of significant value to this discussion? Are peripheral ideas and thoughts invalid? Should I leave and come back in 20 years?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fedup
[i]Hey Dickhead... I'm still young and inexperienced in life, mongering, and dating. At what point do my opinions, and the opinions of others, become of significant value to this discussion? Are peripheral ideas and thoughts invalid? Should I leave and come back in 20 years? [/i][/QUOTE]

The more experience you get, the more valuable and valid your opinions will be, I personally think. It's one thing to be "inexperienced in mongering" and another thing to be hanging around on a prostitution board when you've NEVER been with a hooker.

Dickhead, while I agree with you to some extent about the value of people who speak from massive direct experience, people with brains as well as dicks (and, in the case of RN and USbabe, with alternatives to the latter) are in short enough supply that I'm loathe to scare any of them off :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fedup
[i]CBGB... As a Canadian I can tell you that you are, in my estimation, only half right about Canada. Yes... there are more fat slobs in the US (and the largest in Canada cannot compete in the same class as the largest in the US) and I think the reasons are that 1) Canadians are better educated (as you mentioned) [/i][/QUOTE]

FU, I don't know how you define "better educated," but I researched this a little since I had always read and heard the opposite. My sources are census data from Canada's latest (1996) census, obtained from www.statcan, and US census data released in March 2000 (I looked back a few years farther and saw no significant obvious change), obtained from www.census.gov/population/socdem/education.

According to these sources, 35% of Canadians 15 and over have less than a high school diploma, while 84% of Americans 25 and over are high school graduates. The difference in ages makes this comparison a bit shaky.

Again according to these sources, 17% of Canadians between 25 and 64 had university degrees, whereas 26% of Americans 25 and over had bachelor's degrees. Since the Canadian website says that "The 1996 Census showed that Canadians continued to attain higher levels of education, a trend observed since the early 1950s," it can be inferred that the number of Canadians 25 or over with university degrees is lower than 17% in total (adding in those 65 and over).

Granted, education and ignorance are not mutually exclusive, and based on my fairly limited experience in Canada, I do agree we have more slobs in the US. But, at least based on these numbers, we are better educated slobs!

If you have some other numbers that support your claim, I'd be interested to see them, truly. Next thing I'm gonna research, if I can find it, is the relative educational levels of the high school TEACHERS in the two countries.

In the US, educational levels vary fairly widely across geographic areas. My guess is the same is true of Canada. For example, Arkansas has the lowest percentage of college graduates (I think the number was 16% but don't quote me; maybe it was 18%) while Colorado is the state with the highest percentage, approximately double Arkansas' percentage (36% I think but I didn't write it down; anyone interested in the exact number can go to the website). Although, it should be noted that the District of Columbia has an even higher percentage of college graduates than Colorado (again, these numbers are based on those 25 years of age or older).

Dickhead does his homework!

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joe_zop
[i]Dickhead, while I agree with you to some extent about the value of people who speak from massive direct experience, people with brains as well as dicks (and, in the case of RN and USbabe, with alternatives to the latter) are in short enough supply that I'm loathe to scare any of them off :) [/i][/QUOTE]

Don't wanna scare anyone off. Just stirring up shit as usual. And, nothing personal against David. BUT, I would be interested in a response from him as to why he frequents the board if he doesn't want to screw any hookers.

Sorry, don't understand your comment about "brains as well as dicks"; you mean there's a difference? I thought dicks were for thinking with and brains were to be used as a hat rack.

A fairly quick search seems to indicate no obvious differences in the educational levels of high school teachers in Canada vs. the US. However, further examination of the census data (trust the government and its data as much or as little as you like) shows that as of 1996, 21% of Canadians aged 20-29 had NOT graduated from high school, while only 12% of Americans aged 25-29 had not graduated from high school. The US census data refers to high school graduation levels as being "stable" at 85-88%.

2.22% of Canadians 15 and over had master's degrees and 0.46% had earned doctorates. I know from my own research that the percentages in the US are over twice as high for master's degrees (appx 5-6%), but again fairness requires me to emphasize that the only figures I have found for Canada are for those aged 15 and over.

However, only about 20% of Canadians are between 15 and 24, inclusive, indicating that even when adjusting for the differences in the age brackets, the percentage of Canadians with advanced degrees is still lower.

So: Lower percentage of high school graduates, college graduates, AND persons with advanced degrees in Canada as opposed to the United States. The women here still leave quite a bit to be desired, and you sure as hell don't need to be real well educated to either be a hooker or to enjoy their services.

Just defending my native country as best I can. No offense (or offence!) to the beautiful country of Canada.

Dickhead I see you have done your homework on Canada, I'm surprised there are few college grads in Canada than the US, especially since education in Canada is far less expensive. But those numbers are very decieving if you check the OECD PISA ratings. Canada has the one of the best educated students in the world. Reading, Math, and Science scores are the 3rd and 4th highest in the world. In overall performance in school, most European countries beat US students in their Math, Reading, and Science aptitudes. This year the US beat Italy and Germany in the PISA ratings (this creating a big uproar in Germany which has taken great pride in its education system). Japan and Korea have the best school systems according to this OECD study.

FedUp, I guess its a matter of you say to-ma-to and I say ta-ma-ta, maybe the foriegn accent makes someone more attractive to you, it certainly doesn't hurt. But I feel that is only part of it, and how the women holds herself in her whole being is more important. I recently visited Montreal, and just could not believe the proportion of beautiful women in that wonderful city, in fact it was higher than in Vancouver. But overall, I just feel sex and romance is the pits in the US. There are simply too many barriers between people these days. FedUp, you also mention xenophobia, that is a major issue for me, since I am, for lack of a better term, pigmentally challenged, I am part Mexican part Japanese, and I feel my ethnic background makes me a target of discrimination in the US. I feel if I approach someone of another background they often see my outside ethnic appearance and immediately move away. I happen to live in New York, which by most means is fairly tolerant, but there is a lot of xenophobia in NY which makes my life difficult, and I feel there is far less xenophobia in Europe and Canada, a contrast to the way it is in the US. Although California maybe a bit of an exception but not too much.

Also I find your Europe vs. USA diamond and coal analogy on the money but I have a more drastic opinion of woman finding in the US, when you mine for diamonds(the right woman) in the USA, it costs you about $200 per tonne of coal vs profits of $100 per diamond, In Europe, diamond mining costs you about $20 per tonne of Coal vs profits of $200 per diamond. Meaning women and romance in Europe is CHEAPER and BETTER!!! This is especially true for sexual services, as in most European countries prostitutes cost as much as one tenth as they do in America. Take for example Germany, I go to an FKK and pay a simple 50 Euros for the sex of my life with a amazing beautiful woman, in a brothel in NY a women approaching the same quality will charge me anywhere from 400-500 US Dollars and on top of that the service 99.9 % rarely approaches Germany, so you pay a lot more for it in America and you get less satisfaction or profit. That is a major difference.

Now on to who's fatter. It took a while to find consistent definitions. Defining obesity as having a body mass index greater than 30%, and using obesitycanada.com as my Canadian source and the Center for Disease Control as my US source, 1996 statistics for Canada say 12% of Canadians are obese while a far greater percentage of Americans, 19.8% are obese according to 2000 data. 35% of Canadian men are defined as overweight and 27% of Canadian women. I started to read the US statistics for a further breakdown but became sickened and disgusted, so I stopped.

So, FU, to oversimplify, it appears you have more dropouts but we have more lard asses. Comes as no surprise to me.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur
[i]Dickhead I see you have done your homework on Canada, I'm surprised there are few college grads in Canada than the US, especially since education in Canada is far less expensive. But those numbers are very decieving if you check the OECD PISA ratings. Canada has the one of the best educated students in the world. Reading, Math, and Science scores are the 3rd and 4th highest in the world. In overall performance in school, most European countries beat US students in their Math, Reading, and Science aptitudes. This year the US beat Italy and Germany in the PISA ratings (this creating a big uproar in Germany which has taken great pride in its education system). Japan and Korea have the best school systems according to this OECD study.

[/i][/QUOTE]

First let me state that I am a high school dropout (never have graduated to this day and no G.E.D. either) and a college professor (scary, huh? I do have a master's degree and have completed 27 of 36 hours towards a second one). Having said that, I feel the joker in this deck is: what components of any given country's population takes these types of standardized tests? Canada, like many European countries, has a "two-track" approach to high school, where some students are tracked towards university education and others towards vocational or trade-type paths. We don't do this in the US, at least not overtly. I don't have a definite opinion on whether a two-track approach is good or bad as I have not researched this. The socialist egalitarian in me says it's bad while the pragmatist in me says it's realistic and therefore correct. But, it does skew the data, since I think a higher percentage of US students make it to the point of being included in these aptitude tests.

Having said that, I will say that I think high school in the United States is way too easy, a great big joke in fact, and that's PART of the reason I accidentally disremembered to finish high school. I see functional illiterates in my college classroom all the time. It's very scary. Since I'm a dickhead, I just flunk them and leave the problem for other, more qualified people to address. To quote one of my own undergraduate professors, "all I can do about that is apologize."

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur [i]. Japan and Korea have the best school systems according to this OECD study. [/i][/QUOTE]

I taught at a Japanese university (Teikyo Loretto) and have also had many Japanese students at the other universities at which I've taught. Also, there were many Japanese students in my first graduate program (I fucked a couple of them but I got sick of taking three showers to get laid twice!). My opinion is that their educational system emphasizes rote memorization at the expense of developing critical thinking skills. Some of this can be blamed on a "culture of consensus." Yes, their math skills on average were better than the math skills of American undergraduates I've taught, but in general they could not think for themselves and lacked initiative and creativity in business contexts, especially in entrepreneurial type situations. Also and importantly, in my experience they were NO fun to party with.

I've been far more impressed with my Chinese (PRC as well as ROC) students. They WERE fun to party with and weren't afraid to challenge my opinion if they disagreed with it. However, it is certainly possible that I was getting the very, very best of the brightest more so in the case of the Chinese than the Japanese. I've only ever had one Korean student so can't comment there but she was one of the best students I've ever had and a stone fox as well (I have never had sex with a current or former student and don't plan to = don't shit where you eat, but I can LOOK). Can't speak to science skills as that is not my forté.

Hmm, some scary similarities here, Dickhead. I, too, lack a high school diploma, as I was an early college entrant. (Did have to get the GED for a job once -- shook 'em up because I didn't take any of their classes and got a perfect score.) I took it one step further and technically never actually got my undergrad degree, as I never turned in a paper for a class a loooong time ago. Yet I also taught at the college level, both undergrad and grad level at a major university, for about five years, till I discovered I was as bored at universities as a prof as I'd been as a student, and the social penalties for wandering around there drunk or stoned were greater. ;)

That said, I found my Korean grad students to fall in between what you describe with Japanese and Chinese (my opinion of whom mostly matches yours.) They also come out of a fairly regimented system and have all that overly-problematic classroom shyness and deference when in the American system, but for the most part they were far more creative, far more willing to take risks, and far more able to be critical thinkers about both our and their own societal constructs. And they're far more fun to party with than the Japanese students, though not as much as the Chinese. Can't speak to sleeping with any in that context, as, again, my rules are the same as yours.

Well, if you want to get scarier, I am entering Year Six of teaching at universities, not counting being a grad assistant. The one I'm at now is definitely major but the others maybe not. I'm not bored yet, but maybe that's because I march to the beat of my own drummer and ignore what I'm "supposed" to do, or maybe it's because I keep teaching different classes in different subjects at different levels every year, or maybe it's because I blaze up as needed. Or, maybe it's because every other job I had before was arguably way more boring. I mean, I was a letter carrier for 8 years and I didn't think THAT was boring so maybe I'm just an earhole.

But I sure as hell wasn't an "early college entrant" as I did not take my first college course until I was 31 years old. I dropped out of 10th grade when I was 15 and began my mongering travels. I do have an undergraduate degree but it is completely unrelated to the fields in which I have been teaching.

However, the scariest thing of all is that my student loans will be paid off the exact month I am eligible for Social Security ... assuming there IS any Social Security and assuming I bother to pay them off instead of just leaving the country. Oh, wait a minute, if I don't pay them off they will deduct them from my Social Security check.

I always figured I'd die young but now it's too late ...

Well, I should clarify -- the job itself was definitely not boring, nor the students, and I very much enjoyed teaching; I just find the university system as a whole moves far too glacially and annoyingly for me. And I generally prefer playing with [b]live[/b] ammunition -- not that some students aren't made of that.

But this is waaay off topic.

Well, to put it back on topic, the first full-time teaching job I had was in a small town where I did not know a soul. Xmas break arrives and I decide to celebrate at one of the few local bars. There I run into an American Woman who is a grad assistant (but not a teaching assistant) in our department (but does not work for me). I have barely met her. We have a few beers and she says she is thinking about going to one of the casinos in an adjoing state. She asks me if I am familiar with casinos and/or gambling. I tell her I used to live in Nevada and the casinos there make the ones in State X look like a toy. She suggests we go to State X, a drive of several hours. I say, hey, aren't you engaged to Student Y (not one of my students nor personally known to me)? She says yeah but I'm pissed at him. Dickhead has not knowingly fucked a married woman since reaching the age of majority (before that it's their fault, right?) but engaged is another story.

So off we go and it's drink and fuck and suck and gamble for three days. Then it's time to go back and the guilt hits (her, not me; I have nothing to feel guilty about). Have you ever had a woman cry continuously for 350 miles?

SHE doesn't return for spring semester, Boyfriend X doesn't return for spring semester, and Dickhead gets the icicle treatment from the whole rest of the department. Department head says at the first meeting of the spring semester, "Well, grad assistant isn't coming back, thanks to Dickhead." Everyone in the room is staring at me. No idea whether she told the department head or whether someone saw us making out in the bar or what.

This is typical of the type of shit American Women pull with their insecurity and their immaturity about sex. Probably she immediately told Boyfriend X the whole story. The pussy wasn't worth the subsequent aggravation and ostracism.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur

[i]I feel my ethnic background makes me a target of discrimination in the US.[/i][/QUOTE]

Why do you then feel it's okay for you to discriminate against women because of the way they look (their weight, the fact that they're American, or that they aren't attractive enough for you)?

I doubt it feels good. But there IS something you can do. Open your mind and treat people as individuals instead of lumping them all together to fit whatever molds you've fabricated for them.
Just as people of one heritage aren't all the same, neither are all women of one nation. It's no crime to prefer one type of woman, but to squeeze all American women into one small narrow box is no different from squeezing all American men into the same one either. Billy Joel, Bill Gates, Tommy Lee (Pamela's ex -- I'm not sure if that's his name), and many other American men are not exactly conventionally handsome. Shall I then say that American men cannot hold a candle to their European counterparts? Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, and an entire slew of scumbags are American men. Shall I then put you in the same boat and claim that all American men are violent and hateful?

No, I like men and know and appreciate that they come in many varieties! And I also realize that ultimately what's on the inside is far more important than what's on the outside. A lousy attitude cannot and will not ever overcome even the body of a Greek god.

CBGB, I have no doubt that this message will infuriate you to no end. But, before you fly off the handle again and start calling names and spewing venom, please take a very long look in the mirror. You're treating others the way you hate to be treated. You're digging your own social grave.

One can lie to the world and get away with it. But as soon as we lie to ourselves (but more importantly, continue to do so), our lives are worthless. Intelligent people with willpower, determination, and hard work can persevere and WIN! I've personally always looked up to men for their strength. Strength comes in many forms. Those who admit their faults, open their minds, and grow and learn will be admired by far more women than they may ever realize.

This is my last message, and I will be unable to read any more forum. To those who have been open-minded and polite to me, I am most grateful. I wish you lots and lots of mind-blowing sex with the wonderful women you deserve!

Ciao.

Well Dickhead... as I don't really care about numbers that much I will simply tell you that quantity does not equal quality. A student of a Canadian community college (less esteemed than a university) with a 3 year degree in architecture is able to take a test for US certification. If they pass, they're in... passed a course that's four years at a US university. Also: Why does the US so actively pursue Canadian nursing students? (Sorry RN... not that kind of nursery... although I'm sure you'd be welcomed). A better quality education is key... not diplomas handed out like trinkets to support college football teams and inflate the national numbers to look good on the international stage. Besides... when was the last time you heard of metal detector in a Canadian high school?

This topic did start as a reasonable one... education. The American education system teaches an abstinence platform which pretty much flies in the face of human sexuality. Coupled with, as someone else said before me, false puritanism; the American Woman is bound to come out with warped attitudes about sex. The guys are constantly shown scantily clad women on every ad, TV, pop can, and matchbook; thus developing a false impression of what a woman is.

But we've been over this one before...

as always, I'm...

Fedup

Ciao... It was nice having ya around.

USBabe, In a weird way, I kind of like you. Do you know why? You just keep reminding me of what it is that I find wrong with American women. You just made reminded me how much better I have it in Europe, and that's why I'm moving there, permanently. I rather be married there in a less hostile environment. Oh yeah you quoted my comment on I having issues with racism. Well you really wouldn't be able to understand that, being the spoiled rich woman(you said you went 3 times last year to Paris, that can cost a small fortune) you are living in your sheltered world. Ever heard the expression once bitten twice shy? Most of my views are not prejudgements, they're based on my experiences. I feel dating is easier in Europe, much easier. And go ahead you can just say European men look better than American men. Its no secret, heck, when I visited Holland last year, I thought the concierge at my hotel looked like Brad Pitt, not to imply anything on that, but I couldn't help but noticed that he seemed a little too good looking to be a concierge. I am equal opportunity. Lets face it life is short, and I don't put up with shit and I have putten up with a lot of shit in my life. When I was in Europe I just couldn't believe how attractive I found women to be. And on top of that, their friendliness and openness, highlighted their physical beauty. I'm a real nice guy in real life, and a softie, my soft mannerisms seem to strike a chord with the European females. In fact most European women prefer softness in male partner to machismo and assertiveness. In America, its the reverse, a man has to be a macho assertive guy to meet women. I always wondered why when I was in college so many of the best looking women I knew dated football players. They just seem to love aggressive pricks I guess. Some people like one thing and they can hate another thing, its called free will.

I guess I had my last post reported to the WSG BIG BROTHER. Well, I'll keep it less inflammatory this time. Don't really want to get into the US-Canada shit tossing contest too much since Canada, no matter what its "fine citizens have to say" is still considered to be our little retarded brother... and with good reason.
Canadians bash us all the time but who really cares? When the chips are on the table and the bad guys come gunning for us, we'll still protect our little retarded brother.
Have news for you FedUp... The US pursues RNs from all over the globe since there is a shortage here, not because you produce better ones than are produced here. You know why Canada doesn't pursue US nurses as vigorously? You guys can't afford 'em.
When was the last time a US citizen tried passing themselves off as Canadian? I'm not saying Canada is a bad place to live but it is a good place to leave.

Actually FU, I'm a little older than you as we know, but when I was in public school in the US they did not teach an "abstinence platform"; they taught a ZERO platform as far as sex was concerned. In other words, the subject was ignored completely.

What do they teach in Canada, sex education-wise? My latest knowledge of US public schools' sex education is that it falls under the heading of "local control" in many instances; i.e., no consistency and wide variations depending on how conservative the particular locality is (or isn't). Where I live now they do at least teach about contraception but not to the point of actually showing or talking about how to use it effectively.

Hope you know I'm not bashing Canada here. The Canadians I hang with most often lately are from Saskatchewan and they tell me things are more conservative there than elsewhere in Canada. This is probably similar to the US in that the coasts are more liberal and the central areas more conservative???

But I do question what you said about diplomas being handed out like trinkets to support athletics as a large majority of college athletes in the US do NOT graduate, and no one seems to care, and that sucks even worse. Also, I will say that a weakness in the data I found on both of our countries' census sites is that community college or 2-year degrees did not seem to be well identified. I am a product of the US community college system, and would not be where I am (wherever that is) without it, and I respect it to a certain degree.

Also I agree with Ceebee Jeebie that your nurse example is somewhat flawed, cuz EVERY country wants to hire nurses from WHATEVER country, to my understanding.

Teacher shortage, nurse shortage, prostitute shortage, shortage of CPAs .... PAY MORE and the shortage will go away. Economics 101. I guess the politicians slept through that class.

I am not sure which scale are we using here to compare one country to the other.
If it is merely the economic scale then there is no doubt: US wins over the rest of the globe (maybe excluding Switzerland, which is neutral anyhow).
But I am not sure on what other scale would the US be the No.1 country.

Statistics is always misleading in judging the culture of a population. If I am not mistaken, I believe that a while ago a statistical study confirmed that the majority of the American people interviewed thought that New Mexico was actually in Mexico.

There should be no doubt whatsoever that culture is a broader term that cannot be limited to a high school diploma.

How many countries, cultures, languages, people do you know other than yours? These are the things that define how open minded (and in my opinion, educated) you are.

But then , having a President that, before being elected, had never gone out of the country other than in Mexico (spring break 1966) there is not much to expect.

Kaffir said... "When was the last time a US citizen tried passing themselves off as Canadian?"...

This happens DAILY. When I was up in Toronto a few weeks ago I bought a Roots Canada (it has a Canadian flag on it... they can only be bought inside Canada) t-shirt for my American GF. She was sooooo happy to see the shirt she clapped her hands and then jumped me. Why???... Because she travels to Europe frequently and Americans are treated like crap while Canadians are treated like royalty (I have more examples if you want). Talk to any student who has traveled abroad and they will all tell you that the best way to make friends is to sew a Canadian flag onto your coat or backpack. I said once before that Americans are fine as individuals (although there are always losers to be found in any place), but are pricks as a country. The problem is their ignorance of the world (a recent survey revealed that most don't even know who Koffi Anan or Jean Chretien are) and their arrogance as "the best in the world". It's time for America to step to the other side of the fence and take a good look at themselves... they may not like what they see... the rest of the world doesn't. The only country that sees Canada as "the retarded little brother" is America... but just wait until you need our water... you'll be paying DEARLY.

This is my last post on the subject. While I may be able to argue that American Women are arrogant and ignorant it's a bit of a stretch to be on topic.

Dickhead... With regard to your question of what is taught in Canadian sex education courses: When I was in high school in the 80's I was taught about reproductive systems, birth control, STD's, fallacies (such as pulling out before it's too late), and was also given demonstrations on how to roll on a condom (on a dildo held by the teacher). Since I've left, I've read that the age at which this course is taught has been lowered, and that material has been added to include drug use/abuse. Course material is mandated by the federal government with the provincial governments able to create their own methods of teaching the material. Saskatchewan is one of the least populated provinces in Canada and is likely closer to the church and conservatism. It's likely a small town attitude vs the big city attitude that you see everywhere.

Nursing was perhaps a bad example. As the baby boomers age there are far less people who want to clean up the shit stains that the elderly leave in their pants. Trades (construction) are next in line... In about 10 years I'll be making that triple digit income we all aspire to... and I'll have grease under my nails while doing it.

Okay... Canada is a better country than the US! Where can I sign up?
I can't wait to hear April Wine and Moxie, Triumph and Alan Thicke on the radio 24/7. I also can't wait to spend some of that pretty colored money. And the Canadian football is something else, ain't it?
BTW, if the US really needs Canadian water, won't they just take it like they did all that Mexican land way back when? My former countrymen are such bastards!

Europe, Canada, and America are good and bad for the specific person. If you're aim in life is to get filthy stinking rich, by all means the USA is the BEST place to do it. If you want to have a active social life outside of a job and long vacations as well as time for doing other things like having hot sex Europe is WAY above America, I can't help but notice how many fat cows I have to see in NYC before I meet a diamond, its not like that in Europe, with the exception of the UK and Ireland, most European women seem to take good care of themselves and that makes them better lovers, it also makes for hotter sex.

Dickhead, only 19 percent of Americans obese? There's got to be something wrong with those statistics. I went out for a long walk around Manhattan this weekend and saw about 7 fat women for every 3 in shape women on the street. I did something like this in Paris, and my ratio was like 8 in shape women for 2 fat women, and on top of that most of the overweight women in Paris were obviously over 40. Almost half the fat women I saw in NYC were in their 20's.

"Obese" is fatter than "overweight." If you see my earlier post, the "overweight" numbers were way higher, like I think close to 40%. But as FU says, we're off topic here.

Thanks, FU. I hope you realize/realise that I was genuinely curious. The powers that be would shred their collective shorts here in the US if a teacher used a dildo to demonstrate condom use (well, assuming they knew what the word "dildo" meant, which is by no means a given!). Drug education is fucked up here too since of course all drugs are presumed to be equally bad.

Maybe off topic, but I hereby call on my country to yank its head out of its ass and start teaching birth control in the public schools on a practical, no-nonsense basis.

Then the next step is to start teaching sex education, as in education as to how sex can be enjoyed safely and pleasurably, and how to develop sexual skills. How is this any different than drivers' education?

Oh, wait a minute, we stopped teaching that in American public schools too. Along with physical education ... could that maybe possibly have anything to do with our obesity problem? Nah, couldn't be.

Again, all I can do about this is apologize/apologise. Or emigrate. Too bad it has to come to that.

I love my country. I hate my country. I am proud to be an American. I am ashamed to be an American.

I need some safe drugs right now, and some safe sex right now. I need a plane ticket to Méjico or Costa Rica or Australia or The Netherlands. Maybe I need a kick in the ass.

Ahh fuck it; I'll just go get some beer and forget about it. Oh, wait a minute, I can't because some fucks decided you can't sell beer after 11 PM.

Oohhhhhhhhhhhhhh....Fed up is Canadian....This explains a lot. Many questions have been answered....'Nuff said

:) :) :) :) :) :) ;)

RN,

I guess it was more miscommunication than disagreement. You say "don't be dishonest", I say ... ~"don't be too blunt / move too fast". I suspect we both agree with each other.


Dickhead,

If you want further explanation, send me an e-mail (Pachelbels_Canon_In_D_Major@hotmail.com).

Also, in the US, while Sex-Ed is under local control, to get Federal monies, you have to have an "abstinence" platform.


USbabe,

It was a pleasure ... please enjoy the till next time.


Smiles,
David

OFF TOPIC

kaffir, I recently found out some interesting facts about the US taking the mexican's land in the mid 1800's. Living on the border and spending a lot of time in central mexico, I got tired of saying sorry to all the mexicans for that. So I did a little research on the internet. As it turns out, the whole mexican-american war was fought because Mexico would not recognize that the Republic of Texas was it's own country after the revolution and the Treaty of Velasco. Texas wanted to join the Union, but Mexico said no. So we kicked their butts all the way back to Mexico City and got them to agree to the Treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo which involved the sale of most of what is now the SW U.S for 15 million. This sale was reparations for a war they started and also compensation for several million in unpaid loans to the US. Also, the area sold contained less than 1% of the mexican population. Who would have thought? I should have known that mexican cantinas were not the best place to learn US history.

To keep this post relevant, I agree that US women are materialistic and less affectionate than their foreign counterparts. However, I believe that foreign women cannot be trusted as there is always a hidden agenda. Monger all you want outside the US, but any relationship that is attempted is indeed a cut-rate one. Unless of course, you are old and grey. Then the company of a young sexy girl is worth any price.

border rat,

I was just pulling on FU's ñeg a little with that MEX-US territorial spat comment... I really don't have anything against Canadians either but it is true that when I run into them in another country (Turkey, Italy, Germany, Africa, wherever) it seems they're always )(and I mean always) bashing the US. I can get away with them telling these tales for a long time without them realizing I am a US citizen because I am not white. The thing about it is, that when I listen to them bad mouthing the US, it really does sound like someone speaking from an inferiority complex.

Peace to everyone! Go forth and SPANK SOME ASS!

Sex Wars Part 2: Attack of the Flames
When we left our hero CBGBConnisur and our villain USBabe, they argued over the issue of American women, it seems as though CBGB has won the battle. CBGB has saved the universe from the dark side that is USBabe and has made the universe safe for single men looking for sex with hot beautiful European women. He has ended the brainwashing mind control that USBabe has put on men that has prevented them from living out their fantasies. Until the next episode.....

umm... yah... sure...

thanks for helping to drive off a moderate female mind who was obviously interested in changing her perceptions, as well as ours...

job well done...

well genius... what should we talk about now?

As I believe in democracy, let's take a vote.

A) USBabe was a valuable contributor and CBGB was an asshole for flaming her off the board.
B) USBabe was a pain in the ass and thanks go to CBGB for driving her away.
C) USBabe was overly sensitive and should have stuck around despite some flak in her direction.
D) Dickhead is an asshole and should shut the fuck up.
E) (write in vote).

More than one of the above may be correct.

Dickhead,

Can I pick D? (Just 'coz I pictured myself in leather, telling you to shut the fuck up with each crack of the whip *wicked grin*)

Seriously though, I would like to have seen USBabe hang around. It can be hard though, when there is so much testosterone flying around this forum....

RN: D & S (aka B & D) is not my bag. Dickhead just likes F & S. But it seems you are into leather? Too hot and sweaty for me.

Now if you have some nice silk scarves, I will tie YOU up. Ain't nobody gonna tie ME up = double standard. All I can do about that is apologize.

Well, well Dickhead..

Seems you and I are a match made in heaven! LOL B&D actually does nothing much for me either...I was just taking the [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url]. However, I do have a bit of a soft spot for silk scarves (and trust me...I don't mind taking a break from my little feminist soapbox and playing submissive every once in a while ;))

And I don't mind your double standards. Why would I want to tie YOU up?? Anyway, with my memory the way it is....I'd probably wander off and accidentally leave you there...

Well Rub I bet you gotta lotta soft spots here and there and everywhere. When I think about a Rubber Nursey it makes me think about a brand of pencil eraser known as a "Pink Pet" and how a pencil eraser kinda protrudes a bit like a clitoris and how pink a clitoris really is except when it gets engorged with blood and becomes purplish and then other stuff gets engorged and I can't sleep cuz I don't have enough skin left to shut my eyelids ...

Dickhead is diligently dodging his demented demons who are demanding degenerate, deviant and decadent delicacies ... dreaming of décolletage.

My goodness Dickhead...

Is there a 911 number for emergency blowjobs??? You sound like you are in urgent need of one...before you spontaneously combust!! *grin*

Not in this country, unfortunately. I feel particularly sorry for paraplegics and those with arthritis or even those with a weak grip.

Now if I were in Sydney, I could go to The Penthouse and for $54.44 US at the latest exchange rate, my problem would be solved by a qualified professional prostitute practicing safe sex. There'd be a bit of a language barrier of course, since as an American I don't speak very good English, but we'd work it out (and in, and out, and in ...)

Or I could be in any Latin American country and could get my problem solved even more inexpensively without any language barriers.

But been there done that as much as possible for the last five years, and My God in whom I don't believe it was grand, and so now I am "pecuniarily challenged" = too broke to buy a low cut dress for a hummingbird. I am not too lame to get laid here in my home country but of course delicate emotional surgery is required and it is rather tough to get laid on an emergency basis in the US.

One thing you can say for masturbation: you certainly don't have to look your best. Evil is the root of all money.

Dickhead, you could also get your problem solved up North in Montreal Canada or in Vancouver, its perfectly legal over there too.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur
[i]Dickhead, you could also get your problem solved up North in Montreal Canada or in Vancouver, its perfectly legal over there too. [/i][/QUOTE]
Yes, I have solved my problem in Vancouver several times but it's rather expensive by my standards. Haven't been to Montreal but I'll probably get around to it some day. I lurked on the Canada board a bit and it seems a bit expensive there too, and it's also an expensive place to get to for me, relatively speaking.

"Dickhead, you could also get your problem solved up North in Montreal Canada or in Vancouver, its perfectly legal over there too"

The only way to do it legally in Canada is to bring her to your house or hotel. Getting a hummer in the back of your Hummer is a sure fire way to end up giving some guy in a prison cell a hummer of his own (or worse yet... a tossed salad). At $200+ CDN for an hour (+- $135US) plus hotel etc... it just ain't that cheap. And as always you'll likely end up with a cold fish.

As this IS the American Women forum I'll have to add some useable content:

Had a conversation with my GF last weekend and the following came out of her mouth (unfortunately not what I wanted to see coming out of her mouth). She expressed that she can see no reason why one person giving head to another would enjoy giving it. I was shocked at this one... no wonder she refuses to honk on the old tube steak. Besides my initial wonder as to why she can't figure this one out (as a guy with a fixation), I was also pissed at the pure selfishness of the statement. I had always thought that the "yucky" factor at the end was more important to girls... now I hear that there's a whole mental aspect to it as well.

Oh man FU, that is a bad deal. Sorry to hear that. I love to eat pussy even more than I love to get blow jobs. Giving pleasure gives ME pleasure, and I'm a total dickhead and an innately selfish asshole, so I would assume that many other more compassionate humanoids enjoy giving pleasure as well.

But it's interesting because I know there are some guys who don't like to eat pussy. In particular I have had a lot of black guys tell me that over the years. I had one black guy tell me, "If you had a dick like a brother, you wouldn't NEED to eat pussy." I tried to explain to him that I LIKED to eat pussy and I just don't think he believed me. Same thing in Méjico; I am very popular down there because I go right down and a lot of gals tell me their boyfriends won't chow down.

Dunno FU, but I don't think the relationship has a future if she ain't gonna gobble the goober. I assume you've tried applying mass amounts of alcohol?

Yes... alcohol has been liberally applied. The problem with alcohol is that she gets so horned up that she just wants me to give her some pipe. One day when I tried to go down on her she asked me where I was going and why I wanted to do it.

This is frustrating for another reason: I'm not exactly Mr Longevity on my first pop. I've tried using condoms with desensitizer in them but they literally knock him out. So I'm stuck with maybe ten or fifteen minutes of not so fast humping before I'm drained... I'd really like to stay at the party later and a return trip is not usually in order.

And lets not forget about that one week per month when I get nothing at all.

I know there's girls out there who enjoy nobbling on the gob... but I sure can't seem to find them.

I agree with you on the eating concept. Every girl I've been with has been grateful and says I'm NOT in the majority... but they're still selfish and refuse to return the favor. I dream about having the spit or swallow dillema with my GF.

And yes... the relationship is over. I like her, and having a warm body to sleep next to, but I just can't compromise on sex... it's too ingrained in my nature (thanks Dad :) )

I'm with you, Dickhead. Figuring out what makes her squirm and pant is part of the thrill, let alone the pure sensory experience.

FedUp -- you might ask her if that applies to all such situations, such as giving someone else a backrub or massage, or just doing something nice for someone else. Can she understand how a man can get pleasure from sucking on her breasts? If she can't see how those things can give pleasure, then it's time to run away, fast, as this sounds like a relationship in which everything will need to be negotiated (sorry, I get no pleasure from doing the dishes so forget it -- and that's a gender neutral reference) and if she can see it then time to really have a frank talk about what really bothers her. It would also be interesting to hear her take on mutual oral, as there the pleasure equation's a bit more direct.

ok so on the longevity issue: i don't think desensitizing condoms are the way to go because that will exacerbate the situation when you don't use them. do you know about the "squeeze technique"? what this involves is you or a non-selfish and willing partner squeezing the bottom of the joy stick at some point not too much prior to the "point of no return." you do this a few times and then you will develop a sort of "vapor lock" where you will be hard but don't feel like busting a nut just then.

disclaimer: i've never had that issue and so have not tried this, but it's in the literature and i lived with a sex therapist for a while; she claims it works good and i am not aware of any particular dangers or side effects.

on the other hand, when you say a second round is usually not in order, i think you will find that once you find a woman who likes to suck, a second round will be in order. by this i mean two things: a) whenever i get blown to completion i immediately want to fuck til completion, and b) sometimes after round 1 the little son of a ***** is just lying there, but when suction is applied, he rises to the occasion.

i am 45 now and i can get it up just as good and just as often as i ever could, but sometimes i can't get it off, especially when condoms are involved. that often works to the woman's advantage but sometimes leads to her just getting the snot pounded out of her to no real avail. what i do find at this stage of the game is that if the woman is bitchy or disinterested or smells like a carp farm, the little son of a ***** just rolls over and dies, so this may be part of your issue regarding round two.

Oh and WTF is up with this no sex one week per month? Is that her or you? Dickhead will wade in the red river any time. It's nice and warm and adds moisture. The only real issue is that tampons dry things out. The solution? A good old fashioned diaphragm. That dams up the red river without drying up the creek bed. A lot of gals have told me over the years that they like sex during their period cuz orgasms help the cramps; I've even been told that just getting pounded is helpful even if they can't come that way.

If you use the Dickhead Diaphragm Dam, you may even find yourself in the mood for a light snack ...

Hi guys,
I've been lurking here for quit a while now, with mixed feelings as the sex situation in my country isn't as bad yet as it is in yours and most girls I bedded were or became great lovers. But as the US way of life is spreading all over the world, our girls get formatted just the way your remotely female lardballs are. So I'm more than worried there.
Dickhead : seek out a book by Jolan Chang, it's called The Tao of Love and Sex, I found that 15 years ago and it totally turned my sex life around. The compression technique you mentioned was mentioned in the Kinsey & Masters Report, but it's really beginners stuff, believe me. There's more to learn in that area, and that's when fun begins.
As for oral delights, have you ever tried getting in position for a sideway 69 ? Once you start your part, I found out that most can't help returning the favor.
RN : I read your posts on this forum with much pleasure. You truly are a lady.

Yes, read that book many years ago and recommend it highly to Fedup and others. What do you mean about "sideways" soixant-neuf vs. any other direction? Isn't sideways the most common way to do that?? Isn't that why it's "69" as in two spoons in a drawer?

I think you mean EITHER Alfred Kinsey OR (Virginia) Masters and (William) Johnson. I don't think Kinsey wrote with either Ms. Masters or Mr. Johnson.

The only thing that could possibly be better than 69 is 68.

FedUp, its only illegal if you pick up a streetwalker but there are tons of escort services and I have never paid more than 140 Canadian dollars for an hour in Montreal plus the strip and massage parlours also offer sex and the quality is quite good. French Canadian women are a hidden treasure. "Cold fish" you say??!! I would love to hear what your idea of "hot tamale" is. The Quebecois women are much different than women in the rest of Canada and the US, they're more laid back with regards to sex and they seem to enjoy it without little sense of guilt. Although they're not as sexually assertive as their European and South American counterparts. I would say Vancouver's scene is a little iffy but Montreal is the sex capital of North America.

Phillipe, yes and no about the US way of life abroad changing the sex lives of people. When you mean by the US way of life, do you mean the increase in capitalist and free enterprise activity abroad? To be fair, people around the world want that comfortable "US way of life", we're not shoving it in people's faces. People simply want it, to have economic prosperity and affluence, who in the world doesn't like money?? I spent the early 80's in West Germany and that country at the time was as 'American' as you can get, by that I mean it was highly capitalist and it still is to a degree, The Netherlands is quite businesslike as well, so is Scandinavia, but attitudes towards sex and romance are still much different than they are in America, for example Denmark is SUPER RICH, yet the women there still seem to be quite loose and friendly. Just my input.

CBGB, parlez-vous Francais? Je regrette, mais je ne parle pas. Would that affect my experience and the price I would pay if I did go to Montreal? I have an opportunity to get as far as Niagara Falls for free next month.

I hardly speak a word. The Quebecois women are not as Anglophobic as their counterparts in Paris, some women speak some English but it wasn't a problem for me I just wanted some rumpy pumpy. As for street hookers, the cops can't arrest you just for looking at them. FedUp is right, if a cop feels like being a dick he could write you up for soliciting a street hooker. The women on St. Catherine Street in Montreal are good quality women, they're not the crack *****s I bump into in New York. The women in looks average 6-7, with many solid 8's and quite a few 9-10's in the mix. But with the legal situation on street prostitution, its at your risk basically. If you want to be 100 percent safe just use the escort services, as long as she comes to your house or hotel room its OK. Personally I just use the escort services, strip clubs, and incall *****houses in Montreal, there are tons of ads in the Mirror paper. Dickhead, i got news for you, Quebec women know how to give blowjobs, often they do it without the rubber, they know how to suck dick like no one in our hemisphere. Note the word hemisphere. hee hee!!! Niagra Falls? Toronto has some stuff but I think its too overpriced. Its also a lot further away than Montreal from NY, almost a 3 hour difference.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur
[i]IDickhead, i got news for you, Quebec women know how to give blowjobs, often they do it without the rubber, they know how to suck dick like no one in our hemisphere. Note the word hemisphere. hee hee!!! Niagra Falls? Toronto has some stuff but I think its too overpriced. Its also a lot further away than Montreal from NY, almost a 3 hour difference. [/i][/QUOTE]

I have no reason to go to Niagara Falls per se but I have the opportunity to hitch a ride on a private plane. Toronto been there done that. Escorts are too expensive and you can't see the merchandise before it shows up. Streetwalkers are too dangerous. I like brothels or w h o r e houses or whatever you want to call them, or hookers that hang out in hotel bars.

Now by "our hemisphere" do you mean northern or western? Some women I have met in "our hemisphere" could suck a bowling ball through a Dixie straw.

I mean the Northern Hemisphere, the women down in Rio though take the cake for the Southern Hemisphere. Still, sex with the Montreal hookers is a world above what I find in the States with regular women and hoes. In Europe its almost 2 worlds above.

Guys,

This one I have heard but never tried personally.
Basically before starting a BJ she fills her mouth with water. Then she starts taking the dick in her mouth being careful that the lips make a perfect seal around it (no drops left out).
She starts the job and once you come she drinks everything all together;
I heard it's great if instead of water you actually use sparkling water, or rum and coke, etc.

Disclaimer: if your partener drowns or throws up I had nothing to do with this idea.

Fedup: this could be a way to dilute the nut, maybe that would be more acceptable.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by stranger99
[i]Guys,

This one I have heard but never tried personally.
Basically before starting a BJ she fills her mouth with water. Then she starts taking the dick in her mouth being careful that the lips make a perfect seal around it (no drops left out).
She starts the job and once you come she drinks everything all together;
I heard it's great if instead of water you actually use sparkling water, or rum and coke, etc.

Disclaimer: if your partener drowns or throws up I had nothing to do with this idea.

Fedup: this could be a way to dilute the nut, maybe that would be more acceptable. [/i][/QUOTE]

ROTFLMFAO right now but ... blow job with a mouth full of ice cubes good. Hot tea blow job good but let it cool off some (really nice gal I met in NZ did this last year). Sparkling water good for blow jobs. Blow job while your nuts are soaking in warm water good. Blow job while your nuts are soaking in ice water .... I didn't like it but YEMV. However, blow job involving sugared carbonated soda BAD cuz very sticky and that kinda makes your pubic hairs get stuck in her mouth and that tugs in a bad way. Also alcohol burns. Even a red wine blow job I found uncomfortable. White wine better cuz less acidic. And any gal who can maintain a perfect seal the whole time is way too controlling for me. Nothing wrong with a bit of dribbling.

Your loyal servant Dickhead has tried blow jobs with fine brandy, blow jobs with diluted cocaine (this does slow down the process but who wants to turn a blow job into a felony), Kahlua blow jobs (VERY sticky), champagne blow jobs (sticky but nice and bubbly), hot fudge blow jobs, strawberry jam blow jobs, whipped cream blow jobs and most of the above in the reverse direction. Do NOT use high proof alcohol (151 rum very bad idea) and be careful if you use sticky stuff and then fuck afterwards as this can lead to skin tears. Also be careful if you apply ice directly to the clitoris; maybe put the ice cube in a condom or a latex glove or something.

A good old fashioned hot water bottle is handy for hot liquid games and ice cube games. Also if you take a battery operated dildo and put it inside a condom or a latex glove, you can then put THAT inside a hot water bottle full of either ice or warm liquid and that's pretty good too. The wrapping has to cover the entire surface of the dildo. Otherwise it shorts right out! Do NOT do that with a plug in vibrator = very bad. Another trick is for her to hold a vibrator on the outside of her cheek while she blows you = GOOD. Also works on the front of the throat but this makes a lot of gals gag = BAD. Bottom side of the chin usually good.

A natural reflex for most gals is to relax their lips when you start to come so expecting "no drops left out" is unrealistic if she has a large volume of liquid in her mouth to begin with, so "less is more" in this situation.

Next week's class: Fun With Curling Irons

Stranger99, that is some fucken sick ass shit. No wonder they kicked your ass out of Europe.

phillipe,
thank you honey :) what a lovely thing to say! welcome to the board.

dickhead,
re: your last post...i think you should send me your number. *grin*just kidding...but it's nice to see a man who's willing to experiment and have some fun with sex.

fedup,
sorry to hear about you and your girlie, honey. i completely agree that a man who really likes to daty is a rare find indeed. she's a fool to let you go in my opinion! (don't forget i'm still waiting on my couch...only one year and 51 weeks to go. hehe)

re: periods...working girls over here use a sea sponge (or purpose made sterile sponges from the chemist/drug store) to stop the flow. you dampen them slightly, put some water based lube on them (to stop things drying out inside) and insert them just like a tampon. when you have sex, especially with a condom, you don't even know it's there. did y'all really think hookers didn't get periods?? lol otherwise, dickhead is right. some girls use diaphragms for the same purpose, but they can be tricky (and messy) to retrieve after the fact. sponges are fantastic. also, there is a lot to be said for sex in the shower during that time of the month *grin*

and for building up stamina during sex, i recommend dickhead's idea of pinching the penis, or alternatively, some good old-fashioned coitus interruptus (sp?). go at it until you are just about there, then go down on her or play with her breasts or something...anything to stop you thinking about your dick! then when the feeling subsides a little, do it again. if you have a really understanding partner, you could even stop altogether every now and then, and maybe get up and get a drink or give her a massage or play with her hair...
but i do have to mention one thing though...women do not always want a man who will pound her for an hour straight. a large number of women cannot experience a vaginal orgasm at all, and in fact, there are hardly any nerve endings inside her. it's all at "the doorway". most women seem to prefer a lot of foreplay, and intercourse as "dessert"...a way to finish it off. (that's why viagra is most women's nightmare!!)

as for stranger99's liquid blowjob idea...i've always found a mouthful of coke or champagne gets a pretty good response (although i will not be drinking it down afterwards!!! *shudder*) also, alternating between drinking hot coffee and cold drinks or ice (just warming/cooling the inside of my mouth...swallowing the liquid before i actually put the penis in there) seems to be popular too. this also works well on nipples for those girls or boys who are "nipple stimulation" inclined.

dickhead,
i always found a vibrator on low speed held against that wonderfully sensitive area between the balls and the anus during a blowjob, sent men wild. also, holding a vibe against my clitoris during missionary sex was a good one too.

CBGB, by US way of life, I meant the reshaping of mentalities through advertising and marketing.
You always end up wanting what's on the screen, no matter what it is.
As for free enterprise and capitalism, it can hardly be called an US invention as it's way older than the good old US of A.
I can't say I ever really had fun in Germany, I always found the mentality too repressed compared to neighbour countries like Belgium or Austria. Sometimes, even having sex there had a by-the-book feel.
Dickhead : Here in France, I don't see that many sideways soixante neuf because most 69's I've enjoyed had started as BJs where I could no longer stand being inactive.
So the sideways starting point was more used to entice a novice girl to try a taste of me. Never seen that approach fail yet, or maybe I was very lucky.
RN : Obviously, there are more charms to the land down under than just amber nectar and shrimps on the barbie. I should try digging a tunnel in my back yard ! :)

Phillipe, there's saying that things appear to be one thing but they are really another. Germany doesn't advertise itself to the rest of the world about its 'scene' but Germany is full of FKK sex clubs(in one region of Germany there are over 300 of them) which are unbelievable and as uninhibited as they come. For me I find German women are among the most beautiful in the world and their relaxed attitude towards sex proves that. I think the most beautiful women I have ever seen in my life was in Germany, she was part Turkish too, and all I have to say was 'wow', all those plastic American female celebrities I have been brainwashed into admiring through advertising and marketing as you pointed out, could not compare to this beautiful woman. Still I think with regards to sex Europe will always be above the US. I also believe the repressed sex scene in America is really a product of the US's AngloSaxon heritage as well as its Christian fundamentalist leanings.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CBGBConnisur
[i]I also believe the repressed sex scene in America is really a product of the US's AngloSaxon heritage as well as its Christian fundamentalist leanings. [/i][/QUOTE]

It's always useful to remember that the early settlers of the US -- the Puritans -- were perhaps the only group ever to flee their countries because they felt it was [b]too[/b] tolerant. Few in Europe were sad to see them go, and many wished that the earth truly were flat so these folks would get a swifter trip to the great beyond. It's ironic to think that so many followed later for exactly the opposite reasons.

And Philippe, I agree with you wholeheartedly about the Americanization of the world, as well as its unfortunate nature, though at this point I'd also blame it on the nature of cultural leveling performed by multinational corporations, many of which are American-based, originated, or modeled. I can find a McDonalds (or Pizza Hut, or whatever) pretty much anywhere I go in the world, as well as see CNN or ESPN, let alone Baywatch or whatever. I remember talking to a translator who worked with me in Columbia -- he said because he was an American who spoke fluent Spanish (as well as good looking) he was in constant demand for TV commercials, as advertisers felt people would pay attention to what he had to say because he was American. Now, this was a smart and charming guy, and people should pay attention to him for that, but I've got a number of neighbors I pray no one ever pays attention to at all :)

I suggest to use age brackets when defining the beauty of the women of one country.

It is true that German women are nice (although boring, all blondes , big tits) but they deteriorate preety quickly into redfaced, fattish, knodel eating ladies. Their expiration age I guess is around 35.

French and Italian women are classy all along their lives. Down side: a lot of showing off, too flashy sometimes.

Spanish women and Latin American: also nice (in reverse, boring as the German, all dark hair and eyes). Some of them have the defects that once into marriage they will let themselves go, meaning their ass is going to increase size in direct proportion with the elapsing of time (more or less like trees that add a circle of new wood to their logs every year).

Of American women we already said, they are born sequoias.

As I'm witnessing the transformation of our younger girls into brainless lardballs, I'm getting pretty desperate. France will soon be an awful place to get laid in.
It seems the prime cause for that is a steady diet of Coke, pizzas, hamburgers and all kinds of snacks, along with many hours sitting on one's ass in front of the TV.
So unless someone pulls the plug, we're doomed !
I don't think I could get used to that, I love a good tit-fuck just as every other guy, but there it would feel like surfing on cellulite.
CBGB : Maybe Paris will still hold its own for a while because it's the capital, so girls with better brains or looks flock there because that's where the money is, but we're bound to run out of babes any time soon.
Jackson : as the disaster is going global, I suggest a topic's name change to Occidental women :(

Phillipe, if France falls we can always go East to Poland, Hungary, Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria and such. I think eventually India will the next big place for single men. Miss Universe last year was from India and they are constantly making the semifinals. I still have a hard time believing you Phillipe that younger women in France are becoming fat as you so say. I was living in France for quite some time and it seems as the majority of women in their 20's are quite slim. I only saw a few occasional younger fat women, and I realized she wasn't French when I heard her accent, she was Scottish. This observation became more apparent as I visited Britain, I told a relative of mine how come so many Englishwomen are so fat and women in the rest of Europe are overall thin and attractive, I pointed out to the fact that I saw literally thousands of beautiful young women in France, Holland, Germany, Belgium, and Spain but when I dropped into Britain all the lovely ladies dissapeared. He replied that British and Irish women simply are ugly to begin with, always was ugly and always will be and that a lot of his mates go to the continent for pussy. Most of my friends who have been to both Britain and France also say the same thing, that the British women are fat and ugly and the French ladies are overall extremely attractive. Some of my British colleagues also find that there is a difference between the British and French female, and that is that the French female is much sexier. Any of the more overweight women I saw in France appeared to be older such as those on the Rue St. Denis or middle aged housewives, but hey thats nature and a woman's physical beauty is a transient thing.

CBGB, don't mistake the situation in a capital city with the general state of the nation.
There might be plenty of gorgeous girls in some selected spots in Paris, but it's still only a few miles drive from the real world of cheap tarts.
Girls go wherever the opportunities are, when they have the brains or the looks to succeed. The rest sticks where it is, and that's what a majority of guys have to put up with.

Phillipe you're not fooling anyone I KNOW who you really are, you are USBabe masquerading as Phillipe, a Frenchmen, I have caught you!!!!!! Now I will remove you from the list of reliable posters.

I always knew USBabe was a tranny.

I think that girls from the US, England and Canada can all be grouped together as there is no common language barrier. All end up fat once they hit the 35 year expiry date. I've found that the English girls have a healthier attitude to sex... which is the only difference between them.

I have a unique viewing position here at my desk... I can look out two opposite windows and watch people come and go. In the past 10 minutes I've seen 4 fat chicks and one thin. This seems to be the common ratio here in Florida (except for the trendier areas such as South Beach or Boca Raton), and is certainly the ratio for my neighbourhood.

Anyway... enough fat bashing... it's certainly not the only factor. Although in our lazy culture it is certainly easier to be fat and unambitious than to be thin and energetic. This is why we will soon be taken over by brown and yellow people.

Regarding the Montreal escort scene... if you're American watch out. They love your cash... but they make the rest of Canada look like amateurs when it comes to America bashing... as well as bashing the rest of Canada. Quebecois blame everyone else for their problems... as a Canadian I'm tired of hearing them whine about the same problems the rest of the country endures.

Something that most seem to forget about Canada is that natural Canadians are in the minority. There's 180 (or so) languages spoken in Toronto alone. Many of the girls that you see walking the street, and that you say are so good looking, are probably not even from Canada. The strip clubs are full of girls from eastern bloc countries... Canadian girls are rare.

Once again... The police can charge/arrest patrons of massage parlors (aka rub n tugs) as "found in's"... this still carries a misdemeanor charge and shows on your record. There are plenty of clubs in the Niagara Falls area Dickhead. If you're only there for 2 or three days it's not hard to stay amused... particularly if you're into the Casino scene.

I'm no stranger to ointments, oils, jellies, lubes, or syrups. The liquid in the mouth during a hummer is a new one though. I can't see however, how I could convince any girl that a "cum and coke" is an acceptable drink. Which raises the question of why American girls will down tons of liquor shots with such elegant names as "Sex on the Beach, Orgasm, or Blowjob"... but refuse to have the same in real life. I think that "tease" is an appropriate term that has so far been left off the list of descriptions for the American Woman.

Regarding my current GF: It seems that I am yet again (as with other GF's) having to repair damage caused by previous boyfriends. It's come to light this weekend that part of her hangup with BJ's is that some fuckwad decided it would be fun to get a forced deepthroat from her. A previous GF was once choked (against her will) by a guy while he was fucking her... as a result I was not able to touch her above her boobs without her tensing up. Another was subjected to a "oops wrong hole!" approach to anal sex and as a result refused to let me try it. Given my GF's current revelation I will give her another chance rather than just showing her the door... I can't blame her for being a bit reluctant.

American women can be a pain in the ass for sure... but American men are by no means innocent in our current problems.

Perhaps, Fedup, you can start by suggesting licking and nibbling rather than sucking. If you're so inclined, a bit of bondage (meaning you being restrained) might also go a long way to easing what's clearly a control anxiety.

And been there, done that, in terms of emotional repair work. Good luck -- it can be a long process, but a rewarding one, as it's all about repairing her sense of trust.

Thanks, FU, but to me Niagara Falls = East bumfuck as I like to have some cultural pursuits once I am suitably drained. If I do make the trip, I'll go to Montreal and use me wee Irish brogue. Any Thai girls up there?

Brilliant suggestion, Joe. I'm starting to think you and Dickhead should start your own "Sex Tips" website! LOL And no, I'm not taking the [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url]...I mean it. Fedup, try Joe's idea. Let her feel in control, and come to realise that you are not a threat. Our bodies respond in the strangest ways to deep-seated fears, even when our brains are trying to tell us otherwise. It just takes persistence.

Good on you though for deciding to see her through this. It is a lot easier to just say "Too hard" and walk away. You are truly a good man. :)

PS...You don't need to actually answer this (too personal, I know) but I was wondering if you and your GF are using condoms for oral? If not, I would suggest that maybe you try it. The plastic coating can make the penis seem a little "less real" in your mouth. Flavoured condoms are even better, masking all the natural tastes and smells associated with oral.

Also, lay on your back while she's doing it and keep your hands where she can see them (on your stomach or something). If you need to move your hands, to scratch your nose or whatever, do it very slowly...no sudden moves.

We could call the site "The Idealist and The Pragmatist," similar to El Gordo y La Flaca.

It is my opinion that if condoms were to be used for oral sex between boyfriends and girlfriends, that would remove the final remaining reason to have a girlfriend.

Did you hear about the Irish guy who was told to use a condom each and every time he had sex? After three days, he had to [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] so bad he cut a hole in the end of it.

Yes Dickhead... Niagara Falls is not exactly the cultural centre of Canada by any means. I don't really see any part of North America that has much culture anyway... we're too busy selling it for SUV's and Big Mac's. As far as sightseeing goes the east and west coasts have the most scenery anyway. Check out Vancouver if you like the mountains... but expect rain.

I'll also agree with you in that the day I need to use a rubber for GF sex is the day I'll change my alias to Fuckthishit, and start scoping out tall bridges.


Thanks RN :)

>>Did you hear about the Irish guy who was told to use a condom each and every time he had sex? After three days, he had to [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] so bad he cut a hole in the end of it.<<

No, Dickhead (love writing that), didn't hear that one but did you hear about the the two Canadian junkies sharing needles in a heroin shooting gallery? One of them asks the other if he was scared of getting AIDS. The other goes, "No fucking way, you hoser! I'm wearing a condom!"

Hmm, RN, I dunno if I could take being in charge of another website. Although, generating the proper amount of good content for that one might not be as unpleasant a research process as some of the others...

El Gordo y La Flaca, eh? Guess that's better than Click and Clack :)

Hi Guys & RN,

Had an interesting experience in a bar over the weekend which I thought really depicted the "American Woman" at her worst.

Was in a bar after playing tennis with some friends and 4 large women sat down at the table next to us. They were not only huge, but loud, on stage, smoked like fiends and had Coke bottles for glasses. How may of you have seen this syndrome before???

In walk two nice looking blond girls who were well dressed, slender, etc. Really nice girls who proceeded to sit at the bar.

Well, the 275 pounders at the next table started laughing out loud and were calling them "Snow White," "Barbie Doll," etc. They were really rude and were loud enough so that the girls at the bar could hear them. It was a pretty distgusting display of American womanhood at its worst.

I thought that this really depicted what many American women are like and woe to those few women who still look and act like women. Anyone ever catch this "act" before??? It was appalling.

Paddy,

Other women are every woman's worst enemy. Fat women criticise thin women, pretty women criticise unattractive women. I (with a slim/athletic body type) have been told I am fat by little skinny rakes and told I am too thin by heavier women. If I wear a short skirt I am called a tramp, in jeans I am a slob. Women are judgemental cows who are never happy with what they have and are always jealous of someone who has what they want. I have to say, I pretty much squarely blame the media for this. Also, men who constantly point out our failings or compare us to other women (right in front of us) have a lot to answer for too. We are always being told we are not "good enough"...not slim enough, not busty enough, not blonde enough, etc. I think we tend to blame the women who DO fit these profiles (even if only in our minds) for making us look bad. (Kind of a "If SHE wasn't here then maybe men would look at ME" type attitude).

As for the girls you mentioned, I bet I know what sort of reaction the blonde girls' entry into the bar received. I have a busty blonde friend that attracts the same attention. All heads swivel, conversation quiets briefly, and all other women in the bar are momentarily ignored. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it can cause a bit of bitterness in the ignorees! LOL What the heavy girls said was cruel, but it is just a reflection of their insecurities. My bet is, they were trying to discredit the girls in front of the other patrons, make them look a bit silly and ultimately DENT THEIR SELF CONFIDENCE. That is a nasty trick, but it works. Most of a woman's sex appeal (in my opinion) has to do with their air of confidence...take that away and make them look uncomfortable or self conscious, and they don't "shine" as much as they did when they walked in.

Like I said, a woman is a woman's worst enemy...

I've witnessed that sort of stuff before too Paddy.

In my observation women (if they can be called that) who have reached that stage have already realised how fat and unattractive they are, and have resigned themselves to that fact. They have lost their sense of jealousy and replaced it with a sense of self loathing and have the whole "fuck everybody else... I am who I am and if you don't like me you can kiss my ass" attitude. They're herd animals at that point... living off the strength of the others. If one of them was separated from the other three they would be meek and unaggressive, their attitudes of the pack (helped with a bit of alcohol I'm sure) will have evaporated and they are left only with their own insecurities. The most disagreeable part of their behaviour is that any one of them would give up their fat asses in a heartbeat to look like one of the two attractive girls they were insulting.

I've never been able to figure out where a person's attitudes in life stem from. Those twats should have been ashamed to leave the house in their flower patterned bed sheets; Yet they did, and were even so bold as to insult others. Perhaps they need to be shown a video of themselves before they can rein themselves in off the farm.

It's cunts like that that make me...

Fedup

Hi RN & Fedup,

Your analyses of the situation which transpired were both correct and compelling to say the least. Thanks.

I guess that I was startled by the ferocity of their attacks on these two girls who were complete strangers. I had thought that this type of behavior was indigenous to American women alone. According to RN, however, it's a universal phenomenon.

I spend a lot of time abroad and have never seen an attack like this before. I've only seen these "herds" of fat girls pullling this stuff in the good old US of A. Believe me, these girls took no prisoners. One of the other guys suggested that we move to another table to get away from these loud and abrasive louts. When me moved they started smiling at us and chuckling (i.e. what a bunch of wimps). I began to stare menacingly at the ringleader and they finally backed off.

I agree Fedup, it's women like this that make me want to ....

Paddy...

Assholes come in all shapes, sizes, sexes, etc. It's so odd to me how one group that experiences discrimination will often choose to act just as horribly to another group.
This is NOT representative of American Women. This is representative of the fact that people who are dumped on will almost always look to dump on someone else. Just look at all of the people in this section of the board who try to put everyone else down just because they themselves feel inferior deep down inside.
However, I wonder if all the people who reacted so negatively to these "ladies' " antics would react as strongly if the shoe were on the other foot and the overweight women were being insulted by a group of "beautiful" women.

Well said Miller...

A **** is a ****... whether they be thin or fat, black or white, tall or short... makes no difference to me. I hold attractive women who bash unattractive women in the same contempt as the ladies Paddy had to put up with.

I could reverse the argument and point out the many attractive women who feel the need to insult and embarrass unattractive ladies in order to make themselves feel better about their bodies. The next morning those same attractive women will be standing in front of the mirror and wondering "augh!!! why are my feet so big?... did that mole have to grow RIGHT THERE!!!... Has my ass grown while I was sleeping???" etc.

Both of these examples seem to be exacerbated by being an AW. The old adage "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" seems to have been lost in our culture. I wonder if anyone in this country is immune to insults from others. Even Tom Cruise (he's sooooo short!) and Britney Spears (could she B any blonder?) are targets. Some of America's more exotic exports to the rest of the world? How about bulimia and anorexia.

We have to open up a new discussion on European Women and other regions as well such as Asia and South America. Anyone who thinks American women are the only game in town is a sucker severely limiting his options. It's ironic my open mind to meeting people from various different countries has created a close mindedness to American women. I guess the grass truly is greener on the other side. It sure is. Oh well we live in a contradictory planet.

CBGB, I don't mean any disrespect, nor do I want to argue with you, but I must say that you've made your point over, and over, and over, and over again. We all understand perfectly well that you've found women in Europe to be more receptive to intimacy than US women. OK OK OK OK OK. We've heard you. We respect your opinion. But do you think that by stating it over and over again that you're going to convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you? C'mon now.

Again, I truly mean no disrespect, but please stop saying the same thing over and over again. I for one am getting tired of it, and I can't imagine that I'm the only one.

Peace

50% of all US women are fat? Overweight by some margin, perhaps. But fat? As in obese? Maybe so, but it never struck me that way. Then again I don't count fat people and thin people. Don't know why anyone would either. What's with the hatred of fat people that seems to be present on this board? Are y'all slender as can be then? Strikes me as odd that a group of folks who have to pay for sex wouln't contain any fat bastards. What's so bad about fat people anyway. OK, so if they're unattractive to you, then don't fuck one. Jeez.

By the way, from my "folks that have to pay for sex" comment, don't gather that I'm some anti-prostitution zealot, or a moralizer of some kind. I myself have to pay for sex when I want it on an emergency basis, that's how I discovered this board. But I just have to say that the degree of "fat bashing" that goes on here is disturbing. It's a reflection of our National obsession (I live in the US) with being slender, which is not so healthy. Refer to Fedup's post about the US's "more exotic" exports, anorexia and bulemia (well put Fedup).

jwny72 ,

I disagree with you. I enjoy hearing the same shit over and over again. CBGB, please, get on your soapbox again and enlighten us with your many (and I do mean MANY) insightful insights (was that redundant enough for you my fearless swami?) into American, European and Martian women. Have you and FEDup pricked your fingers, tasted each other's blood and repeated the secret oath yet? Also, can you please send me an audio tape of your posts concerning the American female. They are classics... almost as good as DEAR ABBY.

.
. . . . And if Tylan05 would only return, we could be "truely enlightened". Maybe it's only me, but in my book, you can't criticize American women until you have mastered the English language. How can you score if you can't talk to them? And before you talk about fat, I need to see what YOU are offering. I know too many losers, fat themselves, who criticize women's looks despite their own sad appearances. Those who score with American women (50 million guys?) are busy doing it while the rest can only bbitch about it. Please! Give us some insight or give us a break . . . -P

Yes Macoutssomethingorother?... this forum does appear to have hit a flat spot as of the moment... do share your monumental, earth-shattering thoughts of the day, and we will be sure to show the proper reverence for them. Oh, and yes... Dear Abby has some issues.

I would say that there is too much "bashing" that goes on in the US, period... not just on this board. Both men and women, fat and thin, are guilty of it. It seems to be an integral part of being human, although in the US it seems to have gained more of an accepted genre to it. I'm sure all of us have been subjected to some sort of discrimination in our lives... I, for being on the thin average looking side... RN for being an attractive SW... Dickhead for being a... well... Dickhead.

So... rather than sound like a pretentious, self absorbed prick I will pass the soapbox over to Macout... and, as Fraiser says... "I'm listening"...

Yes Proko... what ever happened to Tylan? He was a prick... but at least he had an opinion and didn't just criticise.

Hello FedUp,
I accept your invitation to say something but I don't have anything new or insightful to say right now so you may have to wait a bit. It is not my nature to spout off a continuous stream of babbling prattle just because I enjoy what I have to say. I've leave that up to geniuses like you and CBGB. Don't get me wrong... I really am impressed by guys like you who really are impressed with themselves.
Thanks for your support.

Guys,

This section started as a space to bash American women (after a pissed off American woman spouted lots of nasty things about American men in the Thailand section of the old forum). Once things cooled off and the Thailand posters forgot about it, this section turned into an intelligent discussion on the difficulties of dating (or more specifically, getting laid). There was lots of interesting information being shared and I think it was probably to the benefit of everyone here.

This latest discussion...how fat women are and how stupid each individual poster is in the mind of other posters...is certainly not benefiting anyone. Maybe we need two separate sections? One about dating/getting laid and one called "101 reasons why I hate chicks...period"? I know saying this will just start a constant stream of flameage in my direction, but honestly...the bitterness and anger that all of you have been directing at each other lately is beneath you all. Do we really want this section to go back to a place to bash American women AND each other??

Sorry...just my two cents...

We need to create another section dedicated totally to foriegn women. Especially those in Europe, South America, and East Asia, which seem to be the most open places in the world for a traveler to find love. The evolution of the American women is occurring so rapid that most of the women I see aren't much differrent from men. Every time I go abroad I get reminded of this when I see and meet some real women. I think George Lucas knows something, living in America its like the real life version of Attack of the Clones, or in this case Attack of the Fat Overweight American Feminazis. Speaking of Lucas he was seen in Cannes, France with a gorgeous unnamed French beauty. She must have showed him the true ways of the force. The force is with him!!

Well, the sections about which women are best for short and long-term relationships have at times had exactly that kind of discussion about foreign women (other times it's people making lists.) This thread does tend to have a lot more mindless bashing going on -- very little discussion about, for example, why American women behave the ways they do as opposed to other women, or what differences there are by locale and so on. At least a part of this is because any time someone starts something like that, they get shouted down by cries of "they're all fat! ugly! mean! self-asbsorbed! materialistic! b*tches!" and a personal anecdote as opposed to actual discussion of the point.

RN, I pretty much agree with you, but I think this thread is probably just going to ebb and flow based on a) someone bringing up a specific issue or question and b) who tends to post. Tylan is a good example -- when he was posting, the only discussion at all that went on here were long diatribes about fat people and his opinions about how horrible they were, and people's responses to him. When USbabe was posting here there was some small back and forth until she was driven out. Now, because CBGB wishes he were in Europe with the woman he misses, that tends to be the song that gets played over and over and over. This thread started out as a place to b*tch and moan, as opposed to one where information would be exchanged, and that's pretty much what it's remained.

Ok I guess its getting boring but all hope is not lost for those stuck in North America, there's some great fun to be had at our two friendly neighbors, Mexico and Canada. I've read a lot about Montreal, Quebec's scene. In addition I've heard some incredible tales about trips accross the border to Mexico in Matamaros or Tijuana. Ok you want to know why I really don't care about American women?? Ok I could probably write volumes about it but let me give you one example. In Paris last summer I was riding the Metro(the European term for subway), I was sitting on a bench waiting for the next train. Then I see an attractive French women sit next to me in the station. I noticed that she was looking at me. I'm from New York and I never make eye contact with others, but this French lady suddenly looked directly at me, I winced away shyly and then she looked at me again and smiled. She asked if she could smoke next to me, I didn't mind, I was actually surprised that she would ask for my permission. Then a conversation ensued. She initially thought I was a Spaniard,(BTW I am part Mexican). She was in her 20's and spoke fairly good English. The train arrived and we spoke some more, she gave me her number to call her and later on we got together. This from a total stranger, she wasn't at all afraid of me and it was actually quite the opposite. This didn't happen to me all the time in Europe that a friendly glance led to something more but for some reason I got so many friendly and warm glances from women, and heck not just women but men too(I'm not implying anything about that) I guess the woman on the Paris subway found me intriguiging and wasn't shy about it. Now lets take this to New York City, my lovely home(that's sarcasm). Nobody talks to a total stranger in a public in this town. Enlightened by the friendly attitudes I encountered in Europe I decided to show that attitude back home. One day in late August 2001, I was waiting for the train to midtown(this was when I returned from Europe) and I noticed a woman looking directly at me. I tried to use the technique the brunette in Paris used, I just smiled in response and then she replied coldly, "Yes, do I know you???". I said "No." and shrugged my shoulders. Then she replied hotly "Then why are you looking at me?? Don't fucken look at me." *****. I don't know what this woman on the Manhattan subway's problem was but she initiated the eye contact I was just simply minding my own business. Reality hit me that this is not Europe and that people are a lot colder here. This is what USBabe refered to as 'guarded behavior'. Its this 'guarded behavior' that I just can't stand in American ladies.

CBGB -- good story, but NYC is also a special case unto itself, and not completely representative of the rest of the country. New Yorkers in general try to take hostility to a new art form. Where I grew up eye contact isn't all that unusual, but at times I've walked around NYC with folks I know and they have asked me if I was trying to get into a fight or to intimidate people. When I ask why I'm told that no one just walks down the street actually looking at other people; you're supposed to avoid eye contact, keep your head down, and make clear you're minding your own business.

Don't get me wrong -- I actually really like NYC, and have had at least fifty or sixty trips there in the past half-dozen years, and have a whole bunch of friends there. But it's definitely got its own rules and attitudes, and in general they're not geared toward being socially friendly. And that's true regardless of the sex of the person involved.

Yes... I would agree RN... there's no sense bashing each other... unless one of us truly deserves it

Proko said... "Those who score with American women (50 million guys?) are busy doing it while the rest can only bbitch about it."

You're probably right on in that estimation. So, to rein things back onto AW... what are the other 100 million doing wrong? Miller was a great expounder of the view (and I agree) that you can't find undamaged goods if you're damaged goods yourself. But then, we're all damaged in some way... so where's the problem? Jerry Springer's folks always seem to find each other (which is rather funny as I'm currently in the search for a, cough, "manufactured" home of my own). Maybe our/my problem is that we always seek to attain something better than what we can afford.

Or maybe I'm just repeating shit that's been said before.

A new topic: How to pick up AW... here's a couple of my observations:

Bullshit:

Bullshit should be a required subject in school. Those who are best at making shit up and "embellishing" seem to do the best in life. This is as true for business/politics as it is in dating. AW do it; look at the wonderbra. If she can overstate her "assets" then I think I should be able to overstate my profession. For example: I'm not a Janitor... "I'm a Sanitary Engineer baby, I oversee a crew of five"... purposely leaving out that my crew of five are actually mop buckets.

Money:

Pick a bar and only go there once every two weeks. Throw money around like you've got two more stacks waiting at home. Find two other dudes who look like fun and buy them rounds of drinks. Once you all start howling like dogs the girls will want to see what's going on and will come over... lavish them with drinks too. Chances are high that once she's drunk enough she's yours for the night. Bonus: If you're good with your bullshitting skills then you should be able to keep her around for a few more nights of fun... or until she's sober enough to realise you're driving a Hyundai.

Who else has some ideas?

Fed-Up,
Your post tells be a lot about you and how you perceive women. You clearly are confused and bewildered by these creatures and your sole approach is to lie about who you are and what you do in order to trick them into liking you - if only for one night.
.
First question: Do you want a GF or only get laid? This forum explains how to get laid anywhere in the world. It costs between $10 and $300 depending where you live and what you want. It is cheaper, more reliable and will take less time and energy than searching for a GF. Some men are wired in such a way that this is REALLY the best route. Most want more. Don't confuse a PRO with a GF or a GF with a PRO. Two completely different ideas. You can have BOTH - but life without a GF or wife is not very satisfying for the vast majority of men.
.
Once you have decided you want a GF, give-up the idea of getting laid upon meeting or on the first date or two. You are making an investment in time and energy to find a suitable life partner. View it as if you are interviewing for jobs. You have to convince her and she has to convince you. There will be MORE than enough time to screw her later. Don't assume she is dumber (or smarter) than you. Assume she wants more or less the same things as you - Love, great sex, companionship, adventure, entertainment and some sense of security. Women younger than 21 or 22 are often quite silly and unrealistic - true in ALL cultures. I would recommend meeting women 24 and up, even if you are only 21 or 22. In fact for young guys, I think the best prospects are divorced women 25-35. They no longer have that "princess" syndrome or the dreaded "White Dress Fever" More experienced and realistic after their break-up, they will appreciate you more and will exhibit less irrational behavior. Their expectations are lower and they're better in bed.
.
Once you have identified such a woman - in a bar, nightclub, disco, church, gym - you must separate her from her pack or herd and pursue her individually. None of this 3 guys at a bar hustling a group of 4 or 5 chicks - that's a mess. Listen carefully to the cackle of female voices and choose your prey. Then get her alone, someplace quiet where you can chat 1 on 1 for 15-20 minutes. Once removed from her companion herd, she will be more docile and not feel the need to impress her girlfriends. Attitude will disappear. Be confident. Show you are happy with who you are and find out if you share any interests with her. If not or if she exhibits any of the bad attitudes discussed by others, leave her IMMEDIATELY. Be polite, but never waste your time with losers. Others will observe you and know what type of man you are by your actions. Don't get drunk or loud. Please don't "howl" or act like an extrovert asshole. Be professional. Would you apply for a job drunk or stoned? Rise above the crowd. Finding the right prospect is hard, serious work. Approach it that way. My BEST advice-listen to the women and choose with your ears/brain and NOT your eyes. Tough I know. . .

If you feel you have to lie about your money, education or job - then clearly, YOU NEED TO ADDRESS your education, job and resources! Few women will be attracted to a broke loser without a job who can barely converse. But neither do they expect a PhD CEO with a few million bucks. If you are happy with who you are - then sell that and nothing else. If you are unhappy, then get busy and fix it! . . . P

Joe I didn't even get started, New York was only one example. And I got more bad news, other big cities I have lived in were not much friendlier. I have been all over the country, LA, Miami, San Francisco, Seattle, DC, Chicago, New Orleans you name it I have been there and its the same shit coast to coast. In the old days things were much different, I probably would not have the feelings I have today back in the 70's when things were much simpler. To be fair I think Seattle and San Francisco women are probably pretty good they seem to approach European women in terms of friendliness and warmth. The latter has a huge gay male population which makes it difficult for women to find a good mate. But as far as the rest, DC is even worse than NY, Chicago forget it, New Orleans - too conservative, Miami - a little too much for the rich. I think the only real place in North America that could compete with Europe might be Montreal, its very European, with a very French accent. Vancouver's also quite nice. Even I read an article about pro baseball players what they thought were the best cities to find beautiful women, Montreal and Vancouver were constantly ranked in the top 3. I think the fact that we live in a society with high crime, especially in our large cities, makes people afraid of one another and therefore women aren't just going to approach you. Its also the due to our economic stratification, there are a lot of rich people in this country but for every millionaire I would estimate there are 10 people who don't have money for a meal or a place to stay, I am in total shock that this is what America is like in the 21st Century. This income gap seperates people. And 95 percent of the population who aren't rich or in power are just as powerless as the masses under Stalin. I need to be redundant because the mass media seems to give a false impression that American women are the only game on the planet, constantly I see images of sexy women on papers, posters, TV, movies but I rarely see anyone in real life that matches up to anything seen in print or film. Abroad, in some of the most ordinary places I have seen some absolutely stunning women doing pretty normal everyday jobs. Some of these women could give those big celebrities, whose photos and pictographs men accross America worship, a run for the money. Men, we got to wake up, we're just getting pussy whipped all over the place.

Oh for fuck's sake Proko... I was attempting to bring some levity to a stagnant board. Had you been paying attention for the past few months you would realise that I have an American GF and that I'm not a janitor. Your post has merit, but as someone who has been notably absent for weeks you have no right step in and cast judgements on anyone.

Anyway... I'm off travelling until early August. I'll look back again in a few weeks... hopefully the board will have progressed during my absence.

Sorry Pal,
But I don't think many of us are following your love life. I don't know what you do or who you date. But I do remember some pathetic posts of yours a while back, so I see no reason to expect things to be totally different now. I was only responding directly to your post below. I certainly didn't see it as an attempt at humor. I doubt you're a janitor, but I also sense a deep-seated insecurity in who you are or might like to be. If you are happy with yourself, cool - no more whining. If not , fix it. Its as simple as that. . . . Peace -P

[i]In fact for young guys, I think the best prospects are divorced women 25-35. They no longer have that "princess" syndrome or the dreaded "White Dress Fever" More experienced and realistic after their break-up, they will appreciate you more and will exhibit less irrational behavior. Their expectations are lower and they're better in bed.[/i]

Woohoo!!! Seems there is still hope for me yet!! LOL

So all you young guys TAKE NOTE (and ummm...call me. heh heh) :)

RN,
I see you're still shamelessly soliciting! Some things never change . . . And although I said "young guys", it would apply to "older guys" as well. And especially to divorced women with a kid or two . . . Peace - P

Hmmmm Proko,

I wasn't sure if that was sarcasm there or a blatant insult, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Either way, I'm not "blonde" enough to try and solicit on a board full of Americans!! LOL What am I gonna do? Send them naughty letters and they can pay me by money order??? *G*

And by the way, I tend to like older men...for the exact same reasons that you stated in your post below. Less mind games, lower "clingy" factor and a refined sexual technique. I will always choose intelligence and experience over a boyish smile and staying power.

No insult intended . . . only an observation. But now I DO have a serious question. This may not be the right area -Amer Women? - but it would seem to me that you know a lot about what interests us. After all, this forum is for sharing useful info. As a former(?) profesional could you answer these somewhat personal questions??

How many clients would you see in a typical day? Week?

What % of men - if any- only wanted to talk, no sex?

What % wanted anal sex? Or something kinkier?

How was the money split? Tips?

What % of the men seemed nice or at least acceptable?

How often(%) did you truely enjoy the sex? And why?

Would you ever reject a client?

Were your experiences typical? What did the other girls say?

Inquiring minds need to know. You may well have answered some of these questions before. I don't remember that you did. Give us some more insight into the inner workings of a brothel. The mechanics, the schedule, infighting. We need useful tips to use in these situations. Believe me, this is not meant to embarass but to enlighten. Help us make things better - for the women as well as the men. . . -P

Don't mean to defend RN since she is more than capable of doing it by herself but Prokofiev I think your email is out of line and offensive (nice job the question mark in brackets after you wrote "former"...)

Even supposing that she is going to answer what are you going to do with those numbers?
Jerk off thinking about the 12% of people who were asking her for anal?

In my book who cannot spell PROFESSIONAL shouldn't be asking these questions.

Thank you stranger :)

I have to admit Proko, I am getting seriously bad vibes from your last couple of posts. I will answer your questions, just in case they are legitimate. First though I will say two things.
a) Yes I am a "former" worker. I have worked one day (for Christmas present money) in the last 14 months.
b) As pretty much the only woman in this entire forum, I flirt...because I can. I don't do it to solicit, which would be completely pointless anyway. I do it to try and lighten the mood when things get too serious. I am not trying to upset anyone with it...I just get uncomfortable when people are fighting.

Ok...

[i]How many clients would you see in a typical day? Week?[/i]

The most I ever saw on one shift was 11. Often there was none. My average for the week would probably be 10, or in busy periods, 15-20. I only worked short hours, and mainly did the day shift.

[i]What % of men - if any- only wanted to talk, no sex?[/i]

Not a very high percentage, but it certainly did happen here and there. Most times it was unintentional...if they had erectile problems or serious nerves. I would estimate though, that at least 50% of all clients wanted conversation and affection and touch primarily...the sex act was just a bonus to finish things off.

[i]What % wanted anal sex? Or something kinkier?[/i]

At a guess, maybe 30% asked for anal (which I didn't provide). However, I often told men on intro that I didn't offer it, so men who DID like it may not have bothered mentioning it. Interesting fact...probably at LEAST 60% wanted some form of anal stimulation done to THEM.
I have done X-dressing bookings, extreme fantasy stuff (with swordfights and bondage and all sorts of strange things!) and other relatively minor stuff, like massaging balls with my feet or squeezing them with my long fingernails. These types of bookings would be well less than 5% of clients. However, there are people who offer those particular services exclusively, so clients are more likely to visit those girls than go to a brothel.

[i]How was the money split? Tips?[/i]

I always worked for 60/40 in the girls' favour. That is the most common split in my state, but it differs from brothel to brothel, state to state and country to country. Tips are not part of the Oz culture, but they do happen. Anything from "keep the change" to $200. I know a girl who got a $500 tip from a guy who had just won big at the casino...and he only paid $180 for the original service! We sometimes got bottles of wine, perfume or jewellery instead of cash tips. (And no, tips were not split with the house).

[i]What % of the men seemed nice or at least acceptable?[/i]

At least 98%! I hardly ever had a problem with attitude, and violent tendencies were extremely rare. Almost every client I saw was a perfect gentleman, and even the ones who were not so friendly were at least respectful to a certain degree. That said, I am a tall, experienced woman who refuses to take any shit...those "vibes" probably eminated from me, and the troublemakers would have been less likely to pick me.

[i]How often(%) did you truely enjoy the sex? And why?[/i]

Most times (I don't know...maybe 80%?). Why? Because I am a very sensual person, I like to be touched, I got an ego boost from men telling me all day that I was hot, dressing up in sexy work gear put me in the mood...lots of reasons. I don't have any hangups about "meaningless" sex, and enjoyed it for what it was. I also didn't have a r/l boyfriend, which made work my only sexual outlet.

[i]Would you ever reject a client?[/i]

Very rarely. I did a couple of times, when they were really drunk or on drugs, or if my instinct told me they were dangerous. I never actually told them outright that I couldn't see them...I usually made up some diplomatic excuse (I'm just about to knock off work, you look too much like my uncle..whatever came to my mind on the spur of the moment!)

[i]Were your experiences typical? What did the other girls say?[/i]

My experiences were common among the other girls, but things differ greatly depending on things like your workplace, your age, your experience and your looks (height helps), amongst others. There is no ONE common sex industry experience, just like in any other job. Some, like me, came away with a very positive view and really happy memories...others are devastated by sex work.

Anyway, this has gone on too long, and I can't really see any benefit to talking brothel politics...especially as I live in a different country to pretty much all of you! Hope that was what you were looking for.

Those questions were very much "legitimate" and I am thankful for your honest (and rather complete!) answers. They were NOT meant to be offensive in the slightest. Nor Mr Stranger, do I think they were "out of line". This is a forum dedicated to sex with call girls, SW's and prostitutes. The who, where, how, how much, and how often is discussed in minute detail. If this type of discussion offends YOU then you shouldn't be here, since that is the ENTIRE POINT of the WSG site. What I find offensive is the continual attack on American Women as fat, greedy, unattractive and unsuitable for a relationship - repeated over and over again without adding any insight. All my WSG posts have been pro-woman, pro-safe sex, and repectful to sex workers. Although I have offered advice and information, I am more interested in learning from others and addressing questionable facts and behaviors (i.e AIDS and safe sex). If I can't ask RN these type of questions, who would I ask? Why would any of us post here if we weren't interested in these topics? Why would a woman put 100's of posts on this site about prostitution and find questions about it unsuitable?
.
As to your answers, 60% wanted anal stimulation? That is a big surprise to me. 80% was enjoyable? I'm happy for you - although I can't believe that is true for most women. But it would be nice.
.
Since this whole topic of Australian brothels has little to do with American Women, I will contemplate the rest elsewhere before I get flamed yet again. We can now return to complaining about the USA and whining about not getting laid. Enjoy . . .

Prokofiev,

I am sorry if I misread your intentions. The soliciting jibe and then the question mark after the word "former", kinda made me a bit defensive. And remember when we had that little problem way back, regarding my ad in the Oz section? And the...ummm...300lb American trucker accusation?? lol

I could be wrong, but I think I first posted on this site in October 2001. (Getting very close to my anniversary! lol) In that time I have always made it clear that ANY questions, so long as they aren't cruel or an insult to my intelligence, are appropriate to ask. That's the main reason why I'm here. If you don't ask, you don't know. I'm more than happy to give a female and/or sex worker perspective when it's asked for. And considering I'm practically the only woman who hangs out here...who else would you ask! I am rarely offended by anything that isn't outright flaming.

If you honestly want to know about brothel politics Proko, we have often discussed that sort of thing in the Morality section. Maybe we could take that discussion there? We've also been discussing mandatory testing lately.

Man, oh Man...I sure hope we don't run off another female poster on this board. For the guys having problems with American women--Isn't this pattern so familiar for you? Meet a woman, don't listen to what she's saying, insult her, get quasi-violent, and then whine about how women are so terrible. RN, don't ever leave...you demonstrate why men need women...

Fed up...Maybe your little change of topic was tongue in cheek, but you did raise a good point. Instead of the usual pity party in here ("Girls are bad, Men are good"), maybe a more constructive topic would be "How to meet American Women." Most men work under the assumption that potential relationship material can be "picked up". This is not the case. Basing your social life on the "pick up" is like planning your monthly budget by playing the lottery. Luck will shine on you every so often, but don't count on it. My suggestion for everyone is to just forget about women for a while and do something that you're passionate about. (Art, finance, sports, whatever) When women get a gander at your passion, they will approach you. Once again, I'm not bragging, but every women that I've ever had a relationship with has approached me. I immersed myself in my writing and often did readings of my poetry and prose. Regardless of my lack of conventional good-looks and wealth, women began to talk to me. Most men here think that women are attracted to monetary wealth primarily, but this is a mis-conception. Women are attracted to passion in all forms (Of course, as with anything, there are always exceptions). The thinking is "If he's passionate about working out (or whatever) then he must be passionate about other things (sex, romance, whatever). It just so happens that passionate people often happen to be successful financially, but I know many women who are head over heels in love with poor, but exciting men.
Proko has the right idea, if something is broken, fix it. If you don't choose to fix it, then you must like where you're at.
CBGB...for the life of me I just can't figure out why you are still in the USA if you want to be in Europe so bad. I travelled around a bit and fell in love with Mexico, so I decided to stay. Everything else just worked itself out. If you feel so strongly about something, then do it. Anything worthwhile is worth taking a risk for. And with regards to your comparison between the woman on the Metro in France and the woman on the subway in New York: Maybe the men in France are generally more respectful of women, so the French lady didn't feel the need to be so defensive. And maybe the New Yorker needs that defensive attitude to fend off the weirdos and perverts who come on to her constantly in very inapropriate ways. Ask any attractive, American woman and she will read off a whole laundry list of dangerous and/or weird situations that she's encountered in her daily life. Are American women more defensive/cold toward strangers? Maybe. But this is the case because they need to be this way in order to stay safe.

Miller2k,

I agree with you on virtually everything you've said in that last post.

Yesterday I went to a club with a friend (trying out the "pick-up" model). It failed miserably. I'm not particularly hot stuff, but I'm also not not particularly hot stuff (and the guy to girl ratio was pretty favorable that night). *Shrugs*.

It really does seem that the way to mate and relate is bound up in meeting women in your everyday life. *Sighs*. I could definitely use some help in that area (although I am improving).

However, I wonder about having "passion" as a women-drawer. I would say I'm passionate about Argentine Tango (the dance) ... stereotypically you would think this would be a great way to meet women, but in reality, it is a horrible way (because of my location). So my "passion" just doesn't help. Likewise, I would say I'm passionate about some of the music I listen to, but ... well, that just doesn't do it. *Shrugs*.


David

P.S. The women at the aforementioned club were (on average) nice looking.

I just came back for the weekend from Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Now I am really starting to wonder why I have more luck abroad, is it me? Or is it the women? I met a nice French Canadian hottie that looked like Christie Turlington, real real sweet. Better than the he-females I keep running into in Manhattan.

David,
Say it isn't so! The Tango is NOT a great way to meet women? How is that possible? I had been planning to make tango my next "new project"! Explain please before I make a terrible mistake . . .

Miller

"Basing your social life on the "pick up" is like planning your monthly budget by playing the lottery."

Very good line! And very true . . You are turning into the "Shakespeare" of WSG posts.

I read some interesting statistics, there are about 46 McDonalds in the US for every 1 million people, in most European countries its about a fraction of that, for example in Britain there are about 18.3 McDonald's for every 1 million people, In France there are 14.4. So we eat a lot more fast food and its making us very unhealthy it's no wonder when I walk out of the house why I see so many fat people.

Hi guys (and ladies) I have not posted on this american women board, but I have been reading it for a few weeks now and I have enjoyed the intelligent (and the less than intelligent) points of view here.
I am from Boston so I get up to Montreal a couple of times a year. I can confirm that Montreal should be considered one of the worlds great places to go for a sex vacation. Outcall sex is legal there and they don't play the con games that are common in the USA, also because of the exchange rates the prices are low. Its also a great city to enjoy and your costs for most things will be much lower than in the United States. (ciggarettes, liquor and gas are not cheaper because of taxes)

On the McDonalds statistics; I have been to Paris and I have also noticed that the women in Paris as a group are fairly thin. I have also noticed though that the food served around Paris is very high in fat. The reason everything there tastes so damn good is that everything is loaded with butter. Also if you have ever eaten traditional British food you will agree that most of it is also loaded with fat.
This is just my observation, but has anybody else noticed that if you walk into a discount store like say,,K Mart or Wall Mart,,,most of the customers are overweight. In more upscale stores or in places that attract a more educated crowd most people are much more trim.
Adding my two cents on meeting women,,,,clubs are a waste of time if your going there just to meet women. Women will want to know you a bit before they get involved with you, and they can't do that in twenty minutes of shouting over loud music. I have mostly met women through friends, but any social or volunteer activity that allows you to spend time with other people is a good bet. You can't think of it as a one day thing, it takes a little time for her to get to know you and you her. Also resist the urge to tell all about your acomplishments, you don't have to impress her.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Prokofiev
[i]David,
Say it isn't so! The Tango is NOT a great way to meet women? How is that possible? I had been planning to make tango my next "new project"! Explain please before I make a terrible mistake . . . [/i][/QUOTE]

Well, in NYC City there are at least a couple places every night that have Tango dances (Milongas, Practicas) as well as tango Classes. There are lots of available ladies at these dances. More women than men.

Brett, you should check out the NBC Dateline website, there's an interesting article about fat in the American diet, where NBC reporter Josh Mankiewicz talks about his experience with weight loss. You wouldn't believe what he said, but he lost weight eating steak everday!! He mentioned he didn't even excercise that much while he was on this diet and lost almost 47 pounds in a year! I'm not kidding. He was referring to the Atkins Diet, where you can eat high fat foods but have to avoid sugars and starches. We Americans have been duped into thinking that a high carbohydrate low fat diet is healthier for our weight, we've been fooled. I just picked up a copy of the New York Post today, this reporter didn't blink about saying that America has become a fat country, and its not because we're inactive in fact everyone I know goes the the gym and we excercise more than Europeans. He pointed out to Hungary where the food is notorious for its high fat content and noticed that he didn't see a single fat person.
When I met a German woman here in New York, she was almost 42 and didn't have an ounce of fat on her yet she ate a of fatty foods, when we went out I used to order all the 'healthy' things and she used to order a lot of things that you would consider fat, yet she was thin and I was just ok, I work out, but I still have trouble staying thin. Then it all clicked she avoided sugar completely and didn't drink fruit juices or ate starchy foods. I remember she would have a steak and salad. And I would often have pasta and a little bit of bread. So I guess I figured out her secret. PS she didn't work out at all.

Prokofiev

"Say it isn't so! The Tango is NOT a great way to meet women? How is that possible? I had been planning to make tango my next "new project"! Explain please before I make a terrible mistake . . ."

*For Me* it isn't a great way ... namely, because I live in Arizona. The "Tango Community" here is *very* small. I suspect there are around a dozen women I see in the one small weekly Milonga they have in Phoenix. Most of the women are 20 years my senior. That leaves a *very* small pool. Moreover, in the past month the guy/girl ratio has been something like 3/2.

While the (Argentine) Tango might be a great way to *romance* women, whether it is a great way to meet women (seems) to depend on your location. As Lotsafun meantioned, in NYC there is a large Argentine Tango community.

However, let me caution you ... don't learn Argentine Tango *just* to meet women. If that is your goal, then you would have to invest a lot of time that could (probably) be better spent in other ways.

Still, if you want to learn to dance, it isn't (at all) a bad dance to choose as a "first dance". As far as meeting women goes, it seems like Salsa and Swing are a bit more poplular. (Even in NYC, dancing Tango, you can probably get a passing acquaintance with all of your potential mates in a year or two ... the same thing couldn't be said of Salsa or Swing).

Smiles,
David

P.S. Don't let me scare you away from Argentine Tango, even with all I've said, it probably is (or at least, can be) one of the most intimate of dances, and it teaches you things that will help you in an almost any other type of dancing. There is a wonderful focus on connection to music, and connection with partner.

David & LotsA,
Sounds like some guys from Phoenix ought to go to NYC to even things out . . .
And no, I realize that ANY dancing is hard work and it's not JUST to meet women. But having seen several tango films + the "Tango Argentino" and "Forever Tango" shows, I can't help but think how "right" this dance looks. The "macho" attitude makes everything else seem kinda "fruity" including Salsa. Plus all these shows will feature several older couples (50's or 60's) - and it still works. Ever see guys in their 50's or 60's disco dancing? Pretty damn sad. So I'm planning for the next 25 years instead of looking back to my 20's. Plus I hope to be in Buenos Aires next year. Thanks for the info. - P

Seems to be a hell of a lot of this section missing all of a sudden...
Good call I think, Jackson :)

I think CBGB got too violent with Johan that is why Jackson cut out a huge number of postings. There is no point in picking fights in this forum but this forum should be about discusing our problems with most American women and their over moral and snobbish issues with men. CBGB, stop threatening people on this forum because it will get you nowhere. It is okay to express your disagreement but don't talk about punching people out.

And then the other thing we don't need is racism such as was displayed in many of the deleted posts. I may be a Dickhead but I am an equal opportunity Dickhead. I report any and all racist posting I see to Jackson and urge others to do the same. If I say I'm going to kick your ass over the internet, that's just a great big joke in my opinion as it is not possible using the current technology. But the racism destroys the spirit of the board and will drive people away. A main purpose of the board is to help guys meet women of all races (or ethnicities to be more accurate) and colors and screw the hell out of them.

What if we had compulsory intermarriage and no one was allowed to procreate with anyone of the same ethnicity? In two or three generations everyone would be sort of brown or beige and racism would disappear. Plus it'd improve the gene pool. Just a thought.

I'm still hook on black girls cause of the body. But why most of them have stinky pussy although they are well dressed, combed and smell good otherwise. I use too finger them and sniff it to check for cleanliness. Most of them failed at this test. Why to they pay attention to their body and neglect their intimate part? It seems that you guys don't tell me them that you don't want to bang a garbage can. Black are better in my view but most of them here are negligent and encourage to stay so by too accomoding men

Boy they really have some fucked up people on this board, bootylover you are one sick fuck.

I agree with Dickhead. We should ALL marry outside of our race so that racism would vanish and there would be no more "Black, White, Asian, or Latino" race or preferences. I suffer the most being an Asian man in America because people hate us and are jealous of us for no reason. Most Asian people work lower than miminum wage in America and make less than even the welfare cases and yet some racists from these poor areas blame the Asian population and pick fights with us. It is only a very few handful that includes myself that went to college, studied hard and got a job in corporate America. My job requires that I dres sharp but this gets me into a lot of trouble with the handful of racist Black people that hate us and blame us for their family's poverty. I was once accused on the train for "coming to America to take away their parent's jobs". They also say that they were fed cat from a Chinese restaurant. I tried to ignore them but then suddenly, five guys and three women stood up and started throwing punches at me. I got hit a few times but I coordinated the fight using grappling techniques and evasive manuevers I learned from kung-fu and capoeira to get out of the surrounding situation. I then threw some kicks and punches at some of them then I gouged the eye and struck the groin other another. The wounded group of 8 picked up and ran then the cops showed up too late. I looked down and my nose was bleeding because I took a punch while I was surrounded. I filed a police report but none of them were caught because they avoided this route after i beat them.
This is the type of persecution Asians face in America. Asian women also think we have small dicks. If we all mixed and got rid of these races, then no one would be white, black, latino or Asian and we would all be human beings. If I was a human being instead of an Asian among the whites, blacks, and latinos, I would have a much higher batting average. Instead we have this shit called racism. We would also treat each other like human beings. America may be a melting pot but we do not get along. That is why there are segregated neighborhoods for each race. As soon as I date a black girl from let's say East New York, I get stares from the locals of that area. The black guys there gave me dirty looks when I dated a black girl who lived in that area. This relationship didn't last too long because she got threats from her parents and neighbors. Trust me, racism for Asians is this bad in New York.

Wouldn't Asian women be in a pretty good position to know whether Asian men did, or didn't, have small dicks? Anyway, you only need a big organ if you're playing in a cathedral.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dickhead
[i]What if we had compulsory intermarriage and no one was allowed to procreate with anyone of the same ethnicity? In two or three generations everyone would be sort of brown or beige and racism would disappear. Plus it'd improve the gene pool. Just a thought. [/i][/QUOTE]

Iggy Pop wrote a tune about this called "Mixing the Colors" on his "American Ceasar" album. Part of the refrain is "It's what Hitler didn't want..."

I think it's a totally fabulous idea. But an extension of the idea should be made to encompass people of different religions within the same ethnic group intermarrying as well. For instance, Israelis and Palestineans are both of the Semitic ethnicity and it's their religious preferences that have them blowing each other up and whatnot. If they were raising children together though...

OK JW, I will check Iggy out. Although, I saw a television special on him a while back and he knocked up some white groupie for his go at procreation. Not exactly practicing what he preached. But, maybe that was before he wrote that song ...

Great point about religion vs ethnicity. As a disbelieving heathen atheist apostate nihilist, I hadn't thought of that. However, I think if we mix up the colors we'd do a fairly good job of mixing up the religions as well. Oh, wait a minute, religions are all mixed up anyway.

The god in whom I do not believe is an equal opportunity deity despite his or her non-existence and all racists will have their time of reckoning. One time I wrote in a philosophy paper, "Although I do not believe in God, I do believe in karma." The prof wrote in the margin, "Maybe God is karma." Maybe at some point my karma ran over my dogma, but I do believe that what goes around, comes around.

An additional benefit of our proposal is that some fantastic new cuisines should emerge, and maybe some new music as well.

RN
I read a message of yours on 7-21.
I just wanted to thank you for sharing your information and experiences.
Many of us probably had the same questions. (But were afraid to ask) I know I did :)

Again thanks for your input

Even if there were mixed marriages, there would be other forms of discrimination. I would suggest people here to visit Brazil, its one of the most mixed societies on the planet. You see mixed couples everywhere, yet there is another form of discrimination, class. The rich literally run the country of Brazil, the government is a puppet of the wealthy. The gap between rich and poor is increasing, even in wealthy countries like America you see it. When this happens the rich have too much power and they often abuse it and the lower classes to entrench their positions. There are still many other forms of discrimination out there, class, sexuality, gender, education, religion, and others. Racism and discrimination is a very complicated matter.

The mixed ethnicity in brazil is the reason no one there tried to jump me (or ambush) me in Brazil. In Brazil, they all get along because there is no concept of racial discrimination. And dickhead, yes I do have an above average organ (about 7" measured with a tape ruler on the top from tip of head to before the pubic hair starts.) This horrible assumption even spreads to Asian women (or maybe the men THEY dated have small dicks and they assume the rest of us Asian men have small dicks too.) As a matter of fact, some of the blacks or caucasians in some of the amateur or low budget porno movies have smaller dicks than I have. Some even only have 5 inch dicks (2 inches smaller than mine). All women who assume I have a small dick never even pulled down my pants to find out. I did something stupid in the Exit club in New York. Some caucasian girl I talked to who rejected me and said "you know what they say about Asian men, small dicks". I immediately got angry because this is obviously a big hangup for me. I grabbed her, pulled her to the men's room and pulled down my pants in front of her. Then she said, "Oh, guess I was wrong". Two bouncers came into the bathroom after she saw me in my glory, grabbed me and literally tossed me out of the club. I had to tuck and roll out of the throw. When I went to Brazil, these people never heard of the stereotype. Even women in China never heard of this stereotype. This small dick thing is an AMERICAN stereotype created to persecute the Asian man. This is shit I put up with in this country and I was born here too.

The truth, of course, is that there are stereotypes about just about every race and nationality there are, and all one has to do is read through this thread to find a lot of it. Because people don't universally have what they want out of life, there is an innate tendency to turn someone into the "other" no matter where and what -- whether it's tribal differences in Africa, nationality differences in Thailand, religion in South Asia, or any of a large laundry list of ethnic strife issues in Europe or the states. Class has a huge amount to do with it, and as Darkseid points out, in those latter places, a lot of this has to do with who happens to be the recent immigrant group, which brings various strains of xenophobia to the fore. Immigrant populations have a natural tendency to be somewhat insular, as they need the opportunity to adjust to their new society's functions and rules, need to have a support system for this process since the majority end up doing menial work until they acclimate and melt in, not to mention the comfort of the familiar. This tends also to strengthen the otherness, unfortunately.

Though I agree that massive intermarriage would help ease this foolishness, I'm not at all convinced that it would end it. There are still ridiculous striations within groups, as evidenced by, for example, issues of lightness and darkness of color in black culture (though of course some of that is also about acclimating in a white-dominated society) and I hear remarks all the time within Asian communities where one nationality disparages the other. Everyone seems to look for a leg up in the social climb, and if racial, religious, and class tensions became less prevalent (which would clearly be astonishingly wonderful) I suspect that nationalism would then again run rampant, as we'd still need someone to blame for not all being rich or movie stars or getting laid every moment of the day. We're never short on isms. There's a marvelous piece by the poet Thomas Lux that sums it up at [url]http://www.diacenter.org/prg/poetry/97_98/lux.html.[/url]

Where does this all leave us? Well, one thing the races all truly have in common is fear and frustration. Let's face it, even though there's still huge societal pressure about intermarriage across race in the US (as there was about marrying across religion earlier) it's more common now than is was thirty years ago. At the very least, it's no longer unthinkable. I think the only real solution is found in widespread individual attempts to create new stereotypes of kindness and openness by going out of our ways to interact positively across lines and, most important of all, to listen and learn. IMHO, and to genuflect at least in the general direction of the topic, that's also still overall the best way to get laid. We break down stereotypes by confronting them -- though it's generally not a good idea to drag screaming women into bathrooms to do so, so let's say confronting them gently and defusing them, so the other person has an opportunity to save face. After all, this isn't so much as issue of who's right or wrong in any given opinion as it is about how we can get along, and be given an equal opportunity to prove (or not) that we're idiots personally as opposed to part of some larger predefined group of idiots.

I agree that listening and learning about each other is the only way to learn. It worked in Brazil after all, the other party was willing to listen. In the case where I dragged the screaming girl into the bathroom to expose myself, she stubbornly didn't listen to me and stuck firmly to the belief that Asian men have small dicks. I then had to take the extreme measure. Stupid, yes, but I felt she had to see a hung Asian guy to diffuse her prejudice.
As for intermarriage, it is a great beginning to ending racial prejudice. At least there would be no hate at first sight, (unless we wear uniforms or dress codes identifying our class). There will always be class discrimination though but at least the motive for murder won't be because "he is black, white, Asian, etc..." People would still kill but they would kill for money or they would just pick your pockets. Yes, Brazil is like this utopia of non-race because Brazilians are a blend of black, white, latinos, and some even have Asian blood, like the ones in Sao Paulo. And there is also the pickpockets caused by the class system. Let's face it, there will always be a class system because someone wants to rule and bring order. But what Brazil has not is the hatred for people of other skin colors or religion. That is why I want to move there.

The Trashman Commenteth.....
There's great debate here online
Of which girls are the best
Which girls are claimed The Finest?
Well, let’s take the Trashman's test!
Now northern girls are friendly
Brunette and bundled tight
There's southern girls, all giggly
Mostly blonde and not-so-bright
Now, Mexicans are hotties
With fire in their eyes
They look nice until forty
Then they expand in size
There's Cali girls, all sunwashed
But shallow in the brain
Northwest girls can look sexy
While they’re dripping from the rain
Now Euro girls are tricky
There's lots of styles to pick
There's Greasers and there's Froggies
As for me? I like em Spic
Norwegian girls talk funny
And Russian's have big thighs
Most British girls are ugly
Lousy teeth, it's no surprise
There's ghetto girls-a-plenty
(My favorite most of all)
With fifty shades of mocha
I've probably had them all
From Africa to Mozambique
And everyplace between
The Trashman likes his booty
When it wears an Afro-sheen
And finally there's Asians
Some may call the finest race
A Filipino pussy
Is where some rest their face
The Japanese so passive
Chinese slit hard to find
Vietnamese is awesome
I've seen men lose their mind
We've come unto the end now
I've meant nobody ill
So please don't get upset friends
If so, then take a pill
It's poontang we're discussing
Like buddies on a bus
If booty's what you're craving
Then you're just one of us!

Hilarious, Trash!

Haha! I'm laughing my ass off here LynnTrash. :) Very cool....

[QUOTE]Originally posted by darkseid
[i] That is why I want to move there. [/i][/QUOTE]

darkseid

drop me an email if you are still interested to immigrate to Holland.


dutchman5999@hotmail.com


dutchman

Nice little ditty there Trash... I'll post it on my wall until I get tired of it.

Joe... Your last posting was right on the money. There will always be someone jealous/envious/hateful etc... of other people. Even if we were all the same colour we would still find some petty or ridiculous reason to not like another person (even other than religion). Besides... I like the different appearances created by race... variety is the spice of life.

On a personal note: My American GF (who I've been dating for 5 months) has started to pack on the pounds. Poor diet and too much work are part of the issue. She's already reached the stage of comfort with me where she's not too concerned with her appearance and conduct (including belching). She's also begun to go against her original expressed opinion that we should have a casual relationship and stated that she thinks we could be "long term". She's also still very reluctant to honk on my cock and I have to put in a special request before she will do so.

Every woman I've ever dated falls into the above pattern. I don't hate AW as some here do... but AW really aren't giving me any reason to date them. I'm honestly not that picky: I'm not looking for a doctor/porn star/master chef in Penelope Cruz's body. I'm looking for the girl-next-door with a decent job, everyday body (everyday for Europe - not the land of the BigMac), functioning mind, sexually free, and with a pleasant attitude. Am I really asking that much???

Perhaps it's time to change my name from Fedup to IGiveUp...

PS: Hey RN.... how many weeks are left until you turn 30? :)

FU, I think at this point it is imperative that you make it very clear to her that ANY possibility of "long term" is dependent on both fellatio and maintaining the weight she was at when you met. I too have had the weight gain problem with all three of the gals with whom I've lived, anywhere from 15 to a whopping 40lbs in the first year (none was skinny in the first place). #1 told me to bugger off when I mentioned it, #2 yo-yoed up and down for years which gave her nasty stretch marks, and #3 had also developed lockjaw so I just gave her the boot without even mentioning the weight. None of them went through any job, medical, or personal change that would explain the weight, and I never gained any weight myself.

I conclude that there is a subset of women who stay slim/in shape until they hook a boyfriend, and then let themselves go. Seems like false advertising or bait and switch to me.

Maybe I should change my name from Dickhead to I Gave Up A Long Time Ago So Where's The God Damn Hookers.

I think you're correct about some women and weight, Dickhead, though I'd not necessarily make the distinction by gender, as I've seen the same thing happen with guys I know. (Not to mention radical shifts in style of dress once hooked up, usually not for the better.)

And though I scream to the heavens that I don't want to make this thread devolve back into the "fat" forum again, I was intrigued, FedUp, by your mention of working too much tied into work. Americans work more hours than any other country in the industrial world, and that number has tended to continue to rise despite an opposite trend elsewhere. I don't think there's much doubt that translates to, among other things, fatigue, lack of physical activity, and weight gain. Oh, yes, and irritability :)

Well, my #1 was wealthy and was going to school and not working at all. #2 worked less than full-time during most of our relationship and never worked any overtime. #3 had the same job I had and I worked overtime but she NEVER did. I do agree I've seen plenty of guys deteriorate in a similar fashion but I don't date guys so I don't care.

Complacency is a very bad thing when one is in a relationship.

Don't make me think about 30, Fedup...I only just hit 28!!! LOL (As if 28 isn't bad enough.....)

It's funny you should mention your girlfriend feeling comfortable enough to belch in front of you. Not trying to be critical here...but isn't that what a good relationship is all about? I mean, I'm not saying belching is a particularly attractive thing for a woman to do, (and I can't say that *I* would do it in front of anyone either), but it is a natural bodily function. Obviously belching in public would be a different matter, but I am assuming you are talking about her doing it in the privacy of your own home. Don't you think it's just a little bit nice that she has come to the point where she is so settled with you, that she feels you will accept her "warts and all"? I have to admit, I get pretty turned off by men walking around my house passing gas (from either end of the body!) but I do think it's infinitely better than being with someone who I know is hiding their "real" self from me. If they feel comfortable enough to share their bodily functions with me, I am assuming that they probably feel comfortable enough to share other "private" aspects of their life with me. Of course, that doesn't make your girlfriend's belching any more attractive...but it does mean she probably loves you, and feels confident that you have similar feelings for her. If she thought you didn't care about her, she would probably feel compelled to keep trying to impress you.

That said, I am on Dickhead's side regarding her aversion to BJs. I'm not sure how long a monogamous relationship can really last if your sexual desires are too mismatched. If you feel it's something you can work on (I remember you saying she had some bad past experiences she needed to deal with), then more power to you. But if it's going to be a lifetime of you begging and her begrudgingly going down there...it's not gonna take long for one or both of you to get pretty pissed off with it all. Our sex lives often involve compromise, but in my opinion, they shouldn't involve sacrifice.

And Joe, I completely agree that men can be just as guilty of "letting go" when they get into a comfortable relationship. And the comment about the "radical shifts in style of dress" really made me giggle...I've seen that many times! LOL Also your work = weight gain thing makes sense to me too...often when you work long hours you tend to get fast food and eat out, rather than attempt to fit in grocery shopping and food preparation time. Also in a new relationship where you don't live together, your partner may skip meals (lowering metabolism) or grab take-away food after work, in order to get over to your place faster and spend more time with you.

So now this is the fart forum instead of the fat forum (those from Boston may not be able to tell the difference, ha ha!). All this provides a good reason to use the Dickhead method of trolling for women at health clubs and in grocery stores. If they have all junk food and e-coli burger in their carts, expect both fat and farts. If there is a lot of soda pop in the cart, expect both fat and belches. Unless, of course, it's diet soda pop; then you'll just get belches.

So all you American men out there, learn to cook for your American woman. Feed her healthy stuff and you'll get less fat and fewer burps and farts. Plus, eating healthy costs less and will increase your penis size. Then suggest a vigorous walk or a bike ride after dinner. Then you'll be all sweaty. Then you'll need to shower. Then you'll be naked. The rest is up to you.

Yes, we should all eat healthy and skip the Big Macs and Cokes. Even fat-free stuff (high in sugar and startch) is bad or even worse. I myself keep in shape and eat healthy so I would expect the same from my partner. Unfortunately, my ex-fiancee, Nury, devastated me and turned me off from Amercian women so much that I found love in other countries. I broke up with her 5 years ago and haven't dated another American woman since. She became a female superiorist after meeting a fat friend, Martha who told her it is okay to be fat and not to listen to me. She also told her that the woman has the complete control of the relationship and she controls the sex life as well. After following this advice, she stopped going to the gym with me and started heading to fast food places with her neo-feminist friend Martha. She packed on 15 lbs a month until she reached 180 from 120. She started being abusive and throwing things at me when she got mad. She gained all this weight because she felt bigger and more empowered by her size. I tolerated this (big mistake) and then she tries to walk all over me. She even asked if I liked her with a cauliflower hairdo and I said I didn't like it. She said tough, I will do it anyway. I hated that hairstyle (yuck). It looked like something from a horror movie with brain people or the elephant man (or lady). I couldn't stand this ugliness (inside and out) any longer so I left her and even let her keep the ring because I didn't want to get anywhere near her. This girl was the complete opposite of the girl I dated before being engaged. All because she met a neo-feminist ***** named Martha.
I don't hate fat just because of the ugliness of it, but I hate when women get fat because they feel empowered by being big and fat and they like to throw their weight around (no-pun intended). They think they can push their man around by it.
I also work out hard and train in the martial arts to be more pleasing looking to any girl I meet. I expect the same because I work my butt off to give her quality so she should give me quality.
The other American girlfriends I dated before her also let themselves go but to a lesser extent. However, I didn't break up with them because they put on 15 lbs when they finished with me, I broke up with them because they either spent too much of my money or they thought sex was a sacrifice for them. My high school sweetheart even made me wait a year before I even got a blowjob from her. She gave me sex with condom (I didn't mind safe sex because I didn't want kids) at graduation, the third year. My first girlfriend after college made me wait seven months before giving up sex to me. (I mean give up sex because sex is a sacrifice to them.) Women here in America are NOT passionate lovers either. They worry about the negative namecallings that American people call them here in America. I always sense a feeling of guilt in these women after having sex. When I have sex in a foreign country, they really get into it and they don't radiate guilt or a feeling of "cheapness". They in fact ENJOY sex. In other countries, there is no such word as **** or *****. Sex is more respected in other countries other than America.
My ex-fiancee turned me off to the fat aspect of American women. I don't mind if she farts or burps, even thin people do that, but they should not come to me with such bad abusive attitudes that comes with being fat.

WHAT MARRIAGE REALLY IS


1. Marriage is a legal form of prostitution.
2. How women got their power
3. Sex is Business.
4. What Can Be Done ?
5. Woman's Arguments
6. What's About Child Support ?
7. Deep to the roots


1. Marriage is a legal form of prostitution.

If we look into Marriage Law books we'll find something like "during the marriage it is normally the husband obligations to provide for his wife and children" ( "The Law And You" McGrow-Hill Company Of Canada Limited, 1970 ) or " each spouse is liable to the support of the other" ( Ontario Family Law Act ). This came to us from 19th century, when such law was justified, because women were not economically independent. Women then were mostly housekeepers, while their husbands earned the money. There were no such professions as woman-doctor, woman-lawyer, real estate agent, business consultant, secretary, teacher - whatever else. Not now. Now women have reached economic equality, they have equal opportunities to earn money, as men. So why is there law declaring financial responsibilities based on sexual relationship ? We don't have a law, claiming that "two people, that play tennis together are liable to support each other". But if they live together and have sex together, why they are ?

And then, when we say "each spouse is liable to the support of the other" let's not blind ourselves - it's virtually never happens that a woman support her husband. It's always men pay for women, not other way around. Women never want to marry a man that earn less, then they do ! They never want to marry an unemployed guy with unclear financial future. The whole system is a great mechanism to transfer money from men's bank accounts to women's bank accounts - nothing else.

The difference between marriage and prostitution is the same as between wholesale and retail trading. But while prostitution is considered to be a negative thing, and there is no law, supporting prostitution, why do we have Marriage Law ?

That's because we live in time of 'common level matriarchy'. Woman in 20th century have won power over man, and the law is made for their ultimate convenience, like in Middle Ages law helped barons to keep their privileges, but didn't care about peasants. But in a society of justice such law must not exist. It contradicts, for example, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states :

"Every individual is EQUAL before and under the law and has the RIGHT to the EQUAL PROTECTION and EQUAL BENEFIT of the law WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, SEX, age or mental or physical disability".

But Marriage Law DOES CREATE DISCRIMINATIVE PRACTICE ! It provides NOT EQUAL PROTECTION and BENEFITS with DISCRIMINATION of men, based on SEX. Such law must not be tolerated in our time and we should struggle for its cancellation.


2. How women got their power

Historically for many thousands of years men had advantage on women, based on very simple factor - bigger physical strength. Physical strength played crucial role at that time, and women were discriminated everywhere - in politics, economy, family. But now this advantage has disappeared, physical power doesn't give you much on today's job market. And also, unlike 200 years ago, you cannot abuse a woman physically, which is, certainly, good. But now, in this developed society it is women, who got infare advantage over man, based on another simple factor - biological demands for sex from men and women are not equal! There are simply less sexual willing women, then men. The difference is, may be, not so great - 15 or 20% . But lets imagine what would happen if there is 15% shortage of apartments to compare to all people, who want to rent. Nobody want to sleep on the street. So the price for an apartment will go up to possible maximum. That's what is called 'speculative, infare profits'.

That's exactly what happens now on 'sexual market'. I wouldn't discuss now biological causes of this inequality, what is important is the result. And the result is quite clear - the simplest proof is such thing as a price for a prostitute. It's something from 100 to 200 $ for 1/2 - 1 hour of sex. Many men must work hard from 1 to 3 days to earn this money. Why do they agree to pay this ? The answer is - market... And how much does it cost for a woman who want sex with man ? - Zero. The sexual price for a man in our society - zero.

This situation creates inequality between men and women, similar to relationship between business owner and his employee at a time of 20% unemployment. The owner can fire the worker, and there is a long line of others, who want to replace him. The worker also have his right to quit, but he will have a lot of trouble to find another job. And in sexual relationships we have exactly the same picture - women have their choice, men stay in the line. As a result women turned men into their servants. This situation humiliate men and corrupt women. And of course, women learned very well how to use it, to convert it into money. And to help them better - there is a special social institution for their service, supported by law - named Marriage.


3. Sex is Business.

Yes, we live in an epoch of matriarchy. It doesn't matter that women statistically earn less, then men, it's still matriarchy - women earn less because they don't need to earn money as desperate, as men. They don't need to pay money for sex, they receive it for sex. And it doesn't matter that there are less women, then men among presidents, premiers and CEO, - women simply don't need so much trouble to get what they want.

Sexual inequality is the cause of most of the troubles in our society. It creates the same barriers between men and women, as between rich and poor. It destroys normal relationship between a man and a woman, destroys normal sexual relationship, converts love into business and kills it. There are millions men suffering from solitude, from lack of normal sexual life, and nobody care how to help them.
This is the biggest problem in so called developed countries, more serious then even poverty and crime, because there are more people suffering from it, then from anything else. Crime, especially sex crime, depression, suicides probably by 80% directly and indirectly are results of this unfortunate conditions. In our time, when nobody dies from hunger, this - not anything else - is a MAIN SOCIAL PROBLEM, because NORMAL SEXUAL LIFE IS NOT LESS IMPORTANT, THEN NORMAL FOOD. And all democratic governments must care about this. But they don't. They care only about well being of one part of the population - women.

Yes, instead of helping weak part of contemporary society - men, the law helps those who have already advantage by their birth - women. We can not easily change demographic situation, but we can at least not to create laws, that make the situation worse ! How many millions men were caught in this trap - marriage ? How many millions dollars, earned by hard work were taken from them ? Men are not slaves, they are people. The need love, sex and understanding, but instead they get marriage law with all its consequences. How can our society treat them this way ?

If you were so unhappy to be robbed on the street, the robber will take your cash and probably will use your credit card, before you could report the robbery, but your total damage will be less then 1000$. If your marry a woman, she may born you a child, then divorce you, take your child and sue out your money, typically 200,000 or more. A woman, that want to get married is 200 more dangerous, then a street robber.


4. What Can Be Done ?

I don't believe it will be easy to change status quo by some kind of democratic procedure. No political party will take such position, because 50% of voters - women, and they will never vote for this party. And there are also some men - family law lawyers, for example, that make their fortunes on this shit, so they have already 51%. They have won. And the fact that suffering minority is nearly all the male population - doesn't bother them, no more that it bother prostitutes about their business.

We cannot easily destroy this despicable system, but what we can do is to start nationwide campaign against it. The first important thing is information - every men must know WHAT MARRIAGE REALLY IS. So if we can't change the law, we can change the public opinion. Every boy of 10 years old must know what he is going to meet, when he grow. So when his girlfriend will say "I want to get married", his proper answer will be : "Sorry, my love, I can't do it, until they will cancel present Marriage Law, because it does not defend me against financial abuse." Every boy, every man must know the real meaning of marriage, with its statistics and costs, this is no less important then information about danger of sexual transmitted diseases or unwanted pregnancy.

I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE, WHO CARE, TO DISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT OVER INTERNET, TO SEND IT TO YOUR FRIENDS. Many people will agree with it and this will be the first step to change current situation. I would like to see movement "Men Against Marriage", that would struggle for men rights against oppression, like women struggled ( and won ) for their rights 100 years ago. The mere word "marriage" should be labeled as shameful, the same as prostitution, i.e. getting money for sex.


5. Woman's Arguments

Women say : "Yes, in marriage we receive money from our husbands, but this is compensation for our homework, which we do more, then men. And also we sacrifice our career, because we must stay at home and raise children. So men must pay for this." But let's ask a question : Why men don't sacrifice their career and stay at home to raise children ? And who makes women to do more homework ? Is it her husband, that makes his wife to work at home ? Does he shout on her : "Go to the kitchen immediately, make me dinner !" ? No. You can't force North American woman to do anything she doesn't want to do herself. She would rather divorce you, take your money and find her another husband, but she will never do what she doesn't like.

So if women statistically spend more time on homework, then men, that's because they need it more, then men. They like it more, then men, or, maybe, men dislike it more, the women. But why should men pay for it ? They don't hire their wives for cleaning or cooking. And when a woman doesn't work and stay at home to raise children - it's her own choice. Every husband would like to have second salary in the family rather then housewife, the family can hire a babysitter, but nobody can force a woman to quit her work. Today women do it only because they know that THEY HAVE LEGAL SUPPORT FROM LAW, that will help them to sue out men money. That must not be. Staying at home instead of work is women own choice and in case of divorce it must be their own responsibility.


6. What's About Child Support ?

Let's first ask a question - why courts in more then 90% of divorces give a child to his mother, and not to his father ? That's because there is a convention in our society : child is more close to his mother, then to his father. This is biologically true. But if so, if the child belongs to his mother more, then to his father, why would father and mother pay equally ? Father can not see his child much after divorce, their relationship are not as close, as when they live together. Why must he pay same amount of money, or more, then mother, who lives with her child ?

What if they, while married, buy a car together, then they separate, court gives the car to the husband, but also rules, that for 20 years both husband and wife must pay all car expenses equally - gas, repair, insurance... For compensation the wife have her right to come once a week to her former husband home and to drive this car for 2 hours, at a time when it is convenient for the husband. Absurd ? Sure. You got the car - you pay for it. The other side doesn't have this car any more - it should not pay.

I can imagine the women's howl when they read this. How dare I say this ?! The child's interests are sacred ! Do you know how difficult it is to be a single mother, to raise children ? Cool down. It's not only child's interests are sacred, interests of all people are sacred. It's difficult to be a single mother, sure, but it is also difficult to be a single man. A man after divorce looses his family, and his children, a woman keep her children with her. What is more difficult ? - who know... Would you like, dear ladies, to leave your children with their fathers, and also to pay child support for 20 - 25 years ? There are some single fathers around, but I've never heard about a woman, paying child support...

In a free, democratic society, with EQUAL RIGHTS FOR MEN AND WOMEN child support can be voluntary only. It doesn't mean that there will be not child support at all. There are many fathers, that love their kids and have connections with them even after divorce, so they will support their children without any enforcement from law. There are happy families, that wouldn't divorce at all, but such families doesn't need Family Law ! But we know other examples. It's not a big secret : there are many women who choose not to work, but to born children and use them as a guaranteed source of income on the expense of their unfortunate husbands. That's who need Family Law. That's who benefit from it. Do we need their children ? How can we create unequal, discriminating laws, that help such women to rob men ?


7. Deep to the roots

So how this odious laws can still exist? One answer is voting majority of women plus some man, that also gain from it. But that is only part of the answer. The fact is, that would marriage be forfeited, women simply will stop to bore children.
This is true - raising children costs a lot of money and women want guarantees, so governments didn't find anything else then to put this burden to men, even in cases of clear fraud.

To make things worth, they introduced so called Family Law Act, where among other things it is declared, that a man have full obligation for a child, born from him even if he has not been married with the child's mother and never wanted children with her at all ! That makes man a hostage of every woman, he slept with. She always can cheat him and get pregnant, if she wants, as for the man - the only way to him to stay out of trouble for sure, is to live without sex ... Nice solution, ye ? Note, that all decisions - to have or not to have a child, are up to the woman only. According to this law the man is responsible for something, about what he has absolutely no power. Nobody ask him, but he must pay, because he wanted sex. In what crazy country do we live ?

The next step should be to state something like : "Every man, who slept with a woman, must give her full access to his bank account and credit cards". Why not ? You don't want this ? - don't sleep with women.

Decline of population sure will be a problem, it will lead to economic depression first, then values of businesses and real estate will go down... But isn't the current price too high ? Should we turn all male population into slaves in desperate attempts to raise birthrate ?

Governments should look for other solutions, but not for what is going on now. And there are other solutions, first of them - immigration. It can not only solve the population problem, it can solve problem of disproportion of sexual demand and supply for men and women, by simply inviting more women, then men, until situation is balanced. Also prostitution can be eliminated... But women don't want this solution. They like it the way it is. I think now it's time for men to fight for their rights, for sexual equality.

Let's declare this - SEXUAL LIFE IS OUR PRIVATE LIFE, AND THERE MUST NOT BE LAW, THAT IN ANY WAY CONNECT OUR PRIVATE LIFE WITH MONEY. No lawyer must be able to put his nose into my bank account in connection with my sexual life. Any law, that do not comply with this requirements must be cancelled.

Let's delete Family Law Act. There will be less divorces in this world.
Let's delete all Family Law completely. There will be less lawyers, less children, but more love and happiness in our life.

So although I am now back to work and busy and earning some money to spend (later) on weed and hookers, I did miss the forum. American women are OK but a lot of them look like shit in those low riding pants that are currently in fashion. It gives an entire new meaning to the phrase "crack problem."

Jackson da man and I hope no funky stuff happens tomorrow.

Alex,
For your 1st post couldn't you have written a little more? Are you the guy who wrote War and Peace???

If you don't like it - don't read.

So, is this something you actually wrote, or is it something from somewhere else? I ask because of the "distribute this document over the internet" rejoinder. If it's not original, would you cite the source, please? I'm interested because this has an intriguing dynamic of fairly well-reasoned and well-structured argument combined with either a translation or an English as a second language set of obvious errors. I want to be able to understand its context, this being a thread about American women...

Alex, I know a couple--the husband is an artist, a sculptor. He does generate some income by selling his work, but the wife is in fact the "bread-winner" supporting the two of them. Examples like this may be relatively uncommon, but they do exist. I would suggest that they may not even be as uncommon as we think. They're just not as highly visible as the traditional model. I can't think of a movie that depicted such characters, and one certainly won't be seeing a sit-com about a high profile woman attorney and her loveable house-husband. But these situations do exist. Marriage is many things to many people. I'll agree that the model of marriage that you're condeming exists, but it's not all that's going on out there, as you seem to imply.

Furthermore, Western Culture is NOT a matriarchy. It's not as hard-core a patriarchy as it's been historically (women have a lot more pull than they did even 30 years ago), but a matriarchy it isn't. You sound like someone with an ax to grind, not like the logical, informed person you think you sound like.

for : joe_zop

"is this something I actually wrote ?" - yes. It's not a translation.

English is my second language - it's true. You, probably, see some mistakes - please feel free to correct them and distribute, if you agree with the thesis. That's the idea. I don't claim any copyright for this text.

for : jwny72

I am not against marriage itself, but against marriage law as it is today. Take off all financial liabilities from this law and then it's fine.

Of course there are different marriages, but happy couples don't need this law and lawers !

Look, if you have a problem with marriage laws there is an easy solution. Think first and don't get married. . . -P

Why so much words against marriage? Just stay away from it.

A- For those who are already into it:
1- use ur assets to get loans (in a case of a divorce, just withdraw your cash & you'll only have liabilities to share)
2- convert ur assets into intangible ones as much as possible (knowledge,etc.)

B- For those considering the marriage:
1- make sure to discuss the idea with a lawyer since you're about to get into a contract
2- financially assess the woman situation as she does for you (be as strict a a mortgage company)

C- For all of you, get a passport and travel to view the woman/man from a different perspective

Alex:

An intriguing post, and here are a few comments on it. First, let me note that people who don't like the situation don't need to get married, so it's not as though someone's being born into poverty and needs to overcome things to have a fair shot.

First, I'd have preferred a couple of US law citations in a thread about American women, as FedUp is quite fond of reminding us that they are two different countries, with different perspectives on things.

While I find much of what you have to say well-stated and reasoned, there are a few places where I also find flaws. As your missive is long, I'll just start with a couple.

First and foremost, I have a problem with the way you just dismiss economic realities when economics are at the core of your argument. You can't have it both ways -- either economics count or they don't. The assertion that the situations are basically equal between the sexes is simply not true -- the truth is that the average woman in the workplace does earn substantially less than a man does. And this is true pretty much everywhere (one can look at the European Union and it ranges from 68% in Greece to 89.9% in Eastern Germany, with the UK at 73.7%.) The US falls in these general ranges as well, though women here have had more success at closing the gap. While the above are figures strictly about income, and there's also still a gap in pay for equal work as well. There are many reasons for this, and we can debate them ad nauseum, but the bottom line in your argument is an equal ability (not opportunity) to support oneself, and that's still not true. You tend to dismiss this by saying that men need more money because men need to pay for sex and women don't, but that's a rather ingenious approach that's unsupported by facts. If you're seriously contending that men take that extra 25% or so they make and spend it on sex, I'd like to know where your information comes from. At $40k a year, that would come out to close to $200 a week.

Also, the simple truth is that divorce [i]is[/i] tougher on women -- according to the latest census, 21% of recently divorced women are below the poverty line, as opposed to 9% of men. And that's even in the environment you say economically favors women. Pretty much every report and study I've seen says that divorce still tends to make men richer and women poorer, with the gap widening when there are children involved. Part of this is simply that men tend to have been working longer, and in better jobs, and length of work experience tends to impact compensation.

The last time I checked, all fifty states in the US had a no-fault divorce option, so it's at least possible to cut the strings cleanly and say goodbye. (Whether one can actually make use of these laws, depends, of course, on the two people involved.)

Women spend more time on housework because they "need it more"? Does that explain why men spend more on sex as well? Whether it's money or marriage or dentistry or food, someone who wants their needs met needs to give something up in order to get it. If men want sex, they'll give up pretty much anything, including a house (little head thinking) and if women want a house to work on they'll give sex. Given this, why should the man complain when he has to give the house up at the end of the equation? Wasn't that part of the bargain? If we use your math, and men need that extra 25% to get sex, then that pretty much covers the cost of the house, doesn't it? (Let's see twenty years of $40k at 25%a year = that's a $200k house.)

As far as your argument on kids, sorry, you completely lost me on that one. Ok, you feel that it would be a good thing if there were fewer kids and lower property values. Goody -- that's you; I know plenty of my friends who live and die for their kids. Sure, there are some men who feel "trapped" into marriage by pregnancy, but that doesn't mean that their perspective is somehow trump. I also don't see how your argument can have it both ways -- that the interests of the adult are paramount, and the interests of the child are not, and that the man somehow suffers when his family is gone, but he shouldn't be responsible for paying to raising these kids because he doesn't get much time with them (or want it -- the majority of those two-hour a week visitation scenarios you decry are ones where the father shows no interest.) And, for what it's worth, I *do* know a couple of women who pay child support, which obviously means I also know women who have not been awarded custody.

The woman has total control of pregnancy because she can choose to get pregnant no matter what the man does? And the only alternative is not to get sex? Huh? Ever hear of condoms?

"NORMAL SEXUAL LIFE IS NOT LESS IMPORTANT, THEN NORMAL FOOD" and "SEXUAL LIFE IS OUR PRIVATE LIFE, AND THERE MUST NOT BE LAW, THAT IN ANY WAY CONNECT OUR PRIVATE LIFE WITH MONEY" -- are you telling me that you've somehow found a way to get free food all the time? Please, share your secret -- that way I can have more money for sex...

Don't misinterpret this -- I'm not at all slamming you for your opinion and perspective. I believe in healthy discussion, and part of that is pointing out areas where clarity is needed or where disagreement exists.

hiya boys :) missed you all. ok, on with the feminist diatribe....

family law has nothing to do with sex. do they ask you how many times you had sex during your marriage as part of the court process? does the judge say "i hereby award you with the house and half of your husband's worldly goods, for being so damn good in bed all these years?" i personally agree with you that marriage is a state/church sanctioned form of prostitution...strictly by the definition of goods received for sexual services...but is sex really all there is to marriage? what on earth possessed you to suggest that a man's (supposed) extra desire for sex should have any bearing on a family court ruling?

there are soooo many things about that chauvenist and totally misinformed "thesis" that i want to pick apart, but i'll try and limit myself to child support and women ending up "better off" than men after a divorce.

firstly, a little sex ed lesson....women can not have babies on their own. no, seriously, it's true! men do not stand idly by while their significant other gets pregnant. there are consequences for having sex for both parties...if you are not mature enough to realise that, then you have no business having sex in the first place. even when all precautions are taken, there is still a risk of pregnancy. and if you're scared that she may be lying to you about the pill and trying to "trap" you into having a family...take some responsibility for yourself and use a condom!

ummm i was going to write rep001hing abuse here for his suggestions in child support section, but have decided i couldn't do it rationally. this man obviously has no children, therefore he will never understand how very different a child is to a family car. (and if he does have children, then i hope for their sake he has no further contact with them). he will not understand the expense involved with raising a child, nor the continuous maintenence they require, like housework...you know alex, i could think of much better ways to spend my time than cooking dinner and cleaning up mud off the floor, but as the primary caregiver of children, that is my responsibility. to suggest that i do it because it is "more important to me than it is to a man", is truly ludicrous. any "househusband" or single father will be more than happy to confirm that for me.

i am truly fed up with hearing men claim that children are a woman's problem, and that men are the poor innocent victims of the court system that end up paying for "someone else's property" in child support. if you don't want kids, keep your dick in your pants. if you insist on dipping your wick, then you should have to take some damn responsibility for your own actions. regardless of who they live with, kids have two biological parents. it may be easy enough for men to walk away from their physical responsibilities as a father (which so many of them do), but they are still his children. child support goes towards making sure the children are fed, clothed and educated...and any good father would be more than happy to do that.

Geez, RN, and here I was picturing you in that nice maid's outfit, getting all how and bothered not because of the outfit or the company, but because you were actually getting the opportunity to dust and do dishes. And now you're saying I gotta pay for that too? :D

I'm happy to wear the maid's outfit for you free of charge honey...but if you want me to actually clean anything, it's gonna cost you fantasy rates!!

(Oh my god.. did I actually say "dip your wick" in my post??)

hi, everybody ! i expected a lot of shit on my head, but instead i got some reasonable arguments. let's discuss them :

to joe_zop :

thank you for your post.

your arguments :

1. in real life women earn less, then men ( althoug in theory they are equal ), so marriage in a way compensates this gap.

it's not only men and women that don't earn equally, whites and blacks also earn not equally, tall and beautiful people statistically earn more, that short and ugly. we don't have laws to compensate this. we don't have a law "if a white man and a black man play tennis together they have mutual financial obligations". why if a man and a woman have sex together, they do have them ?

what if we have this absurd law about tennis ? people will be afraid to play tennis. before playing with somebody they will learn his financial background first and then decide, to play or not. would it be good for tennis game ? - no. are marriage laws good for sex ? - ... same thing.

2. i know plenty of my friends who live and die for their kids.

i also know a friend that keep tie connection with his daugther after separation and helps a lot. more, then mother. he does not need any law for this !

so who need this law ? the law is a tool to forse to pay men, that have no connection with their former wifes or children. they don't love them - it happens, it's life. why should they pay for something they don't like ? - because it's difficult for single mother to raise a child. but this is another problem ! let's recognize, that raising a child is in fact full time job, that is nessessary for benefit not only of his parents, but to whole society, so society should pay for this job. and then kill marriage law completely. doesn't matter - single, married, even for normal family with both parents working, they in fact do second job raising their children. let's redistribute taxes, but not charge cheated fathers. men will be less afraid to have children. i, personaly, would prefer to pay more taxes, but to be sure, that no lawer will ever put his nose into my private sexual life.

the current price for marriage law is too high, it mixes love with money and so kills love. and love is more important then money ! - this is the point. no single mother has died with the child from hunger yet ( god save ! ), but how many happy lives are raped by by mixing love and business. financial situation of single mothers is not the only important problem in this world !

there are many complaints about american women - they are selfish, treat men like shit - that's partially result of marriage law, that introduce business relationship into family. cancel the law, and women will eventually learn, that sex is for love, and business is on their working place, not at home.

3. - ( my conception is ) - that the interests of the adult are paramount, and the interests of the child are not

not quite this way. but let's not forget - every child is child until 17, then he lives 3-4 times longer as adult. and half of children are also boys. did anybody ask them, boys, do they want this law ? maybe they'll prefer less toys in childhood, but more normal sexual life as adults ?
when they say : family law is maid to keep interests of children - it's lie. this law is made not for children. it's for their mothers.

4. - i *do* know a couple of women who pay child support.

so what ? that's exception, but the rule is that men pay.

5. - i've seen says that divorce still tends to make men richer and women poorer

it's, probably, true. it's another proof that marriage tends to make women richer and men poorer.

still i read that 90% of divorces in usa are initiated by women now. i don't know how credible is this data ( also it seems to be true ), i just read it somewhere in internet. it's interesting to find official data, if you know a good web-site, please, let me know. i'd also like to find credible statistics about :

- how many marriages happen a year
- how many divorces happen a year
how much money annualy are sued out by divorces :
- by women from men
- by men from women
how often courts give children :
- to mothers
- to fathers

i guess this statistics could be quite elogent.


to bootylover, prokofiev :

- why so much words against marriage? just stay away from it.
- think first and don't get married.

i try to stay away. the problem is that women press on men - go get married or go to hell, i'l find another, more agreeble guy. just like prostitutes - no money, no funny. i'd like to take this tool ( marriage ) off their hands.


to rn :

- family law has nothing to do with sex. ... i personally agree with you that marriage is a state/church sanctioned form of prostitution...strictly by the definition of goods received for sexual services

good. you agree.

- if you don't want kids, keep your dick in your pants. if you insist on dipping your wick, ( yes, you said this ! alex. ) then you should have to take some damn responsibility for your own actions.

this conception is totally wrong ! to have children and to make a mistake about this - is not a crime, that men shold pay for. this idea kills normal sexual relationship between men and women - and normal relationships are more important, then money !

please, see also my answers to joe_zop.

Everybody has there own views about family finance, but the most common view is that somebody else should pay. I know lots of people that have kids, but I can't think of any parents who wish they did not have their children. They sure complain about the costs and the many forms of effort involved with raising kids, but none would give up their kids.

I will tell everybody reading this that I do not want to pay my electric bill. I do not have a good excuse, I just do not want to pay. I will pay it though because I really don't like sitting in the dark. Lots of guys try to get out of paying child support. They offer every excuse imaginable but the bottom line is ,,,they just don't want to pay.

I hear people complain about taxes thinking that they are paying somebody elses way through life without ever considering that most of the things they take for granted would not happen without the system as it is. A simple fact of life is that if we want to play the game, we all have to pay our share of the bills.

I have never been told I look like Brad Pitt but I have been able to maintain a relationship even at points in my life when I was barely making enough money to get to my next paycheck. I don't claim any special ability in bed, but most of the women I have been with seemed more than willing to be intimate. I honestly think that we blame American women for our troubles because otherwise we would have to look in the mirror for the real problems.

I am far from perfect, so if I can do it, anybody can......Life is what you make it.

random : I do not want to pay my electric bill.

You pay electric bill for house where you live only. If you leave the house, you don't pay the bill any more.

Alex I pay the electric bills in places that I will never visit. I pay taxes to fund programs for people that I will never meet. I might complain about that sometimes but the fact is those people cash the checks they got from the goverment and buy things from people I do business with. We are all connected and I understand that its not a free ride. Your going to have a tough time convincing many people that you deserve money for prostitutes more than mothers deserve money to care for their kids. Good luck selling that idea my freind.

Alex,

"To have children and to make a mistake about this - is not a crime, that men shold pay for. "

That was exactly my point....paying child support is not a "punishment". It is a responsibility! Parents support their children financially, emotionally and materially...that is part of the job description. It's quite obvious by your constant references to the financial position of single mothers, that you believe this money is paid to keep the WOMAN happy. That is not what it's for. I believe Americans have alimony payments that cover that sort of thing (a concept that I find bizarre mind you). Child support is paid to provide for the children....children that BOTH the parents brought into this world.

re: the father losing custody.
A child is not property that can be divided up equally between the parents. It is unfortunate that one parent has to miss out, but that's the way it goes. "Shared custody" is really the only situation that keeps both parties happy, but living in two different houses usually does kids heads in. It's also not possible if the separated couple live too far away from each other (with school, etc).

Women are not always automatically granted custody of children just because they are mothers. As someone involved in the sex industry, I know MANY women who have lost custody of their children after being classified as "unfit mothers" due to their occupation. In the overwhelming majority of cases, (and yes, I have studied stats and numbers while doing a research project on sex workers and residency), women are granted custody because they are unemployed. When there is a choice between a man who works fulltime (who would have to put the kids in daycare) and a woman who is a housewife (who can give all the attention necessary to the children)...the courts will choose the mother. The other fact is...the majority of men do not WANT custody! They run off and start a new, dependent-free life and the woman is left literally holding the baby. Most of these "fathers" (and I use the term lightly) are showing friends the baby photos and bragging about how well their son is doing on the school soccer team, while at the same time flatly refusing to pay child support. When the kid grows up and gets married, the "father" will expect an invitation. He will want to be called Grandpa when the time comes too. If he wants all that, he can damn well help with the child's upbringing. You can't just be a father when it suits you...it's a fulltime, lifelong job.


"No single mother has died with the child from hunger yet"

Of course they haven't. Any mother worth her salt would sacrifice EVERYTHING to ensure her children have food on the table. That may be why "providing for my children" is (worldwide) the most common reason given when you ask a woman why she became a prostitute...

Random,
Beautifully said honey! :)

Alex --

First, sex is not tennis. Just because there are balls involved and love matches, doesn't mean it's the same. Sex may be sport, but that's not all it is. And in any event, tennis also has its rules -- you don't get to simply decide that "I want to hit the ball and win, so any place I hit the ball must be in." You wanna play, it's got to be something where the opponent has an equal chance to come out ahead.

We do in fact have laws that prohibit discrimination by race, though they don't always work. We've had a long stretch of affirmative action programs (whatever one might think of them) to try to compensate for inequities in opportunity in that regard. Even the most vocal proponents of such programs acknowledge that they give preferential treatment to those who fit into the definitions. So it's far from an unknown scenario.

I don't agree with you that "making a mistake about children is not a crime that men should pay for." First of all, children are one of the basic potential byproducts of sex -- if you're not willing to deal with this then you shouldn't be engaging in the act. You don't want kids, get a vasectomy and then you've got nothing to worry about. As long as you're shooting something other than blanks, pregnancy can happen, and it's part of the deal that you're co-responsible. Frankly, it's childish to expect that you don't have to accept the consequences of your actions -- if you're part of bringing a kid into the world, you're responsible for making sure that kid is supported and nurtured to adulthood.

I'm sorry, but your concept that maybe we should ask the boys about this situation and maybe they'll prefer lots of no-string sex as an adult to lots of toys right now is simply beyond silly.

You say, these laws penalize men who want nothing to do with their ex-wives and children, and that society should pay for the raising of children, so men can basically abdicate their responsbilities if they so choose. In other words, I have to help pay for the fact that you choose to go out and make a slew of women pregnant, right? So what you really want to do is shift the burden for [i]your[/i] behavior to [i]my[/i] wallet as opposed to yours. Why should I think that's a good idea, exactly?

Interesting questions on your stats issues -- here's a few answers:

Simple numbers I found from the Census Bureau, slightly dated by probably still in the ballpark -- in 1995 there were 2.3 million marriages and 1.2 million divorces.

Yes, everything I've read says that women are more commonly the ones who file for divorce. The best stats I've seen put the number at far less than your 90% citation around or slightly higher than 2/3rds -- the highest historical rate cited in general was in 1931, when it was 72.8% female filings (American Law and Economics Review 2000) The National Center for Health Statistics says the same -- in marriages with children, women file two-thirds of the time. Isn't it worth asking, given that women end up worse off after divorce, why this is the case? Custody might be part of it, but the stats aren't clear in that regard.

The legal truth is that maternal preference laws regarding custody were found to violate the 14th Amendment (Roth, 1976), so things have been changing and joint custody is much more common than it used to be. The NCHS did the first studies looking at custody rates, and, using their definition of joint physical custody as a minimum of 30% time share, while women still get custody from about half (Montana and Kansas) to 80% (several states) of the time, both women's and men's percentage of sole custody tend to be higher in those states where there's little joint custody, and women's rates are the ones that are substantially reduced in places where there's a substantial rate of joint awards.

The bottom line is that marriages tend to fail because of sex and money problems, so why would it be surprising that those are the two things there are most complaints about here?

RN

"That was exactly my point....paying child support is not a "punishment". It is a responsibility! "

You can call it anyway, it's just words, but the result is more severe, then if you'd steal something.

"Parents support their children financially, emotionally and materially...that is part of the job description. It's quite obvious by your constant references to the financial position of single mothers, that you believe this money is paid to keep the WOMAN happy. "
"A child is not property that can be divided up equally between the parents. "
"The other fact is...the majority of men do not WANT custody"

I agree with this. I do not idealize men and don't despise women. It's all difficult problem that has no easy solution. What I say is that current solution is VER bad. It sacrifice normal relationship between men and women for business matters.

"As someone involved in the sex industry" - I am not sure what do you mean, but some women " involved in the sex industry" have reason to worry. If marriage will be canceled, prices for sex industry will go down.

I am asking all men - Do you want to get sex-for-sex, free, or do you want to live in a country of "sex industry". If you prefere second choice - go continue support for marriage laws.


random753

"I pay taxes to fund programs for people that I will never meet." - good, let's pay taxes for raising children. Not marriage law alimonies.

"Your going to have a tough time convincing many people that you deserve money for prostitutes more than mothers deserve money to care for their kids. Good luck selling that idea my freind." -

I am not trying to sell it for your friends, but to people, who will understand it correctly.

for joe :

"As long as you're shooting something other than blanks, pregnancy can happen, and it's part of the deal that you're co-responsible. Frankly, it's childish to expect that you don't have to accept the consequences of your actions" -

In current situation women have whole control on this matter - she can have a baby, or make an abortion, man has no control. Is this correct, that he has equal responsibilities, on something, he can not really control ?
The only solution for the man who don't want children - abstinence from sex. Is it going to be happy society ?


"I have to help pay for the fact that you choose to go out and make a slew of women pregnant, right?" - no, not right. You will pay for the fact, that you will never pay more, even if a prostitute lured you into sex and bore a child. ( It's not my case, don't think that I am just hurt and speaking for myself. )


"I'm sorry, but your concept that maybe we should ask the boys about this situation and maybe they'll prefer lots of no-string sex as an adult to lots of toys right now is simply beyond silly. " - why ? did you ask them ?
They will answer what they, children, whom we do care about, want.

"If marriage will be canceled, prices for sex industry will go down."

Let's see...if the Family Laws were gone and marriage didn't exist, and women knew they could no longer get financial assistance for their children after a relationship breakdown, then women would be terrified of becoming pregnant. Women would then stop having sex. When women stop having sex, sex industry demand increases. And when demand is high...so are the prices!

Or...when women are no longer being screwed over by joint loans that their husbands manage to slither out of paying after the divorce, and the state is supporting all the single mothers with taxpayer funded welfare payments, many women will no longer be forced to work in the sex industry. That will mean fewer prostitutes, and when demand is high but supply is low...up go the prices again! :) LOL

Seriously though, apparently about half of all sex workers clients are married...which by my calculations means that half are not. Single men see hookers too. I can't see how the abolition of marriage would effect the sex industry at all.

Also, apparently around half of all marriages end in divorce. That means the other half don't. So all those men who are in happy marriages are currently getting all the free sex they need. Anyway, marriage has nothing much to do with sex. Marriage is a partnership...a friendship...if you happen to have great sex in that relationship then you are lucky. But if you are getting married just because you want lots of sex...then you are getting married for totally the wrong reasons, and it will fail. And if you then find yourself in the predicament you're describing, I reckon it's your own fault.

for RN :

Let's see...if the Family Laws were gone ... then women would be terrified of becoming pregnant. Women would then stop having sex... -
no, they would have sex. they would stop having babies when they are not sure.

"Anyway, marriage has nothing much to do with sex. Marriage is a partnership...a friendship..." -
Wrong ! The main reason why man marry is that they want normal regular sex and can't get it other way. For friendship you can meet in a cafe, even to have business in partnership, but not live in the same house.
Men, if not gays, don't live together for mutual cooking, cleaning...

"But if you are getting married just because you want lots of sex...then you are getting married for totally the wrong reasons, and it will fail." -
Thats what is, unfotunately, happen TOO often. Or why there is 50% divorces ?

"in current situation women have whole control on this matter
- she can have a baby, or make an abortion, man has no control."

i'm sorry, did i miss some kind of biological breakthrough where women can now get pregnant without sperm? i've been screwing for a lot of years, and no one's ever gotten pregnant with my child without my active participation in the process. and if i'm worried that someone is going to have a baby and hold me hostage either emotionally or fiscally, i've got other options than to stop having sex.


"the only solution for the man who don't want children - abstinence from sex. is it going to be happy society ?"

hello, let's try again -- condoms, birth control, etc. that's not abstinence (heck, that's only good sense, with stds running around.) you're saying that a society full of neglected children and self-centered irresponsible males is going to be a happy one?


" 'i have to help pay for the fact that you choose to go out and make a slew of women pregnant, right?' - no, not right. you will pay for the fact, that you will never pay more, even if a prostitute lured you into sex and bore a child. ( it's not my case, don't think that i am just hurt and speaking for myself. )"

sorry, but if you're asking "society" to raise kids, you're asking me to help pay for that, as opposed to you taking full responsibility for your actions. that means that you (and it's the rhetorical "you" not you personally) just pawn off your actions on the rest of us. and i'm sorry -- a "prostitute luring you into sex and bearing a child"? c'mon! what planet are you from?


"they will answer what they, children, whom we do care about, want. "

so you seriously expect to go to a seven-year old boy and say. "honey, if we stop giving you as many toys and clothes, when you grow up you'll be able to have all the sex you want without those nasty girls taking money from your wallet or worse, your house, after she emotionally screws you over. doesn't that sound great?" and actually put some stock in the answer? i suggest you do a little reading on child development before you put forward such absurb suggestions, because it really undermines the rest of your argument.

alex, there are some areas where you say some really good things, but c'mon, on some of this stuff you're just waaay out there.

and i'm with rn -- your concept of marriage explains a lot, and it's clear you've never been in one, or at least one that works. marriage definitely [i]is[/i] a partnership, one in which sex is included in the mix but is not the only thing happening. let's keep in mind that part of the so-called "traditional" marriage was very much one of the man working outside the home, the women providing meals, support, a home, etc., and the man gratefully coming back for relief, comfort, something of his own, etc. things may have changed and roles may have changed, but food, shelter, safety, and family are still pretty important in the big scheme of things. if you seriously think that the only reason men marry is for "normal" sex, and that friendship and partnership and family have nothing to do with it, then please, please, please never marry, even if all the laws change to what you'd like. that would be like diving off a skyscraper and expecting to hit water.

joe_zop

"Hello, let's try again -- CONDOMS, birth control, etc." -

What if a condom breaks ? Or, more often, a women say - I take precautions, but then she says "sorry, I am pregnant and I want a baby and you will be the father." How many people were cheated this way ? Do you have statistics ?

"Sorry, but if you're asking "society" to raise kids, you're asking me to help pay for that, as opposed to you taking full responsibility for your actions." -

And what is the alternative ? This way, that we have it now ?
Even the existence of this topic "American women" proves, that it's something wrong in this situation.

"So you seriously expect to go to a seven-year old boy and say. " -
Not 7 years, but at 14 years old they will understand it well. I'm wondering, what'd be results of such experiment ?
Anyway, this is not my main point.


"If you seriously think that the only reason men marry is for "normal" sex, and that friendship and partnership and family have nothing to do with it" -
yes, that what I think. 2 good friends, not gays, that share appartment, may even cook together, understand one another, be lifetime friends and so on - are not married. They are not financialy responsible before the law. ( Why not to look this way at all relationships, regardless off sex ? ) Marriage happens only when sex is involved. If sex woldn't exist - nobody would ever marry.

>What if a condom breaks ? Or, more often, a women say - I take precautions, but then she says "sorry, I am pregnant and I want a baby and you will be the father." How many people were cheated this way ? Do you have statistics ?

Do [i]you[/i] have statistics? You throw this out as though it's the major problem here. The percentage of condom breakage is pretty low overall, which means so is the rate of pregnancy in that regard. Your approach is that everything needs to be defined by the worst-case scenario.


>Even the existence of this topic "American women" proves, that it's something wrong in this situation.

No, it proves that there is a dysfunction of relationship between men and American women. It doesn't prove a darn thing about the marriage situation, as this is a board about prostitution.


>Anyway, this is not my main point.

Thank heavens, because as I said it's a weak one. And setting up a scenario where you ask 14-year-olds about sex both ignores the majority of childhood and basically chooses the precise spot where raging hormones and social discomfit coincide. It's picking only the spot where your scenario might work.


>yes, that what I think. 2 good friends, not gays, that share appartment, may even cook together, understand one another, be lifetime friends and so on - are not married. They are not financialy responsible before the law. ( Why not to look this way at all relationships, regardless off sex ? ) Marriage happens only when sex is involved. If sex woldn't exist - nobody would ever marry."

I'm sure that's what you think, but how long/often have you actually been married? What examples and personal knowledge are you speaking from? C'mon, fess up -- RN and I have at least walked the walk.

Tell you what -- you spend your life living with guys, then, and having sex whenever you can manage. I've lived with guys, and I'll take marriage any day, even with its various perils, and I'm sorry to really disagree with you on this, but it absolutely [i]is[/i] different. And for far, far more than the sex. As you mentioned oh-so-briefly in one of your other posts, there's also love, and I'm not talking about fraternal love. And love is about more than sex, though it obviously can involve that. You thesis compared marriage to legal prostitution -- normal, healthy love (which I use because you keep referring to normal sex) doesn't fit into that equation.

BTW, your two guys [i]are[/i] financially responsible before the law if they have entered into any kind of contractual obligation, such as buying a house or leasing. (A better example would probably be a two-person business, as there is a more clear co-mingling of interests.) And marriage is a legal contract, a statement of financial and emotional committment. If you don't like that, don't sign up for it -- same as moving in with a guy.

Since we're pondering statistics, suppose you give me one about the number of non-gay guys who live together for, say, twenty, thirty, or fifty years, since this seems to be such an attractive example to you to use. There is a different level of committment being made in marriage, even keeping kids out of the equation, which is difficult to do, and the statistical truth is that frequency of sex tends to decrease the longer the relationship lasts, regardless of whether marriage is involved or not. Tell me, if you would, since sex is all there is that's important in marriage, why so many older guys (and this was still true pre-viagra) get married again to women their age, even in nursing homes? Surely it's not for the sex!

I'll tell you what, if sex is what it's all and only about then here's what you want to be -- a never married/ divorced/separated/widowed person living with someone of the opposite sex. Statistically speaking, that's the single group of who most often get laid more than twice a week. More than married guys or women. More than single folks. So I suggest you just skip the whole angst about the marriage thing and move in with someone. You'll have more sex and less existential crisis, and your partner will be clearer on your level of committment. (And again, I'm using the univeral "you" as opposed to talking about you specifically.

- Even the existence of this topic "American women" proves, that it's something wrong in this situation.
- No, it proves that there is a dysfunction of relationship between men and American women.

You say the same thing in other words.
What do you think is the cause of this dysfunction of relationship ?
I think - marriage law is one of main causes.

joe_zop :

"your two guys are financially responsible before the law if they have entered into any kind of contractual obligation" -

The difference is that 2 guys make the contract voluntary. but marriage is often happens under sexual blackmail/pressure - marry me or go away. Just like prostitutes - no money - no sex for you. There are happy exceptions, sure, but the rule is this - men do not need marriage law, women do need it to get money. I am not against love and living with women, not againt happy marriages, I am against the law, that corrupt sexual relationships. And your advise just to keep out of marriage does't work well, it's women that wouldn't let you to keep out of it.

Yes, I present extremist position here, while you argue for women also. But I don't see any other solution - it simply does't work for both men and women. So we have to make choice - either for men or for women. Now the choice is made for women - are you happy ? Look at this site - how many people go even to Philippines to get cheap sex - is it normal ? Their life must be really unhappy for them to do it. Who can state that this is a smaller problem, compare to better financial well being of women. I feel that women have unfare advantage in today's society, and the first step to decrease this gap will be - cancellation of financial shit in marriage, which will decrease self esteem of american women, make them more dependable of men to compensate men's dependency of sex.

You also have mentioned, that marriage law practice violates amendment 14 - yes, it violates it even with all cosmetic attempts to repair it. How can it still exist ? It's clearly sexually discriminating law.

>What do you think is the cause of this dysfunction of relationship ? I think - marriage law is one of main causes.

I don't think that's the case -- marriage happens in all countries, and the laws in many are pretty similar. The situation's with women's different there, as many here will testify.

Causes? A post-feminism boredom that has translated into a wide pendular swing toward male-bashing, basically unhealthy competition between men and women over whose rights and interests are paramount, a culturally materialistic and and callous societal undercurrent that promotes unrealistic expectations about beauty and possessions, obsession with winning as opposed to cooperation, fast food and unhealthy lifestyles, too much time spent on work by both sexes, heck, there are lots of culprits. I put marriage laws down the list -- IMHO, dissatisfactions with them are symptoms of the disease, not the cause.

Please, see my post 12, if you want to answer it now, do it. I'll return tomorrw.

Thanks.

PS. In what you say in your last post - do you see any solution ?

"And your advise just to keep out of marriage does't work well, it's women that wouldn't let you to keep out of it."

Just like they trap you into pregnancy, right? Geez, can't you arm and protect yourself against the wiles of these jezebels? No one can force you to get married. No one can force you to get them pregnant. So let's be clear about what you're saying -- it's ok for you to want to sleep with women with no committment, but it's unfair of women to want a committment from you in case they get pregnant and stuck raising a kid? Are you that wonderful in the sack that they should be getting wet thinking you might bestow yourself on them? C'mon! Given that you basically seem to be approaching everything as though women are out to get you, and want to flee when you don't like something, why would they enter into a voluntary contract with you where they had no benefit? You're getting what you want -- sex -- what is she getting? Contracts generally specify gains for both sides, an exchange of benefits.

Marriage is a voluntary act, no matter how you want to paint it. You don't have to sign a loan for a car or a lease unless you want to, and you sure as hell don't have to take a blood test and sign a marriage license unless you want to. If those are a woman's conditions and you don't like them, then look to sleep with someone else!

My quote on the 14th amendment was on preferential custody laws, not marriage laws. Most states in this country use a community property approach, which divides assets equally -- your position is that this favors women, because men bring more dollars into the equation. If you want to enter into the process of marriage and are worried about getting screwed when it falls apart, then get her to sign a prenup.

I argue for me and what I know and see -- not for men and not for women. Mostly I'm more concerned for the kids, as they will affect society and messing them up will have direct consequences on my quality of life. I don't feel like getting robbed or killed by a kid who's angry because he has nothing and was neglected by a father who said, hey, you're not my responsibility. Unlike you, I don't see it as an either/or equation where either one or the other gender has to win, and I don't agree with you that the existing laws only work for women and not for men. Personally, I wish the laws around child support were more strongly and radically enforced, as I've seen too many kids who have nothing because their parents marriages broke up and daddy won't hold up his end, while he's busy using your argument and perspective.

You don't like it -- don't procreate. You feel a woman's going to trap you into marriage by getting pregnant -- get neutered. You don't like that she wants you to marry her in order to keep sleeping with her -- find someone else. But whining about how unfair it is that you might have to clean up the mess you make, because it's all the bad laws and crafty women is nothing but wallowing in being a victim. Let's go back to one of the old roles, where men are men, and do what they need to do instead of complaining about how tough it is.

This site is not indicative of the oppression of marriage laws. This site is first and foremost about exchange of information about where you can find available women to have sex with, both in the US and elsewhere. This site is indicative of the fact that men like to get laid, period. Men, in general, like to get laid anywhere, any time, as often as is possible, and with as close to anyone and everyone as they can manage. Men will travel to the ends of the earth to get laid, and have done so throughout history. That has nothing to do with marriage laws -- that has to do with human nature and biological imperatives. And single men, who get laid less often than married men, also have to work harder to find an available woman.

And your example of the Philippines is rather ironic, in that one of the reasons men go there, among other places, is for the so- called "girlfriend experience" where it's the illusion of a relationship that goes beyond one that's strictly sexual. The girlfriend experience -- that's the one that's different from just sharing a place with a guy.

As far as seeing a solution -- personally, I believe where we are in the relationship between the sexes in the US is in a developmental gully. I believe it will straighten itself out somewhat given time, given a further development and stabilization of roles within society, and given an overall state of dissatisfaction with how things are. We're still in the blame arena, and the current generation is also still reacting to the fact that the promised climb up the economic ladder which has been at the core of the American ideal may not take place. It's not until we get out of that place that there's the possibility of moving forward.

[i]"I feel that women have unfare advantage in today's society, and the first step to decrease this gap will be - cancellation of financial shit in marriage, which will decrease self esteem of american women, make them more dependable of men to compensate men's dependency of sex.'[/i]

I think that sentence explains his entire position on the matter. What's going on? Do Misogynists Anonymous hand out this link at their meetings or something???

Alex...even some of the hardcore woman-haters in this section will probably not accept most of what you say. Especially if they are fathers, because your attitude to the welfare of children is really disturbing. I'm not sure that you will find many Americans who will support your law reform ideas...but I hear the Taliban are looking for policy writers....

for Joe : continuing answers for previous posts :

>You're getting what you want -- sex -- what is she getting?

Joe, you are so used to this system, that you don't see how wrong it is. I get sex, she also gets sex ! Both sides enjoy it. I am not looking for any money in it, she must do the same ! Then the world will be a good place.

Sex for sex, not sex for sex+money for women !

>Marriage is a voluntary act...

Sorry, you don't hear me. Let's imagine a country with lack of food, so in order to get meat in such a country you must marry a woman - owner of the meat shop or restarant. It's voluntary - you don't have to marry her and you will eat shit all your life. Would you like to live in this kind of world ? Would you try to change it ?
That's the situation with sex in USA now. And marriage laws decreases availability of 'sexual meat'. I, personally, try to avoid marriage, but I don't want to discuss myself, because it's not about me. Millions of people meet same problem.

>Mostly I'm more concerned for the kids, as they will affect society and messing them up will have direct consequences on my quality of life. I don't feel like getting robbed or killed by a kid who's angry because he has nothing and was neglected by a father

I am pretty sure, that lack of sex, not lack of money or father is the main cause of juvenal aggressivness. Would sex, girlfriends be more available for them - free, without money at all ! - crime will go down, not up.

>Let's go back to one of the old roles, where men are men, ...

You cannot just go to the old roles in a situation when women control men more, then men control women. It's not my whinning - it's reality.

>This site is indicative of the fact that men like to get laid, period.

Woman also want to get laid ! The difference is may be 10-15% of frigid women. What makes this difference overwhelming is the law, that create for women opportunity to suck money through it. So they not to give it free, but to sell it for more.

>And single men, who get laid less often than married men, also have to work harder to find an available woman.

This is double standard - men must work hard to find a woman, women don't have to work hard. We must eliminate such standards.

>As far as seeing a solution ... We're still in the blame arena,
- Sure.
> and the current generation is also still reacting to the fact that the promised climb up the economic ladder ... may not take place. It's not until we get out of that place that there's the possibility of moving forward.

We can not rely on this. Economic ladder can be up and down for tens of years. What's about generations of men that live now ? Are their lifes doing to continue to be screwd up with 'hard work for women' ?
Then US economy is among best in the world. There is a trend - the more country is reach - there are more sexual problems for men. That's because women feel more money around. That's why there is more sex in Africa or Brazil, then USA. Better economy doesn't help in this way.

Your list of causes of problems with American women in one of your posts - just a set of general words, there is no hint how to solve this problem. What I propose is a solution, do implement it and the situation will change, women will become more sexy and less bossy in US. You don't want it ? So nothing will ever change.
Don't hope for happy marriage, in present situation your chances are very low.

>RN : I hear the Taliban are looking for policy writers....

Now I realize how moslems got their ideas - it is an attempt to solve 'american women' problem. I do not preach moslem's way, in no way ! - because what they do is discrimination of women. What I want is not discrimination, but true EQUALITY of sexes, to stop with discrimination of men. Of course, women don't like it, so they will label me 'Taliban' and so on.

Of course child care is difficult problem - it has no easy solution. The one solution we have now - is very bad for 1/2 of all people - man. May be let's try something else ?

>This is double standard - men must work hard to find a woman, women don't have to work hard. We must eliminate such standards.

The truth is that single women get laid less as well. (Right RN? :) )A person living with or married to someone of the opposite gender simply gets more sex, period. C'mon -- this has little to do with marriage law or gender; this has to do with who is or isn't in a relationship with someone of the opposite sex! If you're single, you have to work harder, male or female.

I'd like to see you give me one statistic that says that juveniles' lack of sex is the cause of their aggressiveness. That's just something pulled out of the air to fit into your general thesis. From everything I've read, in fact, the kid who sticks the gun in my face is more, not less, likely to be sexually active. If you think all societal anger and unrest is related to a) not getting enough sex and b) men's distress over getting screwed over by marriage laws, then you're living in fantasy land. Here's the truth -- fatherless homes account for 63% of youth suicides, 90% of homeless/runaway children, 85% of children with behavior problems, 71% of high school dropouts, 85% of youths in prison, well over 50% of teen mothers. Sorry, that's not all from sexual frustration.

Your example of a country without food isn't make-believe -- those countries exist everywhere, and that's exactly how it works. Marrying the boss's daughter, or marriage for strategic reasons or marrying for land are all long-standing approaches, and if you think people don't still do that in the US you've very naive. And men, not women, tend to be the ones who benefit most from that approach. Let's not forget, either, the tradition of the dowry, which was basically a marriage bribe to take the "worthless" woman off the hands of the family, and ensure she can enter into the equation with some degree of material goods. Approaching things strictly from the perspective of what happens in the US in terms of economy and marriage laws ignores the reality of the majority of the world.

Speaking generally and acknowledging exceptions, men's and women's conceptions of sex are, by and large, simply different -- men tend to view it as a physical act which may or may not have emotional overtones, and women view it as an expression of emotional closeness that occurs physically. While it may be true that both need it, your concept that they need it for the same reasons is wrong, and that's one of the ongoing problems between the sexes. One of the strong threads you can find by reading back through this thread is not the issue of marriage, but the inequity of men needing to "woo" women in order to get sex. I say this is related directly not to marriage law but to longstanding societal mores that arose around fear of pregnancy. Truly effective birth control (meaning the pill) has only been around for forty years or so, and equal opportunity laws for less, and that's a very short time for longstanding societal patterns to change.

The basic truth is also that you are at lower risk of contracting STDs in the process. You are not at risk of getting pregnant and having your life radically changed by having sex, and she is. Or ending -- since a woman's risk of dying during childbirth, though they are far, far lower in North America than anywhere else, are still one in 3700. You're at risk only of having to help raise the offspring you helped spawn.

You see your solution as some sort of panacea -- I see it as yet another way of driving a wedge between the sexes that will make things worse, not better. "Let's throw things into turmoil without evidence it will actually help anything" is not my idea of a good approach. You've offered nothing but opinion, conjecture, and philosophy to back up your contentions -- give me some real facts, or actual statistics, or some models that work elsewhere (and not tennis or guys living together, but something on topic) as opposed to simple assertion of truth.

And I'm sorry, but your idea that there are only a few happy marriages is just baloney. I know tons of people in them. I know lots who are not, as well, but a blanket assertion like that is ludicrous. We don't have a 100% divorce rate -- about sixty million people are married in this country, and the reason isn't simply economics. Men and women have had strife and disharmony in marriage thoughout history, as well as great relationships, and to look at the US without considering the broad context of human behavior is foolish.

The bottom line in your argument, taking all the rest out is this -- American women are uppity, wanting men's money even though they don't really need it since they have their own, and they need a come-uppance to put them in their place so they'll act right. That's not equality, that's misogny.

...As to married couples having more sex, there is a Chinese proverb...

During the 1st year of marriage a couple should put a coin in a jar everytime they have sex.
.
After the the 1st year, they can remove a coin from the jar everytime they have sex.
.
The proverb says that such a jar will never be empty . . .


Peace, -P

> I'd like to see you give me one statistic that says that juveniles' lack of sex is the cause of their aggressiveness.

Freud's theory.

You give some statistics - where did you get it from ? web-sites ? Can I check it myself ?

>One of the strong threads you can find by reading back through this thread is not the issue of marriage, but the inequity of men needing to "woo" women in order to get sex. -

True. But what I say - marriage concept make things even worse.

>I say this is related directly not to marriage law but to longstanding societal mores that arose around fear of pregnancy. -

I am not agree. Unwanted pregnancies are rare. It's related to simple greed. (imho )

> You see your solution as some sort of panacea -

No. That's the first step. Real panacea would be to change demographic situation in such way, that demand/supply for sex from both sexes will be equal. The good mark here would be - when price for women prostitutes will go to zero, or will equalize with price and number of men-for-women prostitutes ( currently virtually non-existing ). It's more difficult, then to change law, but also possible - by immigration policy or sexual planning of births with help of sience ( in the future ).

Would I have a child now, I don't want him to be a boy. He will grow up - for what ? - for being all his life a 2nd class human, 'wooing' for sex and getting in reply - pay for this !

> give me some real facts, or actual statistics, or some models that work elsewhere -

The only real fact I can give you - now in US it does't work. The situation is so bad for many people, that an attempt to make changes is reasonable. It can't be worse, then it is already.

>And I'm sorry, but your idea that there are only a few happy marriages is just baloney.

I don't say few - probably 15-20% of marriages are happy. ( rude estimation ) Others - not. ( i.e 80-85% )

for Prokofiev :

Chinese girls are not sexually willing ( with rare exceptions ) I know. That's girls from 'mainland' - in Hongkong - it's different. This is result of anti-sexual brought up in communist, overpopulated China. It's good exfmple that sexuality is dependable of environment - not only genetic stuff.

Change the environment - kill f.cking marriage - and women will grow more sexy.

Sorry Alex, but you're wrong again.
.
My current girlfriend IS from mainland China and spent her 1st 33 years there. Has been in the US only 2 years and is an absolute firecracker in bed. Doesn't get any better than this. Your problems with women have more to do with the guy in the mirror and less to do about them or any laws . . .

There are exceptions.

So, how is your chinese girlfriend ? She doesn't say to you - I don't want to go on like this any more, I want to get married ?

If not - you are really lucky.

RN? Are you still with us? Or did you quit during the shut down. Let me now.

This is StarDotStar, under a new name. You can contact me at WhisperedStar@hushmail.com

Hope all is well with you.

Stay in touch, and let's hear more from you!

Hugs.

> Freud's theory.

Hardly what anyone would consider authoritative these days, even those in the field. Certainly nothing at all factual.

> You give some statistics - where did you get it from ? web-sites ? Can I check it myself ?

Sure -- [url]http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml[/url]

>>I say this is related directly not to marriage law but to longstanding societal mores that arose around fear of pregnancy. -
> I am not agree. Unwanted pregnancies are rare. It's related to simple greed. (imho )

That may be true now, but it was certainly not so in the past. Societal behavior develops over time, and it's only recently that good contraception has been generally available. My parents used the rhythm method, the only one sanctioned by the church at the time, and the result was six kids. And if unwanted pregnancies are now rare, then you're saying that most pregnancies outside of marriage are direct and blatant attempts by women to gain economic advantage or trap men into marriage. If you truly believe this, then you've truly got a very warped and paranoid perspective about women.

>The only real fact I can give you - now in US it does't work. The situation is so bad for many people, that an attempt to make changes is reasonable. It can't be worse, then it is already.

And, again, that's not fact, that's opinion. As is your estimate of happy marriages. The facts that your theory is based on are akin to the ones people used to come up with to divine witches.

Hiya WindStar! Yep, I'm still here annoying everyone. *grin*

Alex...I can't believe you honestly think that the only reason women (on their own of course, without the help of men) get pregnant solely for financial reasons. Accidents aside, did you ever think that maybe people CHOOSE to have children...as COUPLES?? Children are something that come out of love...out of a desire to share something of each other, and to keep your family name and your genetics alive. (Like I said, accidents aside).

Children are an incredible burden on a couple...both financially and emotionally. From the moment you have kids, you may as well start smoking hundred dollar bills, 'coz almost every cent you earn goes to their care. Every couple knows their finances are going to suffer when they have children...why do you think so many people save up and get settled before starting a family? There is a popular myth here...where we have welfare payments to support single mothers...that women pop out children just to get extra benefits. Well, I was on a single parents pension for a while when I had my first child. 6 years later, after having another child, I went back on the pension after my divorce. You want to know how much extra that second child was worth to me in welfare payments?? 65 dollars a fortnight!! Yep...that extra $32.50 a week goes a loooong way to paying a kid through school.

Actually, while we are on my story, lets see how it measures up against your theory. I fell pregnant with my first child by accident. It was totally our own fault ...BOTH of us that is...because neither of us took the necessary precautions. HE wanted to do the right thing and get married. I didn't think I loved him enough to make that committment and said no. 18 months later, I left him. He was broke when I was with him, and is still broke to this day...in 10 years I have had basically NO child support payments from him, although he still plays a VERY important part in my son's life. Incidentally, there was no court involvement in our access agreement...I encouraged him to spend as much time with his son as possible, because I felt it was important to my son, even though there are no financial benefits for me.

The second time, I was married. I had told my then-husband I did not want to have any more children, because I had almost died giving birth to the first one (post-partum haemorrhage). He was fine with that at the time, but after the first year he started to put pressure on me to change my mind. His parents, who didn't have any grandchildren yet, joined in too. After 6 months or so of CONSTANT pushing, I agreed to go off the pill. I got pregnant before my next period even came...and I cried for days about it. (And I ended up in intensive care after this one, with a more severe PPH...just as the doctors had warned me would happen). 18 months later, after the drunken violence became too much to handle, I fled from the marriage with NOTHING. His family fought me for seven months in court, and WON...giving them ridiculous amounts of access to my son. 6 years later, even with court intervention, I have still NEVER received child support payments from my ex husband.

I support my children financially, with no help from anyone else. I work fulltime, not because I need to...because I could get by on welfare if I wanted to...but to teach my children the value of a dollar, and the self-esteem that comes with being employed. After the divorce, I built our life from the ground up by working in the sex industry. A very large amount of the money I earned (just under $20, 000 to be exact) went to paying off "joint" debts that my husband managed to somehow escape from. I paid off HIS car, HIS tax bill, and a personal loan that HE used mainly to buy drugs and alcohol. We have been evicted from houses for non-payment of rent, lived without gas or electricity for days...even a week at one time...because I couldn't pay the bills, and I have gone without food MANY times so that I had enough food for my children.

Please explain to me exactly how I benefited in ANY way from marriage or childbirth...

Oops, sorry. Two more things...

1. Joe is certainly right about single women having just as much trouble getting sex as men do! (For those of you following my saga...I went out last night and, 'lo and behold, came home alone again). Single women with kids have to be even lower on the "easy pick-up" scale, and for those of us who have kids, have no immediate family within a 200 mile radius, and do not have enough money to pay for childcare outside of work hours....well, we may as well kiss our sexlives goodbye completely. I just can't get out enough to meet people.

2. [i]"Unwanted pregnancies are rare. It's related to simple greed. (imho )'[/i]

Can you tell me why the abortion rates are so high then? If getting pregnant is done "on purpose" and is simply an act of greed...why are they terminating pregnancies at such alarming rates? For that matter, why would ANYONE terminate if there are such huge financial benefits in keeping the baby???

Hi RN,

Your statement that, "...children are an incredible burden on a couple both financially and emotionally" is soooo true. They take over your life from the day that they're born and continue right on into adulthood.

I have two grown children who live in different states but they're still the number one priority in my life. In regard to the money issue, I had both of them in college at the same time for a few years and my fixed costs for both of them in school at the same time ran about $45,000 per year for two years. Nevertheless, it's still the BEST money I've ever spent and they now have excellent paying jobs and are completely indepedent financially although emotionally we're still a family. Also, daughters are forever I've found.

Where am I going with this? I'm not sure. I guess that I want to assure you and the guys that the best is yet to come. Sorry, I'm rambling. Thanks for indulging me.

there are many paths of happiness and happinese does not necessarily mean getting married (or maintaining an exclusive relationship with one single woman), having children and raising a family. for many, a single lifestyle with abundant disposable income, foreign vacation a few times a year, young playfriends, new german sports cars and fine fashion is happinese. personally i do not understand why my married friends live such a frugal lifestyle and never had the wonderment of my lifestyle since all their income goes to support the family .... but they do seem to be happy and proud.... from time to time, they did compliment my lifestyle with envy..... but then, they made the choice that having a family is the route to happiness.

Alex, why don't u stop this useless discussion? Why do u care that much about others happiness?
Why do you want to set free those who aren't looking for freedom?
Just let everyone do the way they feel good, Just protect urself from these women. Anyhow with about 60% of the population with weight problems why bother? Just leave em alone and go international that's where the truth is. No more women trying to command you to extort you!
Please leave others alone don't awake them cause they are comfortable. Make your own case!
PS As time goes by more & more of these women will stay alone.

Some interesing points of view. On a sidenote however, I just have to ask, is it just me or does it feel like the frequency of sex dramatically decreases after a few years in a longer term relationship? It's getting harder to get her in the mood these days as often as before .... it's nothing like in the beginning.... damn...
I mean, the emotional aspect of a relationship and the connection has its pros like some of you have mentioned, but is it gonna get any better in the sex department? Any others feeling this way or experience this?

BTW I'm in good physical shape, so no need to tell me I should lose some flab or look in the mirror at sagging male breasts =)

Oh yeah, and this site as a whole is really interesting and detailed. Didn't realize that prostitution was this prevalent and the prices in some places are alot cheaper than I had thought before. You learn new things every day I guess...

still reading through some of the other sections on WSG, there's just so much.

RN >Please explain to me exactly how I benefited in ANY way from marriage or childbirth...

- No, you didn't.

RN > Alex...I can't believe you honestly think that the only reason women (on their own of course, without the help of men) get pregnant solely for financial reasons.

No, I don't.
I also don't think :

- all women are bad
- all men are good
- all marriagies are unhappy
- there is nothing in marriages except financial calculations

and so on.

What I say is :

1. In current situation life of men statistically is even worse, then life of women.( including all difficult financial problems of single mothers ( sorry, RN ! ) )

2. Marriage law make this situation even worse, so canselation of it will improve life. ( note, not marriage - as an aliance of two loving people - just MARRIAGE LAW with its prostitutional-financial implications )

That's all I say. See my initial post for details.

Bootylover > Alex, why don't u stop this useless discussion? Why do u care that much about others happiness?
...
PS As time goes by more & more of these women will stay alone.

I want to intensify this process. Not just for the women stay alone, but to return sexuality to sex, away from business.

Do you enjoy travel abroad for sex ? Why not to have normal sex here, in US, Canada ?

"normal" sex. define normal?

>"normal" sex. define normal?

One that you are not charged 100$ or marriage sertificate for it.

well, my friend. not charge $100- is possible since there are lots of meat bar in any cities. but then the problem is, most women in these meat bar are fat and ugly. so, at the end of the day, i would rather pay to play. life is too short to dig fat and ugly chicks.

second, marriage certificate. life is too short to dig the same woman every night and day, got to diversify.

conclusion, "normal sex" per your definition is boring.

> 1. In current situation life of men statistically is even worse, then life of women.( including all difficult financial problems of single mothers ( sorry, RN ! ) )

Good clarification of your position, Alex, but I just don't know where you come up with the above. What statistics are you talking about? Life is worse in what way -- not getting free pussy? That's worse than what a financially struggling single mother has to go through?

joe_zop > ...Alex, but I just don't know where you come up with the above. What statistics are you talking about? Life is worse in what way -- not getting free pussy? That's worse than what a financially struggling single mother has to go through?

Yes. 1.I've never heard about single mother, sufffering from depression because she is tight with money, but I knew personaly at leat 2 men, suffering from depression because of lack of female love and sex.

2. Suicide rate is 2-3 higer for men, then for women, especially in developed countries. Why do you think ?
I've never heard of single mother, commiting suiside, because she has not enough money.

>Yes. 1.I've never heard about single mother, sufffering from depression because she is tight with money, but I knew personaly at leat 2 men, suffering from depression because of lack of female love and sex.

In point of fact, the statistics show that single females are more likely to suffer from depression than single males, twice as much by the age of 18, 3 to 1 from ages 30 to 50, then leveling out to equal levels after that. ([url]http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/2/3[/url])

And I apologize if I'm badly wrong, but the impression I've gotten from reading all of your posts is frankly that you know nothing much at all about single mothers, so it's kind of hard to put much stock in your anecdotal information. I know and have dealt with a number of single mothers, and they sure as hell suffer from depression. Money's part of it, though in my interactions it's more about being alone and lacking emotional support.

>2. Suicide rate is 2-3 higer for men, then for women, especially in developed countries. Why do you think ?
I've never heard of single mother, commiting suiside, because she has not enough money.

"Why do you think?" Where do you come up with this stuff? You mean I should summon up a picture of horny males too depressed because they only get sexual relief if they whack off so they whack themselves? I think it's a lot of things -- should I think that the fact that the suicide rate for males under 18 (going down to age 5) is also at about the same rate indicates that there's a bunch of adolescents and pubescents offing themselves because they don't get enough sex? Or the same for those over 75, whose rates are significantly higher? (Now, if you want to tell me the latter are killing themselves because they can't get it up anymore I'll have an easier time believing you.)

The male suicide rate is higher all around the world. The basic difference in the suicide rate can be explained in a large way by the fact that men tend to use guns, and thus are more often successful, even though women attempt suicide twice as often. The stats also say this -- suicide is more common among women who are single, recently separated, divorced, or widowed, and women who attempt suicide tend to do so because of interpersonal losses or crises in significant social or family relationships. Overall, risk factors that have been identified for suicide are age, unemployment, chronic illness, social isolation (higher rates among farmers, for example) and being in certain occupations (police, for example.) The most important one is presence of mental illness.

I don't know your background, but I worked two years as a volunteer in a crisis intervention center, and spent a lot of time talking with depressed and suicidal people on the phone. Men who called and threatened suicide tended to do so because they were unemployed, or because they felt they'd screwed up their lives, or because they generally felt worthless, and very infrequently because they didn't have a girlfriend or support structure. Women almost always focused on relationship problems.

C'mon now, every problem out there doesn't automatically relate to your thesis -- all male problems don't simply come down to bad marriage laws or women wanting something for sex. And you weaken your argument by simply throwing things out in a conspiracy-theory kind of way, where it's like everything's the fault of the CIA or a covered-up alien invasion only in this case it's marriage law or women not wanting to lie down in the road in front of you with open legs for nothing.

Skinless -- interestingly, most of the decent info and studies I've found on male suicide are from outside the US. The one I cited below was the best of the ones that actually looked closely at differences by age, though there are some others that look at general demographic differences. A couple of good sites with links on this subject are at http://www.psycom.net/depression.central.suicide.html and http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/suicide.html#statistics.

I think you're right that at least part of the cause of the rise in male suicide rates is probably related to rising power and success of women, since that translates into further stress in the workplace and men's sense of power and self-worth. And, yes, that clearly gets reflected in this thread. But, as I said below in my reply to Alex, I don't see where that translates into marriage laws (married men, in fact, have very low suicide rates, lower still than married women) or women wanting things in order to have sex. If we want to say that the bottom line is that a high and rising suicide rate for men is an indication that men are not coping well with changes in society which give women more power, you'll get no disagreement from me -- but, again, that doesn't translate into saying those changes are bad or need to be stopped, etc. To me it says that there are very poor support structures for men, that society isn't dealing well with the effects of its changes on men, and that men lack education on how to deal with such emotional turmoil. And I say this as someone who is by nature a depressive :-) as it runs strongly in my family.

Personally, I think the "role/gender confusion" that has come with the emancipation of women causes a lot of problems for both the sexes (with regard to depression). Traditionally, roles were very clearly defined and everyone knew what was expected of someone of their gender. Those clear lines are very blurry now, and it's been tough for all of us. Men are unsure where they stand now that they are having to view women as "equals". They have lost their power and dominance, and with that, their self-esteem and self-assurance has taken a bit of a beating. They are getting mixed messages about who they are supposed to be...strong and in charge on the one hand and sensitive and caring on the other. Women are portrayed as sex objects in the media, but you can't speak to one in the real world for fear of a sexual harassment accusation. Men are encouraged to "feel" more, but are still told that real men don't cry.

Women are just as confused. We are told that "we can do anything" and given opportunities in the workplace that we never had before, while at the same time being criticised for not getting married and bearing children. Those of us that DO bear children are seen as worthless if we don't have a career. If we are successful and single, we are ball-breaking b*tches. If we are housewives content with raising children and treating our men like gods, we are pathetic. I certainly don't think that gender equality is a bad thing...I just think it's gonna take some getting used to. We need to adjust to our new roles.

And yes, I have avoided the "single mothers don't get depressed by lack of money" statement. Certain people here have obviously never been afraid (and I mean to the point of throwing up) of going to the mailbox or answering the phone, in case there are bills or debt collectors. They have obviously never been evicted. They have obviously never gone without food for days on end, or missed out on Easter with their parents because they couldn't afford to put fuel in the car. If they HAD been through these things, they would know just how much depression it causes. This is my life, right now as we speak. Luckily for us depressed single Mums...we can't see our tear-stained faces in the mirror once the electricity has been disconnected. No, I'm not looking for pity...I'm telling those certain people what it's like, seeing as they obviously have NO idea what they're talking about.

Your lack of compassion or respect for single mothers, and women in general for that matter, is blatantly obvious Alex. Just out of interest.....what sort of family do you come from? Divorced? Happily married couple? Or were you conceived by a selfish single mother purely out of financial greed???

>single mothers, and they sure as hell suffer from depression. Money's part of it, though in my interactions it's more about being alone and lacking emotional support.

So, Joe, money is NOT main cause !

OK, I am not a professional in this area, and I'm not ready to discuss depression/suicide statistics ( also I feel that's a lot of truth in my understanding ). I was not right to go into this area now. May be I'll find time, make some research in Internet and return to this. But, anyway, my main thesis is not this. It is :

1. Men and women must be equal.
2. Sex for sex for both man and woman, not sex for money for women.

Isn't that right ?

3. If you don't agree with 1, 2 - why then 'real' prostitution is considered to bo outlaw ? Can you explain ?

We should have both marriage and prostitution either legal or illegal.
------------

More specification. There is double standard for men and women in our siciety. A woman may not earn much - and still be respectful and attractive in personal/sexual areas. Men may not. If they are unsucsessful - they are in deep shit. This is natural - it comes from times when men were hunting and bringing food to thier women, family.
BUT ! - now we in all aspects don't live by the law of nature ! In business women have equal opportunities with men ( don't tell me about 20% - it's not so important ). So men have lost their role of 'giver' of food. Then let's women loose their privilege to 'take' it ! Otherwise women get unfair advantage.

That's what is going on now in North America. This is very bad for men, turning them into shit. As for women - the situation corrupts them, because they know, they can use men now as their servants, controlling them through sex. Let's at least stop to support this situation legally !

All financial problems of men, women children should be solved in any other way, but not through sex ! Otherwise it turns love into business, killing a lot of love. That's where from comes depressions, suicides for both men and women - my feeling, I can't right now confirm it with statistics, professional researchs, -but is it not true ? People do not commit suicide because of state of their bank account, but because of lovelessness, solitude... - will you argue that it is not true ?

Regards.

RN -- thanks for the testimony. I think, to paraphrase a discussion that took place a while back in the Thai women section, that there is a great deal of the heroic in those who simply do what's needed, despite the personal cost, whether they're men or women. And hero/heroine is usually a rather lonely role. One of the interesting statistics found is that one of the "protections" against female suicide appears to be having a child under two years old. So that mothering instinct is strong even in the face of despair (though it does lessen as a deterrent as the kids get older.)

The bottom line is it's tough going it alone -- male or female. But, far mroe for women more than men, going it alone can be healthier than being with someone with whom you don't fit.


Alex:

>But, anyway, my main thesis is not this. It is :

1. Men and women must be equal.
2. Sex for sex for both man and woman, not sex for money for women.

Isn't that right ?

No problem with #1. As far as #2, I say sex for sex [i]and[/i] sex for money for whomever decides they want it that way. It's your body, you should be able to give it away or sell it as you please, whether you're male or female. No one is forcing anyone to pay anything -- if it's a deal you don't like, walk away. If there's not a market for you (better be a truly buff male or have a six-inch long tongue) then you'd better look for another source of income. The gigolo may not be as common as the female prostitute, but they definitely exist, and you can look at tons of online sites to confirm it.


>3. If you don't agree with 1, 2 - why then 'real' prostitution is considered to bo outlaw ? Can you explain ?

>We should have both marriage and prostitution either legal or illegal.

No disagreement from me here -- I see no reason why prostitution should be illegal, and I'm pretty sure the majority of folks on this forum agree. If you want to discuss this issue, and the historical basis for outlawing of prostitution, I suggest you take a look at this forum's "Morality of Prostitution" thread. And if you're truly and seriously going to advocate for making marriage illegal, then a) you're going to have to put forward a vastly better case and b) we've descended so far into the realm of "ain't never gonna happen" that it's time to talk about something else.


>There is double standard for men and women in our siciety. A woman may not earn much - and still be respectful and attractive in personal/sexual areas. Men may not. If they are unsucsessful - they are in deep shit. This is natural - it comes from times when men were hunting and bringing food to thier women, family.
BUT ! - now we in all aspects don't live by the law of nature ! In business women have equal opportunities with men ( don't tell me about 20% - it's not so important ).

Sorry, but I don't agree here on some aspects. Yes, women can be attractive if they don't earn much, as the expectiations aren't the same. The opposite can also be true -- women can be penalized for being successful by seeming less attractive.

Men who are not successful are not as attractive, and women are attracted by wealth and power. Ok, I'll concede that can be the case in some regard -- let's have a "get all losers laid" compaign if you like. And I'm being a bit facetious; I agree that things shouldn't be completely based on that, but come on! If you're going to complain about that, then why not bemoan the fact that women pay a price if they're not beautiful, if they don't measure up to society's standards of attractiveness? If women prefer to hook up with the rich and powerful, men do the same with models or actresses or women who meet societal standards of youth and beauty. Isn't that unfair? Shouldn't that be outlawed?

And your dismissal of the 20% (actually more like 25%) gap in gender earnings is beyond ironic when you're moaning that men who don't make enough dollars don't get the girl. How can you just ignore this and then complain women have unfair advantage?


> All financial problems of men, women children should be solved in any other way, but not through sex ! Otherwise it turns love into business, killing a lot of love. That's where from comes depressions, suicides for both men and women - my feeling, I can't right now confirm it with statistics, professional researchs, -but is it not true ? People do not commit suicide because of state of their bank account, but because of lovelessness, solitude... - will you argue that it is not true ?

Actually, people do commit suicide because of financial problems, but it's most often bundled with other issues. Here's the core of where we disagree -- I don't see that earning inequities in marriage kill love or sex, and that somehow men are paying a disproportionate penalty here. Married men get more sex, live longer, tend to have lower blood pressure, give more to charity than single men. (And this is true in both good and bad marriages -- unlike women, whose health tends to suffer in a bad marriage.) Men also benefit professionally -- married men tend to have better jobs, make more money, and are overall more successful. (http://www.msnbc.com/news/599521.asp) Now, it may well be that, as discussed, men who are either more successful or better prospects for success are the ones who marry, but given that this is a study that drew on yearly interviews of the same men over 20 years, and they clearly experienced success during that period, it's not illogical to conclude that being married has something to do with it.

All of this would indicate to me that, frankly, marriage is a good investment for men rather than a sapping of their earnings, as your thesis purports. If things fall apart they do so after a number of years of health and financial positives. Seems to me both parties benefit financially and personally -- take it outside of your marriage law argument, and most men would have very little problem with the idea that they'd invest some money to be healthier and more successful. Getting laid on a regular basis is the icing on the cake.

> Regards.

And regards back at you, Alex. Truly -- I appreciate your willingness to engage in discussion in a civilized manner with folks who disagree with you. (And that's aimed at the personal as well as the general "you.")

Equality my foot!

How can we be equal, while women still expect men favors in day to day life (physical assistance, manners, financial help, etc).
1- How often do they want to pay for your bills? share the expenses of a dinner?
2- Do they ever offer precedence to men? offer assistance to carry heavy bags?
3- How willing are they to be in relationship with a lower income men?
4- How willing are they to take care of you financially? (you only see that in Canada)
5- Will they help an Ex in financial difficulties?
6- Will they try to defend an attacked man?

Women still expect care and attention while contending for equality. The only real justice is to give them their true equality: treat them as you would do for a man. Always remember that she is a "man". The only difference will be them in term of sexual relations where she can hardly pretend to be a man.
The response to this equality should be polarization
1- Assistance or help proportional to what she did for you
2- Financially focued mind to prevent her attempts to draw money from you
3- No assistance whatsoever to one if you no longer have any interest

Basically treat them as "men"
Be as tough and insentive to them as they are to men

Make sure you avoid sex with those over 35 years old, since men are naturally more attracted to young women that should be pretty easy. Do them what they fear most loneliness as they grow older (hence less attractive). You can then easily shorten thei scope of impact (between 18 & 35) Even though you may be spending more for younger girls at least you can evaluate what you are paying for. Young women don't care to date older men, in fact it's a bargain. However, young men may bang an older woman but he's less likely to date her.

Since even those who use Child support as an easy source of money (they are 25 yeard old with 5 children from five dads) are still afraid to stay lonely. It's justice to send them to retirement at 35.

Pay your child support since it's a legal requirement but in the social life you can still win. Almost every women expect a baby or a stable relationship, while men are more tempted to sample women. Biologically you can still prevail since you keep you strenght longer than her, you'll be able to make more money as you grow older & afford young women

joe>...It's your body, you should be able to give it away or sell it as you please, whether you're male or female. No one is forcing anyone to pay anything -- if it's a deal you don't like, walk away. If there's not a market for you ... then you'd better look for another source of income.

So, why not to say to women - you are on free market, so your problems and children are your problems. You are free to do what you want - go and earn your child support with prostitution ( they do it often anyway ). No estranged husband must pay to you support for free. 'No one is forcing anyone to pay anything' - law of free market. Women have some advantage on this market - let them have disadvantages too. It's just fair. Looks fine ?

Joe, if this is law of free market - it must be this way. If society cares about weak side on the market - it should care not only about women.

for Bootylover : In your 6 points you are absolutely right. But then you seem to advocate sex war, hatred, revenge for women. That is, in fact, what we have now. But I believe there is better way - friendship between sexes, but for this prostitution must be destroyed, not supported.

RN>And yes, I have avoided the "single mothers don't get depressed by lack of money" statement.

1. Let's make a psycological experiment. Could you answer truly : let's say, by some magic you could choose to be not a women single mother, but a single man - will you choose it in your 'another life' ?

2. I don't really want to discuss myself, because it's not about me, but about millions of people. But to satisfy your curiosity - I am from 'happy married' family. I am also not a victim of blatant pregnancy- for- money sceme. Women, I lived with, usually even loved me ( I hope ). And that's enough about me.

>So, why not to say to women - you are on free market, so your problems and children are your problems. You are free to do what you want - go and earn your child support with prostitution ( they do it often anyway ). No estranged husband must pay to you support for free. 'No one is forcing anyone to pay anything' - law of free market. Women have some advantage on this market - let them have disadvantages too. It's just fair. Looks fine ?

I don't see where you've at all established that they don't already have disadvantages, frankly, and those disadvantages, according to everything I see, outweigh those of men. And I'm sorry, but we're never going to agree on this -- a man who's signed up for a marriage has signed up for the possiblity of kids, and the responsibilities they entail. Free market also means living up to your end of a contract. Ex-husbands should simply pay their damn child support! They helped make the kid; they're responsible for making sure the kid is ok.

The law of the free market is not without its rules, either. To follow your thought a little further, if you, as someone who is a customer on the free market, damage something beyond expected wear and tear, then you're responsible for damages. You can't just drive rental cars into walls and not expect to be held responsible, or trash apartments and not pay for repairs or forfeit your security deposit. Same thing with pregnancy -- it's not the usually desired outcome for non-married sex, so those who contribute to the extraordinary equation have to contribute for dealing with the outcome. A woman who gets pregnant most decidedly does, as her life changes radically and irrevocably. If you want equal treatment, then the same should be true for men.

And I'll say it again -- this is not simply about the women, it's about the kids involved. I simply don't agree with your perspective that somehow kids are only an asset (and a financial one at that) to women and not to men. "Someone to carry on the family name" is not a female perspective, for example, given that it's usually not her name in the first place...

[i]"1. Let's make a psycological experiment. Could you answer truly : let's say, by some magic you could choose to be not a women single mother, but a single man - will you choose it in your 'another life' ?"[/i]

As much as I adore my children and would never wish them away...if I had my time completely over again, I would be a single woman, with NO children. I don't think I would want to be a man...not because I think it would be bad, but just 'coz I enjoy being a girl. :) But if I had my time again I would NEVER get married. I have no desire to ever be dependent on anybody.


Bootylover,

In my opinion, you are totally right. That's exactly what I meant about our gender roles getting confused.

For the record, I can answer yes to 5 of the 6 points that you listed in your post. I have done all of them, including financially supporting a partner for two years, and backing up male mates in violent altercations (Yes, I'm tougher than I look! LOL). I can't say I would financially support an Ex, because I can't see any reason to do so. I'm not sure if I agree with the whole concept of alimony. However, if my Ex had custody of my children, I would definitely pay child support.

RN, you are one a rare type. Great! I still some of these types of women with whom i deal on an unrestricted basis since I 've learned to expect the same from them in every aspect. I won't let them down for any relationship.

Unfortunately, I can tell u that you on at one extreme of a normal statistical distribution (bell curve). I'm not foolish enough to expect that the women facing is of that type.

By the way, what are the odds to meet a women in yout type, frankly?

PS. As you may see, I'm not mysoginist at all, just rule my life rationally

joe_zop >I don't see where you've at all established that they don't already have disadvantages, frankly, and those disadvantages, according to everything I see, outweigh those of men.

That is your opinion, also not supported by facts and statistics. Here is an example : RN for the question 'would you prefer to be born a man' said NO. And, believe me - all women would say the same. They understand who have the upper hand, while you deny it.

I think it's time to stop our discussion. It's all the matter of opinion, you think women's problems are more difficult, I say men's. It's difficult to prove this or that by facts or statistics. You say it's OK for women to use their biological advantage in sex area, while their disadvantages must be compensated by Law, I feel it's not OK. I cannot convince you, that free sex is more important, then financial matters, you cannot convince me that well being of children is more important, then of adults.

I will continue to post my initial message from time to time here, and in other place in hope, then many people will read it and not argue with it, but quietly agree, and maybe post it further. I don't really hope that marriage can be cancelled easily ( I've written about it in the message itself ), but it may shift the balance of opinions and make men to boycott it de-facto, if not in Law. For those people, like you, who believe, that it's basically OK I can't do anything, go continue, get married and feel it on your own skin.

Sorry for disagreement.

Fair enough, let's end the discussion. (We can now return to the normal discussion on fat.) But I simply can't agree with you at all that the idea that women don't have disadvantages is simply an opinion (please note that I did not at any point say they don't have advantages, too) as I think I've been very forthcoming in that regard with facts and statistics from specific sources, which you've not done. It's looking at the overall balance of things that becomes a matter of opinion.

Since you use RN's response as though it proves something other than the fact that RN is basically happy with who she is, I think it's only fair to turn the question back to you -- are you saying that if you had it to do again, you'd prefer to be born a woman?

I'll state it very solidly: that would definitely not be my choice. I like the advantages of being a man -- I like not having to worry about getting pregnant; I like the fact that women don't tend to base everything completely on looks, so I can still have a shot even if I'm older and not Brad Pitt; I like the fact that I'm going to be better paid and that I generally get to be considered better looking as I get older (as I acquire more "character" I guess) as opposed to being labeled "an old cow" when the first wrinkle shows up; I like the fact that I am almost automatically invested with more authority in a meeting because I'm male, I like the fact that it's presumed that I'll do something with my life other than produce and care for children, etc., etc.

And for what it's worth, I do have some experience in the marriage game, so I'm not simply talking theory.

Finally, Alex, please don't apologize for disagreeing -- I'm not going to apologize for my opinions (though I'll happily apologize if I've been at all offensive in stating them) and you shouldn't either. We're both adults -- it's ok not to look at the world the same way, and I, personally, know that I'm not going to grow or learn if I'm only involved in discussions on things about which I agree. As part of the process of this discussion I've been forced to think about why I think about things the way I do, to look back at things I read in the past, check out hunches, do a bit of research to justify my statements, etc., all of which is completely to my benefit, as I have learned some things and am better able to state others. And that doesn't even take into account your opinions and my consideration of them.

You've been consistently civil and good-natured in this process, and I'd welcome a discussion with you any time.

with the illegalization of prostitution and some other adult trades in america, single mothers here do not have the option of supporting their kids with prostitution. in fact america is not a free market because of censorship or banning. some single mothers are high school dropouts and have no skills to find a job so what do they do? they sue for alimony to leech off of the husbands they marry with jobs or their high school sweethearts with grunt jobs. they also sue for the child support as well. many strip clubs in new york have closed down as well. a lot of these strippers were single mothers. the illegalization of prostitution and even strip clubs have caused more trend toward suing for alimony and child support because they know no other option.
in other countries where prostitution is legal, at least single mothers have an option in making money to feed their children. single mothers usually get a lump sum amount (not a continuous withdrawal from a paycheck from ex-husbands like here in america), then they are on their own. they usually turn to prostitution for their money. some prostitutes scrape by just feeding their kids and others actually make a lot of money. some fortunate prostitutes who are lucky not to have been married just make the money for themselves and become wealthy. some even get paid in american currency. and that is a lot of money in their country.
it is rare in america to find a woman who doesn't rely on alimony to support themselves. even if prostitution is legal here, it is ingrained in them that it is taboo or immoral. rather than being a prostitute, they rather sue for alimony and child support. they want to keep the child for financial gains or else they get nothing if the husband gets custody. some like to sue for alimony because of the man-hating attitude that they sacrifice their younger years on the marriage like they did the ex-husband a favor for being their wives for many years. they feel they need compensation for these years so they also abuse the alimony laws. as always, the laws do favor the women and the judges buy this crap. about 98% of american women are like this and only 2% of american women are not like this and are good women like rn who would actually go out and earn the money to support their kids. i respect women like rn or women that go to college to earn their own pay to support their own kids rather than sue an estranged husband for alimony. unfortunately, most american women are like the 98% who are leeches.
american women also refuse to take care of their man when the going gets rough. most of them leave their man when they get laid off. two of my friends in college who were married got divorced when they were laid off because of 9/11. these women then try to find a man with a job and to add insult to injury, my friends had to sell their houses that they mortgaged and give half the money to their ex-wives because the house was bought during their marriage. the men in america are disadvantaged by the law and thus people liek myself are discouraged from being married. i always think that women who want to marry me have an alterior motive (financially and physically, because i do grunt work). i also rarely see guys in wheelchairs married in america because these wheelchair cases can't take care of these leeches called american women (except the 2%, like rn). i see more cripples married in other countries than here in america. most of them are single. in fact my brother is a paraplegic and he gets no dates. are these women so heartless as to care for only financial gain and not want to take care of a helpless cripple? also the law does not take seriously male victims of female partners. they thought i was a joke when my ex-fiance physically abused me and i refused to strike back at her for fear of being arrested myself.

joe_zop > Since you use RN's response ... I think it's only fair to turn the question back to you -- are you saying that if you had it to do again, you'd prefer to be born a woman?

Yes. It's not that I gay or something, I like it to be myself, but I realize advantages of being a worman at our times. They often don't have to work as hard , as men, and they don't have to pay hard earned money for sex. Yes, it's difficult to born and raise children, but it's their ultimate choice, to have them or not. And if they decide to have them, they really have children, no father can take them away from them.
Would I have a child, I'd like her to be a girl, not a boy in our times .

I understand your position, think it over. It's traditional position, but it doesn't mean that it's right one. I have my vision, based on what I see in life. My position, especially "child support must be voluntary only" seems to be harsh, unhuman but it is not. 1. Many men DO support children voluntary. 2. What if some guy is single father, his wife, unfortunately, died ? Will he not survive with children ? He will and probably will be quite OK. It's not an ultimate disaster to be a single parent. Even more, this guy doesn't meet same compassion in our concience, as single women - it's natural, we are programmed to have more compassion to girls. It's emotions and girls use it well, mother is something honorable in our mindes, single men is something despisable. It's all make quality of life for women in our time much better, then for men. So let's not increase this by feminist-oriented marriage laws.

darkseid>American women also refuse to take care of their man when the going gets rough. Most of them leave their man when they get laid off. Two of my friends in college who were married got divorced when they were laid off because of 9/11. These women then try to find a man with a job and to add insult to injury, my friends had to sell their houses that they mortgaged and give half the money to their ex-wives because the house was bought during their marriage. The men in America ARE disadvantaged by the law ...

Joe_zop - this is good examples for you. Without any statistics we now - it's true, it's style of life. We, men, don't like this. Cancellation of marriage law will improve the situation.

Ohhh puh-leeze. So now women don't have to work as hard as men either, Alex?? Let me ask you this...what do you do after a hard day's work, huh? I'll tell you what my ex-husband used to do...relax, watch a bit of TV, eat dinner, have a beer, maybe go out with friends or sometimes just go to bed early. When his 8 hour working day was over, it was over.

You talk about "tradition"....well, traditionally, women run the household and look after the children. (Even if there are no children, women still traditionally run the household). Let me tell you about MY working day. I get up early, dress myself for work and the kids for school, make breakfast and pack school lunches. I drop the kids off at school and then head to work for eight hours. Then I pick the kids up from childcare around 6pm, cook dinner, bathe the kids, help with homework, do the dishes, tidy up the house, put the kids to bed, then put a load of laundry into the machine. I then sit down at the computer to do two or three solid hours of paperwork that I certainly don't get paid overtime for, hang out the washing in the dark, lay out the kids clothes for the morning, have a shower and then finally get to bed well after midnight. But of course, "women's work" isn't work I suppose...

As for me choosing not to be a man in another lifetime, I had a feeling you would use my comment in exactly the context you did. You wanna know why I wouldn't want to be a man? Because it sounds BORING to me. You have it EASY. Biologically you have all the advantages, and you get to blame all your mistakes on your hormones, genetics, inherited caveman instincts or your dick...which you apparently have absolutely no control over. And yes, I will be very unpopular for saying that, but in my opinion that's the way it is. Being a woman sucks for all the reasons that Joe (brilliantly as usual) mentioned, and more. But I like a challenge.

Anyway....men's "acceptable" hair colours are very limited and shopping sprees for men's clothing are mind numbingly dull. You all wear the same thing to a black tie party, you don't meet any new people because you won't dare approach a stranger for directions or to ask for help (no I don't need to borrow a lighter, I can just use this stick as a flint against the bar...), and in all seriousness.....men look downright stupid in a halterneck and high heels. And that's not something I'm willing to give up...

There's no question that there are money-hungry b*tches out there who are only out to take someone for all they're worth. Also no question that marriages fall apart when someone goes out of work, no matter what the cause -- the stress is immense on all involved, and if the bond was based mainly on material things then goodbye. Absolutely every authority agrees -- problems with sex and money are the two forces most likely to break up marriages. I know the laws at times are very strange -- my brother was legally forced to pay legal fees for the wife who tried to kill him, and ended up bankrupt (and with the kid, I might add.) There's also no question that there are men who beat their wives, treat them like property, decide to dump them for younger models simply because the aging process happens, etc. While Darkseid's most definitely got a legitimate complaint about the unenlightened police he dealt with, part of that is because his is a decidedly rarer type of domestic abuse.

Alex, the guys who support their children voluntarily aren't the problem, any more than the women who aren't in it for the money. Laws are for those who don't do the right thing, not for those who do, and an argument where you cite best-case scenario to support your position and worst-case to attack the other is not productive. I frankly don't see how you can justify things based on "what I see in life" -- a completely personal take on things -- and then say it has nothing to do with you personally, you speak for millions. Either you're using a personal look at things or you're not; either you use actual facts as opposed to anecdote or not. It's disingenuous to lean on personal perspective as though it proves something and then shy away from giving any information about how that perspective has been formed. It means that the perspective is then unassailable by definition.

You say your position regarding child support is not harsh -- I say that if you believe that you are at best naive and ignorant of the situation of countless kids in society right now who have been abandoned by their fathers. And make no mistake -- that's the far more likely scenario than the mother leaving the child. I posted a series of stats earlier about the problems these children have, and those are problems that society as a whole ends up having to deal with. Your approach is to either ignore this issue or assert that the happiness problems of adults are more important than the survival problems of children. Tell me again how that's not harsh, ok?

One thing that's not been mentioned at all here is this -- the so-called no-fault divorce laws, mostly implemented from 1965-74, are considered to be one of the main reasons for the climb in the divorce rate -- with most estimates saying it increased the rate by twenty to twenty-five percent. Your "no obligation" approach would probably do the same, or worse, rather than act as some means for happier, more "equal" marriages.

While a basically traditional position on marriage laws may not be the right one (presuming, amusingly, that as you put it "feminist-oriented marriage laws" and no-fault divorce are traditional), a radical reworking of things based on sexual frustration, a few pieces of anecdote and some gut feelings isn't necessarily the right one either. Your approach is "well, it can't get any worse." Like hell it can't. :)

Ouch, RN -- you really need to work off some of that frustration in a good healthy non-work-involved sweat. :D I don't think being any stripe of human is easy, male or female, and both sides have their advantages and disadvantages. The pressures and values are different (you're a failure because you don't make enough money, you're identified with the job you do which is crap, haven't had any kids/too many kid/ugly disobedient brats, married an ugly/stupid/goodfornothing/whatever spouse, etc.) but they're still there and they're still difficult. It's like arguing over whose operation was more painful! As I listed in my earlier response, I do think there are advantages to being male, but by the same token, my odds of being "kept" do go down in this gender, regardless of your experience with your ex, for example.

Careful or we may get into a stereotype war -- there [i]are[/i] other ways to meet people besides asking for directions on a trip, such as doing research on directions before you leave :) and some of us have been through large progressions of socially unacceptable hair and clothes styles and colors. Not the haltertop or heels, though, thank the gods...

Awwww c'mon Joe...you should know me well enough by now to know that my post was totally tongue in cheek! :) I thought at least the reference to men in halternecks would have given that away!! LOL Of course I understand that there are problems for both sexes (but I DO think that being a man would be boring...the joy of hair-colouring alone is worth being female for!!!)

Mind you, the work bit was true. I certainly didn't mean that EVERY man behaved in that manner...far from it...but if Alex wants to talk "tradition", than "traditionally" a man's working day ends when he gets home and the woman runs around satisfying his every need until the wee hours of the night. And the chauvenist perception that what a woman does around the house doesn't count as WORK, is still all too common in our society.

Well, I knew that tongue was stuck firmly someplace... :)

You did? Hmmm...it seems you might know me TOO well!!! LOL :) (Oh dear...you don't have a webcam, do you???? *gasp*)

Ok, I have a question...partly to get off this ridiculous child support and single mothers discussion, but mainly out of genuine curiosity.

Do you guys prefer a "girlie girl" or a tomboy? Those of you who know me already, will know that I am a "beer and pizza" kinda gal. Sure, I love to get dressed up in makeup and heels and shake my thang every now and then, and I really do enjoy being treated like a lady on occasion, but ultimately I would prefer to play pool, drive fast cars and hang out with the boys.

This attitude earns me heaps of respect, heaps of good mates and plenty of good times....but absolutely no sex!!! LOL So tell me....do you find the tomboy type sexy, or are they fun to be around but not attractive to you? Or do you avoid that sort of woman completely? I'm not talking about looks...I certainly don't look like a boy! But personality-wise...what's your preference?

Actually, I prefer a little of both. I wouldn't want a boring girl that just reads and not do what i like to do like play pool, drive fast cars, drink beer, party, and have a good time. I dated a few of these girls that are too girlie and don't like to party or have fun. Girlie girls are way too conservative and some are afraid to do new things. It is socially acceptable for women to wear men's clothing anyway so I wouldn't even mind being seen with a sexy girl in jeans. The adventurous aspect of the tomboy is what I like. But at the same time, I wouldn't want to be with a butch type lesbian because obviously I wouldn't get any.

As for the advantages/ disadvantages of both sexes, these are created by the laws of society- on what is laughed at as abnormal and what is acceptable in both genders. As you mentioned earlier, RN, women have a more flexible dress code. They can wear men's clothing to a great extent without being mocked at whereas if men dress in women's clothing they are looked at as gay or weird. Women can be more colorful in their dress even in a conservative enviroment of work. Men are forced to wear suits, ties, shirts, slacks and shoes, like myself. We have less flexibility in dress.

Men also have the difficult task of having to ask the woman out and facing rejection. Women take this for granted so much that they don't feel our pain of rejection. Some guys don't brush rejection off so easily and it damages them for life. The type of rejection women face on the hother hand is not being asked out at all. Sometimes the guy that gets rejected too much is afraid to ask out the girl that never gets asked out and this can be damaging to both parties. I think this aspect can be solved if both men and women asked each other out instead of just guys asking the girl out. This society created this one-sided aspect of courtship which both parties get hurt.

Traditionally, if you were married to a lazy bum who doesn't share the work, and married to a chauvinist pig, you do a lot of work that no one gives you credit for and that your chauvinist pig takes for granted. He would be so spoiled with food always being on the table that once you get injured or are away, he would have to cook for himself or buy a pizza. My mother also not only cooked but made sure the house was tidy. I respect all mothers for doing these chores and that is why I love my mother for doing things I used to take for granted. Now that I am on my own I have to do these chores myself. These chores take time out of my schedule and if I don't keep up with them, my apartment would be a mess and I would starve.

Not all men are chauvinist pigs that you mentioned previously. My father did the laundry and shared some of the chores that my mother did. Sometimes my father cooked when my mother had to get home late from work. My family was a duel income family and that is why my first six years of my life was spent being raised by my grandmother. This practice is done by most Asian families especially in Japan or Hong Kong where they also have 2 income families. Now my father is not the beer drinker after getting home from work and relax type, he is very diligent. My father even worked ALL the household chores while my mother was severly injured in a car accident. If he was a lazy chauvinist, he probably wouldn't do any chores and would force mom to work even when she was sick.

Now to be fair to the women even though men are heavily disadvantaged by social and legal aspects, women are biologically disadvantaged because they have to worry about pregnancy when having sex which makes it less enjoyable for them. Prudes in America shame women for having sex and call them sluts (I, on the other hand, don't have that opinion of women who have lots of sex but I would want to date women that love sex and not date a prude). Women have periods which make them nauseous. Women also have lower metabolism and have to work harder at staying in shape than men. Also women have to worry about beauty so they have to pluck all their body hairs and or shave. They spend hours making themsleves up also. Some men nowadays groom themselves the same way also. I spend hours in the gym and martial arts to stay slim, I pluck my hairs to make my washboard abs visible and not covered by sasqatch hairs, I shave, comb my hair and wear skin creams. I don't however, need to paint my nails or wear lipstick, although that would be weird. Women go thought htose extra steps which takes more time and work. I wouldn't want to go through the physical pains like pregnancy or periods, but then again, I hate the legal and social aspects of being a man like the aspects I mentioned previously. I also decided to remain single because marriage is a woman's turf. I could lose my shirt and pants to marriage.

I'd rather have a tomboy who cleans up real nice once in a while than a girlie girl who might break a nail at an inopportune time.

Dickhead

I hate long nails also. I'd rather women cut their nails especially if they insist on cooking dinner for me. Nails collect dirt and bacteria so I wouldn't want that in my food. In fact that is a minor criticsm of my mom when she cooks for me because she digs her nails into the food after she scratches her itches and then I have to eat it. All chefs in high class restaurants cut their nails for sanitary purposes. Also the buzzard nails look repulsive to me. They also break easily and I hate when they use that as an excuse to avoid work even non-physical labor.

joe_zop> I frankly don't see how you can justify things based on "what I see in life" -- a completely personal take on things -- and then say it has nothing to do with you personally,

C'mon, what I see in life is not nessessary in my own life, but of many people around.


> I posted a series of stats earlier about the problems these children have,

When I have time I'll take a look. But again, to balance things would you like to post stats about problems that adult men have ?

>While a basically traditional position on marriage laws may not be the right one ... a radical reworking of things based on sexual frustration, a few pieces of anecdote and some gut feelings isn't necessarily the right one either. Your approach is "well, it can't get any worse." Like hell it can't.

Let's try :)

RN >Ohhh puh-leeze. So now women don't have to work as hard as men either, Alex?? Let me ask you this...what do you do after a hard day's work,

I don't want to calculate who do what more. The moment of truth is that you, and others women WOULDN'T like to be a man. This accumulate all - homework, raising children, sex, money ... you weight it all in your mind and you DON'T want it. Your answer includes all what we can call quality of life, which consists of many components - not only money - and which you feel well inside your conscience and subconscience. So we have a clear result which sex has advantage. Why - is secondary question, it's because men lost their monopoly to earn and did get nothing in exchange, or it may be because men are just boring and stupid - does not matter. We have clear picture : which sex feel better. Who is strong and who is weak. Society should not help strong side to control weak side better by law. Law must help those with disadvantages, not with advantages.

Down with Marriage Law !

Joe, it would be interesting statistics about transsexuals that make surgical operations to change sex - how many of them move in each direction. Judging by movies, literature its nearly always men want to be a woman, not other way around.
Why do you think ? Would both sexes be equal, this statistics must be balanced too.

I agree. There are more men that change sex to being a woman than women turning to men. Most of these cases the man feels it is too hard to be a man so they opt for a sex change. A lot of these men are divorced and owe alimony. Sex change is one way of having a totally new identity and to disappear off the face of the earth to avoid alimony. The only way the law can find out is through hospital records of the sex change. Some of these ex-men move to Europe or Rio with their new identity. Some men do this sex change because they like women's fashion better and they want to wear these clothing and not get scoffed at by society so they also get the sex change. It may or may not have anything to do with homosexuality as most of us think. Sex change is usually done for several other reasons- identity change to avoid legal obligations or looser dress codes. It is rare to find a woman wanting to be a man these days because these days women have the upper hand. Back fifty years ago, it would have been the other way around if we had the technology. But with the rise of the feminist movement that started in the late 60s and early 70s, woman's power is becoming more than man's in America.

darkseid> There are more men that change sex to being a woman than women turning to men. Most of these cases the man feels it is too hard to be a man ... But with the rise of the feminist movement that started in the late 60s and early 70s, woman's power is becoming more than man's in America.

Sure. My words.

>Sex change is one way of having a totally new identity and to disappear off the face of the earth to avoid alimony.

:) That's f..cking funny idea !

>It may or may not have anything to do with homosexuality as most of us think.

I would say, it may. There must be at least some bi-sexuality to do this. But anyway, the trend is clear.

many times i thought to myself: "thanks god, i am not a chick".
i happen to think that whenever i have to [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord134][CodeWord134][/url] in a public place (a train station or rest area, for example) and i can do it standing.

rn: as far as your question (girlie girl vs tomboy).
i am attracted to women because they are sensual, elegant and feminine. this is something that goes beyond what they are wearing but it's more of an inner quality.
beer and pizza nowaday are a cross-gender thing, so i would not be judgemental on that.

ahh, that peeing point is something i missed for the biological disadvantages of being a woman. women have to sit down and pull their pants down to [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord134][CodeWord134][/url]. we can just unzip and point. i like being a man for the biological advantages of it.

stranger99> many times i thought to myself: "thanks god, i am not a chick". i happen to think that whenever i have to [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord134][CodeWord134][/url] in a public place ...

o yes ! let's go on, work, pay girls for sex and then [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord140][CodeWord140][/url] off on the wall !

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alex
[i]Joe, it would be interesting statistics about transsexuals that make surgical operations to change sex - how many of them move in each direction. Judging by movies, literature its nearly always men want to be a woman, not other way around.
Why do you think ? Would both sexes be equal, this statistics must be balanced too. [/i][/QUOTE]

Well, let's see -- despite what folks might have heard, there's actually a fairly large contingent of the female-to-male oriented out there, and it's simple enough to track down sites which support them. From what I've read, the rate of those wishing for the surgery is about 3-1 male to female, though I don't know the actual percentage of those who actually go through with it. Why more men that women? Perhaps it's because the need to be penetrated as a woman is requires a vagina, whereas the need to penetrate as a man would simply requires a strap-on. And in my experience in dealing with the gay and transgendered community (and transsexuals are usually but not always gay -- the definition is someone who feels an aversion to their own sex and sexual parts) women who want to assume the male role feel able to do that without necessarily heading deeply into the literalness of the sexual parts, whereas men who want to assume the female role do tend to focus on issues of the body. To me, that's not all that surprising, given that men tend to be more visual and body-oriented about their sexual processes.

But perhaps the percentage difference can simply be explained by the fact that by and large most studies (and the numbers vary by study) are consistent in saying that there are generally half as many gay women as men.

As to why movies and literature tend to be more fascinated with men who get the big snip, I'd say it's because we're basically still a male-oriented society, most men have been kicked in the groin at one time or another and know how much it hurts, and we basically imagine castration as kind of the ultimate kick where it hurts. Most of the people on this board, at least to some extent, live and die by their dicks, so the concept of having them taken away is akin to the most terrifying creature coming out of the darkness in a horror film. So it simply fascinates, which makes for good literature and movies. With women, the equation is generally an addition, not a subtraction, so it's not as compelling.

But Alex, are you really saying that gender identity issues are somehow are related to marriage laws? That's really throwing out the kitchen sink here...

I repost my initial message, because it's deep down in the stack already.

Who can say, where else to put it - a place where it will find understanding ?

-------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT MARRIAGE REALLY IS


1. Marriage is a legal form of prostitution.
2. How women got their power
3. Sex is Business.
4. What Can Be Done ?
5. Woman's Arguments
6. What's About Child Support ?
7. Deep to the roots


1. Marriage is a legal form of prostitution.

If we look into Marriage Law books we'll find something like "during the marriage it is normally the husband obligations to provide for his wife and children" ( "The Law And You" McGrow-Hill Company Of Canada Limited, 1970 ) or " each spouse is liable to the support of the other" ( Ontario Family Law Act ). This came to us from 19th century, when such law was justified, because women were not economically independent. Women then were mostly housekeepers, while their husbands earned the money. There were no such professions as woman-doctor, woman-lawyer, real estate agent, business consultant, secretary, teacher - whatever else. Not now. Now women have reached economic equality, they have equal opportunities to earn money, as men. So why is there law declaring financial responsibilities based on sexual relationship ? We don't have a law, claiming that "two people, that play tennis together are liable to support each other". But if they live together and have sex together, why they are ?

And then, when we say "each spouse is liable to the support of the other" let's not blind ourselves - it's virtually never happens that a woman support her husband. It's always men pay for women, not other way around. Women never want to marry a man that earn less, then they do ! They never want to marry an unemployed guy with unclear financial future. The whole system is a great mechanism to transfer money from men's bank accounts to women's bank accounts - nothing else.

The difference between marriage and prostitution is the same as between wholesale and retail trading. But while prostitution is considered to be a negative thing, and there is no law, supporting prostitution, why do we have Marriage Law ?

That's because we live in time of 'common level matriarchy'. Woman in 20th century have won power over man, and the law is made for their ultimate convenience, like in Middle Ages law helped barons to keep their privileges, but didn't care about peasants. But in a society of justice such law must not exist. It contradicts, for example, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states :

"Every individual is EQUAL before and under the law and has the RIGHT to the EQUAL PROTECTION and EQUAL BENEFIT of the law WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, SEX, age or mental or physical disability".

But Marriage Law DOES CREATE DISCRIMINATIVE PRACTICE ! It provides NOT EQUAL PROTECTION and BENEFITS with DISCRIMINATION of men, based on SEX. Such law must not be tolerated in our time and we should struggle for its cancellation.


2. How women got their power

Historically for many thousands of years men had advantage on women, based on very simple factor - bigger physical strength. Physical strength played crucial role at that time, and women were discriminated everywhere - in politics, economy, family. But now this advantage has disappeared, physical power doesn't give you much on today's job market. And also, unlike 200 years ago, you cannot abuse a woman physically, which is, certainly, good. But now, in this developed society it is women, who got infare advantage over man, based on another simple factor - biological demands for sex from men and women are not equal! There are simply less sexual willing women, then men. The difference is, may be, not so great - 15 or 20% . But lets imagine what would happen if there is 15% shortage of apartments to compare to all people, who want to rent. Nobody want to sleep on the street. So the price for an apartment will go up to possible maximum. That's what is called 'speculative, infare profits'.

That's exactly what happens now on 'sexual market'. I wouldn't discuss now biological causes of this inequality, what is important is the result. And the result is quite clear - the simplest proof is such thing as a price for a prostitute. It's something from 100 to 200 $ for 1/2 - 1 hour of sex. Many men must work hard from 1 to 3 days to earn this money. Why do they agree to pay this ? The answer is - market... And how much does it cost for a woman who want sex with man ? - Zero. The sexual price for a man in our society - zero.

This situation creates inequality between men and women, similar to relationship between business owner and his employee at a time of 20% unemployment. The owner can fire the worker, and there is a long line of others, who want to replace him. The worker also have his right to quit, but he will have a lot of trouble to find another job. And in sexual relationships we have exactly the same picture - women have their choice, men stay in the line. As a result women turned men into their servants. This situation humiliate men and corrupt women. And of course, women learned very well how to use it, to convert it into money. And to help them better - there is a special social institution for their service, supported by law - named Marriage.


3. Sex is Business.

Yes, we live in an epoch of matriarchy. It doesn't matter that women statistically earn less, then men, it's still matriarchy - women earn less because they don't need to earn money as desperate, as men. They don't need to pay money for sex, they receive it for sex. And it doesn't matter that there are less women, then men among presidents, premiers and CEO, - women simply don't need so much trouble to get what they want.

Sexual inequality is the cause of most of the troubles in our society. It creates the same barriers between men and women, as between rich and poor. It destroys normal relationship between a man and a woman, destroys normal sexual relationship, converts love into business and kills it. There are millions men suffering from solitude, from lack of normal sexual life, and nobody care how to help them.
This is the biggest problem in so called developed countries, more serious then even poverty and crime, because there are more people suffering from it, then from anything else. Crime, especially sex crime, depression, suicides probably by 80% directly and indirectly are results of this unfortunate conditions. In our time, when nobody dies from hunger, this - not anything else - is a MAIN SOCIAL PROBLEM, because NORMAL SEXUAL LIFE IS NOT LESS IMPORTANT, THEN NORMAL FOOD. And all democratic governments must care about this. But they don't. They care only about well being of one part of the population - women.

Yes, instead of helping weak part of contemporary society - men, the law helps those who have already advantage by their birth - women. We can not easily change demographic situation, but we can at least not to create laws, that make the situation worse ! How many millions men were caught in this trap - marriage ? How many millions dollars, earned by hard work were taken from them ? Men are not slaves, they are people. The need love, sex and understanding, but instead they get marriage law with all its consequences. How can our society treat them this way ?

If you were so unhappy to be robbed on the street, the robber will take your cash and probably will use your credit card, before you could report the robbery, but your total damage will be less then 1000$. If your marry a woman, she may born you a child, then divorce you, take your child and sue out your money, typically 200,000 or more. A woman, that want to get married is 200 more dangerous, then a street robber.


4. What Can Be Done ?

I don't believe it will be easy to change status quo by some kind of democratic procedure. No political party will take such position, because 50% of voters - women, and they will never vote for this party. And there are also some men - family law lawyers, for example, that make their fortunes on this shit, so they have already 51%. They have won. And the fact that suffering minority is nearly all the male population - doesn't bother them, no more that it bother prostitutes about their business.

We cannot easily destroy this despicable system, but what we can do is to start nationwide campaign against it. The first important thing is information - every men must know WHAT MARRIAGE REALLY IS. So if we can't change the law, we can change the public opinion. Every boy of 10 years old must know what he is going to meet, when he grow. So when his girlfriend will say "I want to get married", his proper answer will be : "Sorry, my love, I can't do it, until they will cancel present Marriage Law, because it does not defend me against financial abuse." Every boy, every man must know the real meaning of marriage, with its statistics and costs, this is no less important then information about danger of sexual transmitted diseases or unwanted pregnancy.

I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE, WHO CARE, TO DISTRIBUTE THIS DOCUMENT OVER INTERNET, TO SEND IT TO YOUR FRIENDS. Many people will agree with it and this will be the first step to change current situation. I would like to see movement "Men Against Marriage", that would struggle for men rights against oppression, like women struggled ( and won ) for their rights 100 years ago. The mere word "marriage" should be labeled as shameful, the same as prostitution, i.e. getting money for sex.


5. Woman's Arguments

Women say : "Yes, in marriage we receive money from our husbands, but this is compensation for our homework, which we do more, then men. And also we sacrifice our career, because we must stay at home and raise children. So men must pay for this." But let's ask a question : Why men don't sacrifice their career and stay at home to raise children ? And who makes women to do more homework ? Is it her husband, that makes his wife to work at home ? Does he shout on her : "Go to the kitchen immediately, make me dinner !" ? No. You can't force North American woman to do anything she doesn't want to do herself. She would rather divorce you, take your money and find her another husband, but she will never do what she doesn't like.

So if women statistically spend more time on homework, then men, that's because they need it more, then men. They like it more, then men, or, maybe, men dislike it more, the women. But why should men pay for it ? They don't hire their wives for cleaning or cooking. And when a woman doesn't work and stay at home to raise children - it's her own choice. Every husband would like to have second salary in the family rather then housewife, the family can hire a babysitter, but nobody can force a woman to quit her work. Today women do it only because they know that THEY HAVE LEGAL SUPPORT FROM LAW, that will help them to sue out men money. That must not be. Staying at home instead of work is women own choice and in case of divorce it must be their own responsibility.


6. What's About Child Support ?

Let's first ask a question - why courts in more then 90% of divorces give a child to his mother, and not to his father ? That's because there is a convention in our society : child is more close to his mother, then to his father. This is biologically true. But if so, if the child belongs to his mother more, then to his father, why would father and mother pay equally ? Father can not see his child much after divorce, their relationship are not as close, as when they live together. Why must he pay same amount of money, or more, then mother, who lives with her child ?

What if they, while married, buy a car together, then they separate, court gives the car to the husband, but also rules, that for 20 years both husband and wife must pay all car expenses equally - gas, repair, insurance... For compensation the wife have her right to come once a week to her former husband home and to drive this car for 2 hours, at a time when it is convenient for the husband. Absurd ? Sure. You got the car - you pay for it. The other side doesn't have this car any more - it should not pay.

I can imagine the women's howl when they read this. How dare I say this ?! The child's interests are sacred ! Do you know how difficult it is to be a single mother, to raise children ? Cool down. It's not only child's interests are sacred, interests of all people are sacred. It's difficult to be a single mother, sure, but it is also difficult to be a single man. A man after divorce looses his family, and his children, a woman keep her children with her. What is more difficult ? - who know... Would you like, dear ladies, to leave your children with their fathers, and also to pay child support for 20 - 25 years ? There are some single fathers around, but I've never heard about a woman, paying child support...

In a free, democratic society, with EQUAL RIGHTS FOR MEN AND WOMEN child support can be voluntary only. It doesn't mean that there will be not child support at all. There are many fathers, that love their kids and have connections with them even after divorce, so they will support their children without any enforcement from law. There are happy families, that wouldn't divorce at all, but such families doesn't need Family Law ! But we know other examples. It's not a big secret : there are many women who choose not to work, but to born children and use them as a guaranteed source of income on the expense of their unfortunate husbands. That's who need Family Law. That's who benefit from it. Do we need their children ? How can we create unequal, discriminating laws, that help such women to rob men ?


7. Deep to the roots

So how this odious laws can still exist? One answer is voting majority of women plus some man, that also gain from it. But that is only part of the answer. The fact is, that would marriage be forfeited, women simply will stop to bore children.
This is true - raising children costs a lot of money and women want guarantees, so governments didn't find anything else then to put this burden to men, even in cases of clear fraud.

To make things worth, they introduced so called Family Law Act, where among other things it is declared, that a man have full obligation for a child, born from him even if he has not been married with the child's mother and never wanted children with her at all ! That makes man a hostage of every woman, he slept with. She always can cheat him and get pregnant, if she wants, as for the man - the only way to him to stay out of trouble for sure, is to live without sex ... Nice solution, ye ? Note, that all decisions - to have or not to have a child, are up to the woman only. According to this law the man is responsible for something, about what he has absolutely no power. Nobody ask him, but he must pay, because he wanted sex. In what crazy country do we live ?

The next step should be to state something like : "Every man, who slept with a woman, must give her full access to his bank account and credit cards". Why not ? You don't want this ? - don't sleep with women.

Decline of population sure will be a problem, it will lead to economic depression first, then values of businesses and real estate will go down... But isn't the current price too high ? Should we turn all male population into slaves in desperate attempts to raise birthrate ?

Governments should look for other solutions, but not for what is going on now. And there are other solutions, first of them - immigration. It can not only solve the population problem, it can solve problem of disproportion of sexual demand and supply for men and women, by simply inviting more women, then men, until situation is balanced. Also prostitution can be eliminated... But women don't want this solution. They like it the way it is. I think now it's time for men to fight for their rights, for sexual equality.

Let's declare this - SEXUAL LIFE IS OUR PRIVATE LIFE, AND THERE MUST NOT BE LAW, THAT IN ANY WAY CONNECT OUR PRIVATE LIFE WITH MONEY. No lawyer must be able to put his nose into my bank account in connection with my sexual life. Any law, that do not comply with this requirements must be cancelled.

Let's delete Family Law Act. There will be less divorces in this world.
Let's delete all Family Law completely. There will be less lawyers, less children, but more love and happiness in our life.

They call me Slim Shady!! I'm back. I'm back. So what's cookin here in the American Women message board?? Can you smell what the Rock is cookin??!! I got ripped off a couple of days ago by a sleazy New York incall service and I have to say that is the last straw, why deal with shit service in the US when you get high quality elsewhere in the world, Europe, Australia, even Canada to a degree??

Hello

This is a little off topic but I would like to ask about the existance and use of "short stay hotels" in the US. I have also post this to the General board here
http://www.wsgforum.com/vforum/showthread.php?threadid=970
but I really need to ask people who are in the US.

What I want to ask is, are "Short stay hotels" in the US and Canada only used with professionals or do people sometimes take their girl friend in for a quickie? How strange would this be?

As some of you may know, there are places called "love hotels" in Japan which are rented by the hour (or 3, sometimes all night) where people go for sex (and occasionally just for a rest or to stay the night because they are cheaper). Sometimes people will take prostitutes to love hotels, but often they will take their girlfriend, including especially the person that they are having an affair with, or even their wife.

The reasons for this are perhaps

1) Japanese young people live with their families for longer, often until they marry, so they often do not have a place of their own.

2) Japanese houses are smaller and are often partitioned with paper walls.

3) The architectural problem is exacerbated since many Japanese ladies sometimes make those moaning noises.

4) There is a more permissive culture of sex (perhaps).

5) And hence they are provided to give a more interesting sexual experience with them rooms, toys, videos and mirrors that would be difficult to provide in such variety at home.

6) Japanese morality depends on *where* you are - i.e. they have a strong sense of propriety, and a sense of inappropriate behaviour depending upon where they are. Having wild sex in ones parent's house might be felt to be shameful (even if they are away on holiday) but doing it in a love hotel -- well that is the place to do it.



Tim

Tomboy or 'Girly Girl' ?

Depends when and where. Alone in the budoir I certainly like the look and feel of nice lacy lingierie on her body, I appreciate the time she spends to get 'dolled up and pretty' for me. Vive le difference, dammit! And there are times out in public too when I like a nice doll in my arms...

but the ladies in my life who aren't pros tend to be casual, I see them in jeans and flannel or t-shirts more often then dressed-to-kill. Which is fine with me, I like my mountain biking, going to movies, nice time snuggling on the couch. I appreciate time spent when things are natural and she's letting her hair down.
Casual wins overall, it is just more of my lifestyle. Not really a suit myself, just a merchant sailor on the great lakes who thinks all women are goddesses, that god created women so that he can pamper them (when I'm not selling myself the bill of goods that the only thing a lady would want from me is Master Card, Visa, American Express, or cold hard cash). What wins is a woman who can be appealing and make both sides come off well: I may be a simple man, but I like my women to be multi-faceted.

Warpig,

[i]"...just a merchant sailor on the great lakes who thinks all women are goddesses, that god created women so that he can pamper them"[/i]

Who needs Visa cards and BMWs?? What we need are more men like you!!! ;)

Dear Alex,

I agree with a lot of what you say and have thought similar things myself. Some comments,

I am not sure that women have the upper hand. It is true that they have a lot of power due to the sexual appetite imbalance that you point out, but at the same time, as you also note, they are dependent upon men if they want to use their sexual organs to the full and have children. It is clear that someone needs to look after children. In the end we all labour to have our sexual desires fulfilled and women probably work about as hard as men, appeasing men, and raising children or working. Surveys of how much work men and women do in Japan at least show that women do about as much work as men, even though men work long hours. In general it seems to me that men and women need each other, are dependent upon each other, so inequality is difficult to maintain.

But having said that, you are probably right. Men give women money for sex and having sex, even (or especially) for a woman, is a lot less unpleasant than having to earn money. Hmm... at the same time I think that we give them a psychologically hard time a lot of the time.

Anyway

The problem is though that your alternatives to marriage are not all that good. Immigration would only work for the richer countries and would result in considerable cultural decline. Soon American (or whereever you are) would be populated by those from other nations and would cease to be America. When that happened it is quite possible that the economic advantage that it has now would dissappear, meaning that women would not want to come.

One might attempt to run communes such as the Israeli Kibbutz or the attempts in the Soviet Union were women raise children as a group and men work as a group, each according to their ability, each according to their needs. In Russia it was found that it was very difficult to break the bond between biological parents and their offspring, especially the mothers, but also the fathers as well I believe. You predict that some fathers would want to rear their children. It seems to me that there will be a tendency for marriage to rise from the ashes, as it were, so long as there are some men that are prepared to do it. As soon as their are some men that do it, then women will choose those men, and the rest of us will have to do likewise is the competative sexual market.

One might pay women to have children, via general taxation. Would this be preferable?

Anothe point is that this problem is very deep and even spiritual. Many myths start with a divine couple (adam and eve etc) suggesting that forming couples is something that lies at the foundation of our religions and cultures. Overthrowing marriage would be a massive revolution indeed. Marx (or in particular his friend Engels, who was rich enough to live with two women) believed that patriachy and by that he meant men buying women, was the origin of capitalism. (check for books by Engels at Amazon).

As a bit of a buddhist, it seems to me that perhaps one of the reasons why we believe ourselves to have a stable identity (which buddhism denies) is that we are born to a system where we are to have stable relationships. Hence the others that we internalise are stable, and so are our percieved identities. Perhaps the end of marriage would signal enlightenment for mankind!

But the problem is people have not (recently) come up with a better system than marriage - a better system of transferring wealth to child rearers from non-child rearers.

And perhaps, while I can see the objections, it is good for society that we are in a situation where we are required to work in order to satisfy our desires. If sex were free then perhaps we would be very lazy.

I have toyed with the ideal of a utopia in which all women are prostitutes and that everyone simply realises that marriage is just one form of prostitution. Perhpas if the market would just get deregulated a little (meaning that there is no moral or legal divide between those that want to form lifetime and one hour partnerships) then that would improve human society? It could also make it a lot worse.

People find that men are a nicer to their biological children are are more inclined, for example, to form sexual relationships with the offspring of other males. This tends to mean that "liberated" familes are fraght places for young females. I know one family that is a case in point.

Tim

takemototim>

Tim !
I remember I read about ancient Polinesia ( Hawayi ... ) - it was absolutely sexual free society. As young people hawayians had a lot of sexual connections, but by 30-40s they usually found a stable parthner and lived voluntarily in couples. They were quite happy in sexual life ( before europeans came and brought syphilis ).

This example showing that cancellation of marriage law will not cancel marriage itself. It will just make to women more difficult to pull out money - that's all ! As a result it will switch women's sexual attutude from money to sex itself, make them less tough and more sexual, like in Hawayi. The negative result will be that some single mothers will lose money - but not to unbearable point. Taxation system can soften it even more.

>And perhaps, while I can see the objections, it is good for society that we are in a situation where we are required to work in order to satisfy our desires. If sex were free then perhaps we would be very lazy.

You are right. that's another undercurrent reason for marriage law - a whip to make men work harder.

Alex,

Hawayi?

Sounds like utopia. It also sounds rather like the American dream - people hand out when they are young and find a soul mate or really good friend for when they are older. I hope that the future turns out that way, but I am not sure that the removal of the marriage laws is enough to ensure a desirable outcome.

Here in Japan (I am not Japanese, but I have lived here for a while), young Japanese tend to be somewhat less hung up about sex and they tend to find a partner later in life (the average of marriage is about 29, I think).

However it is not only reduced taboos on sex that facilitates this sort of society - they also have very strong taboos related to child birth and female desire.

I would have to know more about your utopia to be able to comment.

And anyway, is it enough to simple remove marriage law? If people get married later in life then younger women may want to grab the man sooner before the good ones get taken, and not so attractive men may want to offerthemselves as life long partners sooner before the good ones get taken. If you remove the law will the promise makers disappear?

Removing the child maintenance law would make quite a lot of difference though. New slogan - "Let the woman beware"?

Tim -- for what it's worth, the current average age of first marriage for men in the US is pretty close to 29. About three years younger for women.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joe_zop
[i]Tim -- for what it's worth, the current average age of first marriage for men in the US is pretty close to 29. About three years younger for women. [/i][/QUOTE]

Can you source that, JZ? It seems high to me. Is the "average" the arithmetic mean or the median (or something else), and how do they treat never-marrieds? Seems to me the calculation is impossible since the never-marrieds cannot be assumed to never marry subsequently, or must be retrospective and thus stale. Or perhaps they are probabilistic regarding the never- (or maybe better said, the not-yet-) marrieds?

The number I would want would be the lowest age at which 50% of the population reported never having married, which would be the median except for survivorship issues (some people had married but died before reaching that age, while others who had died may have married before that age, after that age, or not at all).

Just curious.

Dickhead

PS: 2000 US census data give the median age at first marriage as 25.1 for women and 26.8 for men, if you choose to believe them.

DH

Dickhead, it's from the same place I mentioned below, [url]http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS.shtml,[/url] which boils down stats from various sources, including the census. However, on looking at it again (I did the previous post from memory) I see that I've mixed up average age of marriage with that of average age of first marriage, and that their quote for the latter is for 1997. No idea the specifics of their methodology -- I just found their list an easy short compilation -- but my suspicion would be that never-marrieds are not counted, and that this is simply an average age from a source such as licenses or something similar. They have the same number as the one you quote for median for first marriage, which no doubt means that's where they're drawing it from.

For what it's worth, they report the percentage of those who had never married in 1999 as being about 28% with some slight geographical differences, with the percentage over the age of 15 who have never married, by gender, as 31.3% of men and 25.1% of women. Given that there are more women than men, that would seem to indicate that those men who do marry tend to remarry more often than women, right?

OK, Joe, that makes more sense. Thanks. I haven't read all the posts since the board opened up again since I am pretty busy right now, so I didn't see your source.

Fuckin' statisticians. What use is the percentage of people over 15 who've never married? Now over 30 or 35 might tell me something.

I have always heard and felt it to be true that divorced men are more likely to remarry than divorced women, and I think I've heard that about widowers as well. I worked with a guy at the post office who was 25 and had been divorced 3 times. He told me that he liked being married but just hadn't liked any of his wives. What an idiot. I also have two friends who have each TWICE married women they have known for only a few weeks (a few days in one case). These two are both college graduates. One is still married to the second gal but he hates her and just works all the time to avoid her (they had a kid).

Personally, I think marriage is a quaint anachronism, at least in the developed world. I think Bolivia has a good system. You can get married and if you are not satisfied with your wife after a year, you just drag her ass back to her parents' house and drop her off. Of course, that choice exists only for the man and not for the woman. Being a man in Bolivia is quite good as there is a huge disparity of women to men due to centuries of war. However, the women are butt ugly.

>I haven't read all the posts since the board opened up again

For which you should probably be eternally gratefull :D

I have to agree that it never ceases to amaze me how people can get married on a regular basis after only a couple of weeks. People I would otherwise consider bright, as well, but sometimes people are mysteries even to themselves...

Alex,

I must admit I found the post about sexual inequality quite funny. Contrary to popular belief, there are plenty of sexually willing women. Sex has been called the world's most expensive commodity. Women are just a sexual as men, if not more so, they just don't wear it on their sleeves the way we do. What I often find amusing is this belief that people have that if there are 1000 women and 1000 men then there's one for everybody, everything's equal and balanced. Life doesn't work that way. General, all of the men will be attracted to the top 100 women and all of the women pining away for the top 100 men. So, you have 10% of the population getting more than they can handle, and the other 90% feeling lonely and confused as to why. There are PLENTY of women chasing after handsome, sexy, intelligent, successful guys, just as there are plenty of guys trying to get a date with a supermodel. TRUST ME: THERE ARE GUYS WHO GET TO PICK AND CHOOSE.

It works the same way in business. Certain people have the knowledge and skills the enable them to earn tremendous sums of money, while everyone else sort of bumbles along crying about the inequality. And, not to sound crass, but if some poor guy has to work 3 DAYS to pay for a prostitute, then he probably should be looking for someone closer to his socio-economic level. BMW doesn't market their cars to guys making minimum wage. Their TARGET MARKET is people in a much higher income bracket. For some people on this board, $200 is less than an hours work in their profession. This particular market is driven by those who can pay without batting an eye, NOT by some attempt to make it affordable for EVERYONE.

And for all your comments about marriage, you seem to forget that marriage is a CHOICE. No one is FORCED to get married. Yes, in the U.S. it cost more to get divorced than it does to get married which creates whole other set of problems. This is why I choose NOT to get married. Are all of my sexual needs being met? More than you could probably imagine. How in the world can you suggest that biggest problem facing developed countries is some poor schmuck not getting the sex he desires? Is this a joke!?

If you haven't noticed, there are millions of women looking for husbands, partners, soul mates, friends, etc. If you are an idiot, a troll, complete and utter loser, then I can understand you feeling a little lonely. But, even losers get lucky from time to time. If you choose to marry a woman just to have your sexual needs met, then you deserve to get slammed because you know NOTHING about women, or relationships.

Next, your child support argument is complete drivel. If some ass chooses to have a child, you feel he's not financially responsible for the raising of that child? So, if he's not responsible, who is? Me, as a taxpayer? Guess again, pal. Oh, and yes, women DO pay child support in this country. It's rare, but it does happen. Jesus, drivel, complete drivel… Somehow, during your extensive research, you failed ask why child support laws were created. It's because too many women were being left to care for children alone, without financial support. Well, they did get it…from me…and the rest of the taxpayers that make over minimum wage. Why the hell would I want to be burdened with your financial responsibility? BTW, the cost of raising a child in this country from birth through four years of college is estimated at over $200,000.

Again, not to sound rude, but do you REALLY believe this crap? (And you wonder why your cup doesn't runneth over with p---y….

Dear Mr. drgn !

You say :
>Contrary to popular belief, there are plenty of sexually willing women.

and then :
>if some poor guy has to work 3 DAYS to pay for a prostitute, then he probably should be looking for someone closer to his socio-economic level.

But did you ever seen a woman , that has to work 3 DAYS to pay for a male prostitute ?

You didn't. That proves, that there are NOT PLENTY of sexually willing women. So women get it free, while men must pay.

Or maybe you think that an average woman is on some upper level, then average guy ?

While we have such striking inequality, why not to compensate it with another natural inequality - let's women pay for their children ! Because they are really THEIR children, they don't belong to men, or they belong to fathers only conditionally, because a women can take them out anytime, while a man can not.

>Sex has been called the world's most expensive commodity.

Exactly. So while women make money on this commodity, let's make them pay it other way. It's only fair. I am quite serious.

Drgn, You do make some good points about child support and marriage. I would pay child support if I had an ex-wife that had MY child because the child is my flesh and blood and I would love my creation with all my heart. But what about those poor souls that pay child support to wives for kids from her previous marriages. That is not the child supporter's flesh and blood and someone else's. I believe that child support should be paid for the husband's own creation not someone else's. Yet it never happens that way. Sometimes the current divorced husband gets the shaft and has to pay it all. Not to mention, the judge might tack on alimony. There is no incentive for men to get married especially with single mothers. This is why most men choose to stay single.
I agree that men who get married for sexual gratification should get slammed. They are asking for it. They fall for the trap of the woman saving themselves for marriage and then the buffoon marries her just to get her in bed. That is the stupidest reason to get married! It only reinforces the male stereotype of being people that think with their small heads. These people give us men bad names.
As far as hooking up, it really depends where you live. For example, the Tri State area of the United States is more racist than other parts of the US. I have a hard time hooking up here in New York than any other parts of the US. In fact the girl I am currently dating is from Michigan and just moved to New York about 2 weeks ago. Usually when I ask a girl born here in this state out, they give me the "I only date guys of my own race" crap. But when this girl said yes, I suspected she wasn't from around here. I asked where she was from and she was from Lansing, Michigan. There is almost no race mixing in New York or most parts of the Northeastern United States, especially Boston. They were taught that they could be friends with people of other races but can't date or marry them or else they get disowned. Also, women in New York wouldn't date shorter men who are balding. But these guys have a shot in foreign countries where the men abuse them and they are taught to be submissive. The caring but short and bald geek would have a great shot in Europe or South America because they are more attracted to sensitive men than American women could ever be. The sensitive geek is a prize compared to the abusive men in those countries.

Darkseid

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alex
[i]
Because they are really THEIR children, they don't belong to men, or they belong to fathers only conditionally, because a women can take them out anytime, while a man can not. [/i][/QUOTE]

This is the complete crux of the area where we disagree, Alex. I can simply never agree with you that kids don't belong to their fathers. Not only physically but emotionally. I can look at my own family and see how much the identities of myself and my siblings are oriented around who my father was, his values, his temperment. Yes, the mother is clearly also a strong and singular influence, but to state that children don't belong to their fathers -- just because you're afraid you may have to pay for sticking your dick in their mother -- is just utter immature bullshit.

joe_zop>I can simply never agree with you that kids don't belong to their fathers.
>to state that children don't belong to their fathers -- just because you're afraid you may have to pay for sticking your dick in their mother -- is just utter immature bullshit.

It's happening too often, that we can't ignore it. It's reality of life. Sad one. It's not immature bullshit.

Gee, let's see -- trapped into marriage, forced to pay for kids who don't belong to you just because you helped bring them about, plus anyway you can't get fair custody of these children who you don't really want in the first place and who aren't really your problem, they're society's so taxpayers ought to pay for them, damn women don''t have to pay for sex so if a man were to hang out his gigolo shingle he wouldn't be able to support himself -- sorry, but I hear a baby rattle keeping the beat in the background. Oh, yeah, that's right -- it's not yours anyway, all you did was have sex like a "man" needs to do. Why, indeed, don't people care about men's needs, sob, sob?

Joe, you see problems of men in contemporary life as something not important, while problems of women as something important. I see it other way around.

Darkseid,

As someone who lived in Manhattan for several years, and is a confessed "rainbow dater" I'm going to emphatically DISAGREE with that statement about inter racial/interfaith/inter-whatever dating in the Northeast. In my experience, and the experiences of friends, coworkers, etc. you see biracial couples ALL the time. Granted, you can go into certain neighborhoods and those numbers drop. But by and large, the number of mixed couples in major metropolitan areas far surpasses both the suburbs and rural areas of this country.

Here's a little secret for you about the girl from Lansing. Women's behavior is contextual. Women will often do things away from "home" that they'd be less inclined to do in their own backyard. Which is why it's so much easier to get laid on vacation (or when away in college). When a woman goes to a new "place", there is also a new set of behaviors that emerges. Also, the kind of woman that is willing to move away to a "Big City" is also going to be more adventurous in general, which opens up a whole new set of opportunities and possibilities when it comes to dating. In short, look for adventurous women. Look for women that want to step outside of the ordinary and experience something truly...different. By the way, Danny DeVito is short and balding, yet seems to have no trouble finding willing women. Just a thought.

Alex, you missed the point. ANY GUY THAT HAS TO WORK 3 F---ING DAYS TO PAY FOR A PROSTITUTE IS OUT OF HIS LEAGUE. PERIOD. If you're life is such that you have to work 3 days to make $200, then maybe should be looking at the $40 street walker instead of the $200 escort. Don't complain about wanting a Mercedes when you can only afford a Hyundai. And, trust me on this, spend a week following a true "player", and you'll see the meaning of sexually willing women. Has it ever occurred to you that you're simply...inept? Yes, most women get it free. And the guys I know who have their "shit together" have to turn women down ALL THE TIME. When was the last time you had a woman take you out for the evening and pay for everything? When was the last time you had a woman pay for your vacation? When was the last time you had a woman bring one of her girlfriends to bed with you because she knows you love threesomes? When was the last time you had a woman call you at midnight because she wants, get this...more sex? And these are well-educated women with professional careers. Another buddy of mine always has a "harem" of 3-5 women he can call at almost anytime for sex, dinner, movies, etc.

Here's an interesting fact. Over 51% of all books sold in North America are romance novels, women's romantic fantasies. That is what we call a CLUE boys and girls. When you learn how to get a woman "clicked on" and help her access that part of her mind where she ponders those fantasies, then it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Alex, I applaud you. It's guy like you that make it sooooo easy for the rest of us. :-) To me, sex is a lot like money. Those that know how get all they want, while everyone else, bitches and complains about the injustices of the world.

drgn>Has it ever occurred to you that you're simply...inept?
You may not believe it, but I'm not inept.

>And the guys I know who have their "shit together" have to turn women down ALL THE TIME.

could be, but this is not typical.

>When was the last time you had a woman take you out for the evening and pay for everything?
Never. I pay.
O, yes, once she paid in a restaurant.

>When was the last time you had a woman pay for your vacation?
Never. Not only for MY vacation, they never pay for any man's vacation.

>When was the last time you had a woman bring one of her girlfriends to bed with you because she knows you love threesomes?
C'mon...

>When was the last time you had a woman call you at midnight because she wants, get this...more sex?
3 month ago. It was 11.30pm. I was sleeping already. She wanted me to pick her up at some intersection.
I told her to take a taxi and get here. She felt insulted and didn't come.
It sounds like a funny story, but I simply got tired of this style of relationship. Can you imagine a man calling a girl at 11.30pm, when she is sleeping and telling her - i want to see you now, can you drive at some place and pick me up now, because I am fucking don't care to have my own car, because I used for women to drive me anytime where i want it ?
I am tired of this double standard in sexual life. I don't want it any more.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alex
[i]Joe, you see problems of men in contemporary life as something not important, while problems of women as something important. I see it other way around. [/i][/QUOTE]

No, I get annoyed listening to guys complain about women while whining in the same way women are generally put down for whining: "What about my needs?"

Men's problems, women's problems -- sorry, I live in a world of color, not just black and white, and I don't have to choose one side or another. Being human can suck. Being in a relationship can suck. So can not being in one, so can having been in one. Not getting what you want can suck. That's true for both men and women.

What about talking about taking some personal responsibility for problems as opposed to complaining about the "system"? Your approach is the welfare approach -- "I've got it tough, so I should be pitied and given a break, and no one else's problems are as bad or as important as mine." Poor baby.

That's why I go to Europe where prostitution is reasonably priced and you don't have to deal with the bullshit that you do in the US. In Europe 50 dollars can go a heck of a lot farther than it can in the US or Canada. In London, in Shepherd's Market for that much money I can get a nice session with a 7-8 rating Eastern European beauty. In the outer provinces of the Netherlands that gets me a solid half hour with a 9-10. In Eastern Europe, particularly Prague I could get first rate service for that amount of cash. Even some decent clubs in Copenhagen never charge more than 50-60 US dollars for fun. Speaking the language also helps, for instance in Paris, most Frenchmen I know never pay more than 140 US Dollars for a full hour sex that is the absolute most, that most men I know will pay over there, and often they usually pay 60-75 US Dollars.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alex
[i]drgn>Has it ever occurred to you that you're simply...inept?
>You may not believe it, but I'm not inept.

You're right, I don't believe it. No one with their "shit together" would whine as much as you do. Your "somebody save me" attitude shines a giant spotlight on your lack of skill.

>And the guys I know who have their "shit together" have to turn women down ALL THE TIME.

>could be, but this is not typical.

It's quite typical for guys that understand and can attract women.

>When was the last time you had a woman take you out for the evening and pay for everything?
>Never. I pay.
>O, yes, once she paid in a restaurant.

Sucks for you. Women take me out all the time.

>When was the last time you had a woman pay for your vacation?
>Never. Not only for MY vacation, they never pay for any man's vacation.

You'd be surprised what a woman will do if they want you badly enough. And, yes, a woman paid for my trip to Miami last month.

>When was the last time you had a woman bring one of her girlfriends to bed with you because she knows you love threesomes?
>C'mon...

Again, sucks for you. If you make a habit of dating bisexual women, as I do, threesomes are a normal occurrence. Bi-women are quite easy to spot if you know what to look for. :-)

Alex, your responses to my questions just illustrate you are...inept. Again, you feel society should "cure" your lack of skill with women. Quite sad, really.

Mr Drgn,
I generally agree with most everything you have said. Those that can, do it. Those that can't, b*tch about it.

That said, I must also tell you that you seem to be a real asshole and your "shit" - real or imagined - comes off pretty weak. Real players and guys with money don't spend their time bragging and trying to impress others. If you're getting a lot of tail, my advice is enjoy it while you can. With your nasty attitude, it won't last for long . . .

joe_zop>No, I get annoyed listening to guys complain about women while whining in the same way women are generally put down for whining.

Now you are showing again double standard approach. You'd never say "I get annoyed about women having same political rights, as men" or "I get annoyed about women having same education opportunities, as men" - why "guys whining in the same way women" make you annoyed ?

Men should comlain for their rights, the same way women do it. Joe, do analyze your postings - you simply have pro-feminist attitude. You support women-oriented point of view, but you don't care for men's problems.

Hi, Mr. Prokofiev !

I am really wondering - how is your chinese girlfriend doing ? Didn't she tell you yet "I want to get married, or go to hell" ( rudely speaking ). Chinese girls are especially smart for this.

And then, how long are you dating her ? Please, it's not an intrusion into your private life, but just kind of social observation.

Alex...what is all this "women get it for free, men have to pay" shit? You need to remember where you are. You are on a prostitution board. Thus, the men who frequent this site pay for sex. But on a whole, men who pay sex workers are a comparatively small group. Which means that the greater majority of men in the community ARE GETTING SEX FOR FREE!

There are many men who are "forced" by circumstance to pay a sex worker for sex, and there are many others who do it simply for fun. But ultimately, it is usually a CHOICE. And in most cases, it's because you have CHOSEN not to settle for second best. If you really wanted to get sex for free, you could. Anyone can. There's that woman in her 50's next door who hasn't had a root in 30 years. There's that overweight woman from your office who's always eyeing you off. There's that women in the supermarket who has no boobs and her bum is a bit wobbly. And there are "average" women all over the place, just dying for a no-strings shag. But no. You have to have an 18 year old blonde with implants, she has to know what she's doing in bed, you have to be sure that she won't track you down later and cry that you haven't called her...she has to be PERFECT. You would prefer to pay for sex, than go out and sleep with someone who's "not worthy". So if YOU have to go out and spend a weeks wage in order to get f*cked, that's entirely YOUR faullt.

Drgn,
I LOVED your first post. Keep 'em coming! :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by alex
[i]You'd never say "I get annoyed about women having same political rights, as men" or "I get annoyed about women having same education opportunities, as men" - why "guys whining in the same way women" make you annoyed ?[/i][/QUOTE]

Alex, no double standard here at all -- "What about my needs" is whiny regardless of the gender that says it. I don't think it plays any better for men than for women. I'm not annoyed about people having or not having opportunities -- I'm annoyed about childish complaint as opposed to personal responsibility.

I'm not caring enough about men's problems? Spare me -- I care plenty about men's real problems, but I find your litany of them less than compelling. You're doing plenty of caring for men's problems, [i]as you imagine them[/i] -- every single one of your posts on this site have been on this particular subject, using only a single one-note point of view and never varying one iota. And you're going to criticize my attitude? I provide background, statistics and links to my viewpoints, you provide opinion and anecdote and ignore any fact that doesn't suit your perspective. You make ridiculous and unsupportable blanket statements ("Not only for MY vacation, they never pay for any man's vacation") as if they actually prove something. If I'm providing, as you say, a "pro-feminist point of view" (which is incorrect -- I'd say instead that my perspective is less concerned with men's or women's rights and more about the welface of the kids involved) then you are providing an anti-family, mysogynist, and extremely selfish and self-centered perspective that masquerades as concern for men at large. Here's the difference -- you see this whole equation as being about men versus women. I don't. I don't believe that having one side or the other "win" is of general benefit to society.

And tell you what -- since one of men's core problems, even in your terms, is the lack of available and willing sex partners, suppose you help us all out with this most basic of men's problems by telling us where we should be going to find women to have sex with, as that [i]is[/i] the core purpose of this board. I've done that in other areas on this board -- how about you?

Hi RN,

Just wanted to tweak your statment about the "...the majority of men are gettting sex for free."

Well, here in the US of A the majority of men are not getting any sex at all from what I hear. (Wink) Just had to throw in my unsolicited two cents worth. Keep up the good work as always.

Ok Paddy..."The majority of men are either getting it for free, OR NOT GETTING AT ALL!" LOL :) Either way, I still don't believe that "men HAVE to pay for sex and women get it for free".

Drgn, I did mention that a majority of Northeastern people are racist in the dating sense but as you mentioned and to avoid generalization, there are a few exceptions. They are hard to find though because most parents teach their kids in the segregated neighborhoods in New York not to date outside their race. There are people that go against this rule like myself but not without stares or dirty looks. People in the office date interracially because like you said about girls from Michigan, they are not in their backyard. They are away from parents and their home neighborhoods but they still get stares and the nudgiing question of what are you doing with him/her? When I was with my ex-fiancee, People in her neighborhhood asked her what she was doing with this "chink" and she responded that I was her boyfriend. She got a lot of this in her neighborhood but our relationship was so strong that this racism didn't break the bond. What did break the bond was that she became abusive after meeting a neo-feminist ***** named Martha but that's a different story that I explained in a previous post.

As for Alex, the solution for getting women to pay is to meet a desperate rich woman who hasn't gotten any in years. Not all of them are ugly, but don't expect a wet behind the ears 18 year old either. The 18 year old WILL DEFINITELY make you pay because she doesn't even have a college degree so how can you expect her to have a job to pay for even your meals? If you want a woman that does pay, you have to meet one that makes more money than you AND one that finds you a better person than all her ex-boyfriends. You also have to be physically attractive as well. I do martial arts so I am in top shape and a lot of wealthy older women paid for my meals even when I refused. The key is you must be physically attractive AND the woman must make money. The woman I dated who paid for my meals and even a trip to Vegas was in her forties but back then I was 25 years old but you can be any age as long as you work out to get the muscular body unless you are a cripple. It is the same way with prostitution. We would NEEVER pay for a fat, wrinkled body but we pay for the young ones who are in shape and have shapely tits and asses. So if you are fat, Get in shape and you'll see how many women will pay for you. Also if you are balding, take rogaine or get a hair weave. Women would pay just as much for an ideal man as we would pay for an ideal woman that is why there a few male escort services for these women.

As for threesomes, you MUST date a bisexual. You'll NEVER get a threesome with straight women. Straight women are just as homophobic as straight guys and hate it when you force them to do lesbian acts. That is how I get a threesome once. They are hard to find but you can find them on adult friendfinder sites which will clearly mention they are straight or bisexual. One site I recommend is Alt.com. But say on your ad that you don't want responses leading to paysites because of some of them are fake and do lead to paysites so make it clear that you don't want responses like this. You'll get real responses this way. I met a bisexual girl through this site and had a threesome with her bi-sexual lover.

Darkseid

Interesting, Prokofiev. Asshole? Nasty attitude?
Alex posts this pathetic diatribe about how unfair the world is for men. Then when I ask several questions about a different realm of possibility, his response is Never, Never, C'mon (making blanket statements about "reality). (If you read the initial post, I never made any reference to MY personal experiences.) Then when I give examples from my own life, your response is that I'm an asshole. Why? Because I made a statement about my experiences that doesn't match your reality? Or because it's your belief that guys who aren't whining about a lack of female attention are assholes? Typical response. It's funny how angry other guys get when you don't support their whining. BTW, I usually don't discuss my personal life with anyone, but I really get annoyed when people speak of their pathetic reality as if it's the ONLY reality.

P.S. I could give you dozens of examples from friends that make me look like a "piker". Does that make them assholes too? Is Darkseid an asshole for having similar experiences? Yawn...

P.P.S Thanks, RN. And, Darkseid, thanks for the additional examples of what's possible. (I can smell the smoke as neurons are frying...)

Darkseid,
The woman doesn't have to rich, old, or desperate. She does, however, have to be several years into her career so that her paying is not a struggle…just a choice. Usually 25 is the cutoff. She also has to fully understand on an emotional level that being with you is at the top of her priority list because you can give her the kind of experiences that no other man (at least no one she's met up to this point) can give.

You guys seem to have missed the romance novel stat I gave earlier. Women DREAM about meeting some handsome, sexy, mysterious stranger that gives them unbelievable emotional and physical experiences. If you've ever read a romance novel, they all follow basically the same format. When women go on vacation, they imagine meeting some incredible guy. When they are with their girlfriends, they talk about finding some "alpha" male who's able to reach the woman deep inside, and access all her most private fantasies, dreams and images.

It's quite basic, guys. As men, our sexuality is visually based. We see a hot woman and we want to jump her. Women, by and large, work a little differently. Their sexuality is more emotionally based. Why do you think artists, poets, and musicians are the "master seducers" of our time?!! Because they help women access that part of their mind, where those fantasies, and sexual thoughts are kept. And since HE's the one that opened that doorway, HE's the one she chooses to share it with. This is why women buy so many f---ing romance novels. They're getting their sexual fix, the way guys do when they view Playboy. Most men DON'T HAVE A CLUE when it comes to women, which is why most men are in a condition of scarcity when it comes to sex.

"If you want to be a bull fighter, you must first learn how to be a bull."

darkseid>As for threesomes, you MUST date a bisexual...

Thanks for your advice. But in fact, I don't need it. Personally I am quite OK with my life.

joe_zop>Alex, no double standard here at all -- "What about my needs" is whiny regardless of the gender that says it.

No, what you said exactly is :
"No, I get annoyed listening to GUYS complain about women while whining in the same way women are generally put down for whining."

You are not annoyed about women whinning, but about GUYS, WHINNING like women.

Then :
"I provide background, statistics and links to my viewpoints, you provide opinion and anecdote and ignore any fact that doesn't suit your perspective. You make ridiculous and unsupportable blanket statements ("Not only for MY vacation, they never pay for any man's vacation") "

Do you really believe men and women pay equally for vacations, restorants... ?? Do you need special statistics research for this ?

There are certain realities of life, that we all know, without statistical reports. It's not only restaurants, women don't pay equally for houses, cars, anything. There are exceptions, of course... But don't try to convince me that it is not true.

And men and women don't pay equally for sex, just look into a newspaper and compare men's and womens prostitutes ads. Also RN is trying to say, that most men get sex free - RN, darling, it's not free ! They pay with marriage certificate for this - look at my initial post.

Then you say, my position is balanced, I care about children first. Joe, 1/2 of this children are also boys. They don't ask you about this care ! They will grow up and come under press of marriage law - they will not thank you.

Joe, you ignore well known fact, that normal sexual life is of utmost importance for people well-being. It's not less important, that normal food. Everything that screw up sex, screw up lifes of millions. But you prefer to believe, that financial well-being of women is of first importance, and sexual life is second. This is feminists position, clear.

>suppose you help us ... by telling us where we should be going to find women to have sex with

No, I don't want to discuss this. there is a lot of such information already. Yes, I used to go somewhere for adventures, but now I don't do it much.

But what is interesting here, Joe, do you realize, that if situation will be everywhere like in US, you'll simply have nowhere to go ? So why don't you care for Thailand women and children ? No, you are quite OK with the situation, you show interest about how to exploit the opportunities. So why not to make american women work the same way ? Are they of better kind, then in Thailand ?

:) Don't think, I see happy american society with all women go out of hunger to the streets, whoring for everyday meal. They are very far from it.

Dragon,
"there are plenty of guys who make over $200/hr" I assume you're one of them. . . that's $400,000 to $500,000 year. I doubt it.

"Women take me out all the time" Great . . .

"I have a habit of dating bi-sexual women . . if you know what to look for . . ." Like we are all dying for a bi-sexual woman or a 3-some. Thanks, but no-thanks. Been there . . .

I'm not attacking the message so much as the messenger. No need to break this guys (Alex) balls. I would rather hear you give advice on HOW to "get your shit together" than to brag about your sex life. Something constructive. I don't hear anything about the quality of your relationships or how you utilize "romance", only who pays and how many fit into your bed. But good luck . . .

And Alex . . . don't whine . . . my Chinese girlfriend is fine and she sends her regards . . . in Chinese. Peace - P

>You are not annoyed about women whinning, but about GUYS, WHINNING like women.

I'm annoyed about whining -- period. How much clearer can I be? Look, this is my native language, I am someone with a highly sophisticated sense of syntax and meaning and also someone who gets paid for using that sense, and I was perfectly clear about what I said and meant. Don't blame me because you misunderstood it, and don't attempt to lecture me on what I meant until you're capable of reading nuance better. If you like, I'll be happy break it down for you bit by bit. (I don't normally react like this, but to have you lecture me on what I said and meant is really too much when I've studiously avoided any comment on your unending stream of grammatical and syntactic errors, because I made the specific point of establishing at the very beginning that this was not your native language.)


> Do you really believe men and women pay equally for vacations, restorants... ?? Do you need special statistics research for this ?

Do you really believe that, as you very specifically stated, women "never pay for any man's vacation"? You've had two people in this thread who have contradicted you from direct experience. No, you don't believe it, but you still keep saying it and things like it. That's precisely what I mean about a ridiculous and unsupportable blanket statement. That was exactly what I took you to task on, and once again you are avoiding the issue by fleeing away from your statement.


>But don't try to convince me that it is not true.

Alex, it has become very clear that it is absolutely impossible to convince you of anything, which means that you're basically interested not in thought, dialogue and interaction, but in diatribe. That's boring, and this will be my last engagement of you, as this has turned into an endless repetition of the same whiny complaints without development of any interesting nuances in those whines. There's more to discuss in this thread than your theories.


>Then you say, my position is balanced, I care about children first. Joe, 1/2 of this children are also boys. They don't ask you about this care ! They will grow up and come under press of marriage law - they will not thank you.

No, instead you propose a) asking 14-year old boys if they wouldn't like to not pay for things, and getting sex for free, expecting that the answer you get might actually prove something, and b) setting up a system where children are going to struggle financially because you don't think you should have to pay for helping create them. Wow, that's really caring a lot about those boys, isn't it? Let's just increase their inclusion in some of the negative statistical categories I cited. You're the one who's still dismissing half of the kids because they're not boys, while I'm basically interested in discussing all of their situations as children, not potential adults who may or may not agree with your position. The game is to first get them to adulthood, so they can make their own choices about how they think and live. You consistently just want to skip the realities of that process.


>Joe, you ignore well known fact, that normal sexual life is of utmost importance for people well-being. It's not less important, that normal food. Everything that screw up sex, screw up lifes of millions. But you prefer to believe, that financial well-being of women is of first importance, and sexual life is second. This is feminists position, clear.

You know, that's just complete and utter crap, and you don't know what you're talking about. Psychologists and sociologists of all stripes agree that the baseline issues for humans are food, shelter, and safety, which, in this society, are connected to money. That's not just feminists, that's everyone. Nowhere have I at all disagreed that sex is critically important, and my presence on this board clearly indicates I think so on a personal level, but to say it's more important that food is just hyperbolic baloney -- which isn't surprising, since that's your basic form of argument.


>>suppose you help us ... by telling us where we should be going to find women to have sex with

>No, I don't want to discuss this. there is a lot of such information already.

So, in other words, you're just a troll.


>But what is interesting here, Joe, do you realize, that if situation will be everywhere like in US, you'll simply have nowhere to go ? So why don't you care for Thailand women and children ? No, you are quite OK with the situation, you show interest about how to exploit the opportunities. So why not to make american women work the same way ? Are they of better kind, then in Thailand ?

First of all, I share information about things in the US as well, unlike you. See, that's the purpose of this board -- "sharing information" -- and I do. That's something you've stated you're not interested in doing, and instead you're now going to be judgemental about those who do, by defining it as "exploiting the opportunities." Well, screw you, pal -- opportunist must be your middle name.

Next, you pompous *******, don't dare presume to know how I do or do not care about people in various countries -- I spend a fair amount of my time working with people in third world countries on improving their situations, a large portion of the rest working on community and social issues, and my postings hardly embody pro-exploitation and abuse or lack of caring perspectives. You don't know me, asshole, so don't put attitudes into my mouth. I've quite obviously got no problem expressing them myself.

One thing I decidedly don't presume to do is impose my values on someone else's culture -- that's your game, and it's clear you'd have utterly no problem doing so in the event you were to get laid more and cheaper. In addition, I'm not the one proposing a radical shift in an existing situation without any clear understanding of what would happen. That's you, remember?


>Don't think, I see happy american society with all women go out of hunger to the streets, whoring for everyday meal. They are very far from it.

No, but you're perfectly happy to dismiss the fact that men make 25% more money than women, and still complain that you might have to pay for dinner in a scenario where you're hoping to get laid. Tell you what, since you're into ridiculous and unrealistic scenarios that haven't been thought through -- how about we simply legislate that everyone gets exactly the same amount of money, period, and then we won't have to worry at all about who pays for what? How about you simply talk about sharing the financial load at dinner or wherever -- no, wait, that would involve interaction with a woman other than for sex, and she might somehow trick or force you into marriage, so that won't work.

In the city where I grew up there most certainly were women who were basically out on the streets to make money for food. It ain't always been the good-money 90's, and there's certainly no guarantee that we won't be back in an economic mess at any point. And you've made it crystal clear that your position doesn't really give a damn about whether or not women end up whoring for food in any event, as long as you don't have to pay.

I basically agree with Drgn on his assessment of you, Alex, (and I also think his assessment of the psyche and the reasons men have trouble getting and understanding women are also pretty well dead on.) I've had women pay for things for me my entire life, and I'm far from some god's gift in terms of being handsome or a physical specimen. I've also done the same in return. It just depends on what the situation happens to be, and who the two people involved are. But unlike you, for me it's not all about money, for everything, at all times. Some people walk through life wearing their hearts on their sleeves -- you obviously wear your wallet.

joe_zop> don't attempt to lecture me on what I meant until you're capable of reading nuance better

Not to such level as not to understand what "guys whinning like girls" mean. I catched you with this and now you got annoyed.

>Do you really believe that, as you very specifically stated, women "never pay for any man's vacation"? You've had two people in this thread ...

My God ! STATISTICALLY !
Sometimes they do.

>Alex, it has become very clear that it is absolutely impossible to convince you of anything

Same about you. In fact we exchanged our thoughts already, and no one side could convince the other. We can stop it.

>Psychologists and sociologists of all stripes agree that the baseline issues for humans are food, shelter, and safety, which, in this society, are connected to money.

I read other things. Food and sex are of equal importance. And then - look at all world literature. It's about 1. food and material well-being 2. sex. - And it pays appr. equal attention to 1 and 2.

>So, in other words, you're just a troll. See, that's the purpose of this board -- "sharing information" -- and I do. That's something you've stated you're not interested in doing

I put my postings only into American Women part, the purpose of it to discuss american women attitude for sex. Your accusations are foundless.

>I spend a fair amount of my time working with people in third world countries on improving their situations, a large portion of the rest working on community and social issues, and my postings hardly embody pro-exploitation and abuse or lack of caring perspectives.
>You don't know me, asshole,
Now I know you already.

See, Joe, I believe that you worked as social worker and did your best to help people. But in the same time your presence on this site, dedicated to question "Where to find cheap prostitutes ?" shows, that you are OK with it. You even scorned me that I am not active in this discussion. Would I answer : oh, yes, I know a country with such good and cheap prostitutes ! - you'll be interested. When I pointed this out to you you got mad. It's funny.
Do you look at going to prostitutes in poor countries as a part of social help to people of 3rd world ? Or exploitation of their conditions, so you can pay less for a good service ?
C'mon.

>it's clear you'd have utterly no problem doing so in the event you were to get laid more and cheaper.

But it's the purpose of this site - to discuss, how to get laid cheaper ! You just scorned me for refusing to discuss, in what country to go for this.

>No, but you're perfectly happy to dismiss the fact that men make 25% more money than women,

Yes, I do dismiss it ! America is very rich country, even 25% less is a lot of money. There are really poor countries in the world, and you'll not convince me that 25% of US salary is an important thing.

I am against mariage law NOT just because men must pay MONEY after divorce, but because IT CHANGES WOMEN PSYCHOLOGY, their attitude for relationship with men, focusing it on money.

>how about we simply legislate that everyone gets exactly the same amount of money, period, and then we won't have to worry at all about who pays for what

What ? Communism ? Doesn't work. Proved already.

>In the city where I grew up there most certainly were women who were basically out on the streets to make money for food... And you've made it crystal clear that your position doesn't really give a damn about whether or not women end up whoring for food in any event, as long as you don't have to pay.

So what men did in this unfortunate city ? Being not able to prostitute, they probably, all died out of hunger...
How did you survive ?

Again, US is a very rich country, and also there are some bad examples - it's not the main problem of this country to compare with many others.

>I've had women pay for things for me my entire life
You are a great guy ! And I am poor, unfortunate thing, they don't want to pay for me ... whinn... whin... whinn...

>But unlike you, for me it's not all about money, for everything

Just other way around. You calculate 25% and care so much about it - I don't.

Prokofiev,

Do me one small favor? Go back and READ ALL OF THE POSTS before you open your mouth. You're WAY off base here. By the way, there are guys in my office who make 10 to 20 times that figure. You don't have a clue as to my background, or what I do for a living...let it go. But, that wasn't my point.

Alex, feels society is responsible for fixing his problems with women to the point where the government should step in and solve the problem. Please, try to keep up. And, as I stated previously, if you would bother to read and then process, I'm not bragging. I'm simply giving examples of what Alex stated was IMPOSSIBLE. Jesus, pal, I have no further use for you...

P.S. Joe_Zop, slam dunk!

alex continued to blather:
>not to such level as not to understand what "guys whinning like girls" mean. i catched you with this and now you got annoyed.

and earlier:

>you are not annoyed about women whinning, but about guys, whinning like women.

look, i'll go slow so you might have one last chance chance to catch this. at no point did i say that i was not annoyed about women whining. i find that also extremely annoying, and the fact that i did not specifically state so means nothing -- bud selig, martha stewart and people who drive too close to the rear of my car also annoy me, and i didn't mention them either. my comment was simply that i find it both annoying and ironic to hear men whining in the same way women do, when men constantly complain about women doing it. i find [i]all[/i] whining about how you're a victim and so the world should change for you annoying. in what way is that difficult to comprehend?

>now i know you already.
>see, joe, i believe that you worked as social worker and did your best to help people. but in the same time your presence on this site, dedicated to question "where to find cheap prostitutes ?" shows, that you are ok with it. you even scorned me that i am not active in this discussion. would i answer : oh, yes, i know a country with such good and cheap prostitutes ! - you'll be interested. when i pointed this out to you you got mad. it's funny.

see, there you go again with a complete inability to read, and an even more absolute inability to read between the lines. no, you don't know me, and you're not even close in your assumptions. i am not a social worker and i never said i was one. and the purpose of this site is not finding cheap prostitutes -- to quote from the site itself, it's "finding women and getting laid." you're the one who's obsessed with cheapness -- strange for a guy who says he's not concerned with money -- i've never said a word about that in terms of my own actions.

and my point was very simple -- that's the mission of the board; you've said you're not interested in being part of that, and you're judgmental to boot about those who are. therefore, you're a troll.

>do you look at going to prostitutes in poor countries as a part of social help to people of 3rd world ? or exploitation of their conditions, so you can pay less for a good service ?
c'mon.

first, what exactly does this have to do with anything? (besides your ability to try to make a snide remark.) as far as frequenting sex workers in third world countries (or in the us, or anywhere else) i have absolutely no problem with people deciding what's best for them, what they want to do, and how they want to make money. that includes women who decide to make money by becoming sex workers. i do have a problem with people who are coerced, ****, etc. but somebody's body is their own, and they can choose to do with it whatever they want. i frankly don't see a huge difference between sex workers and day laborers or other independent contractors, as long as it's an option entered by choice. again, you're the one with money on the brain.

if i go to a sex worker, i go to a sex worker. generally, that happens in whatever place i happen to be, as opposed to me magically screwing someone a continent away from where my body is located. (if that were possible, it'd be, hello rn! lol) if i go to sex workers at home, i go to north american sex workers. if i go to sex workers while i'm travelling, i go to sex workers wherever i happen to be located. if i'm elsewhere in the us, they're american. if i'm in europe, i go to european sex workers. thailand, thai. australia, australian. again, what part of that is difficult for you to understand?

most of my experiences with sex workers and with women in general have happened in the us. is that clear enough?

no, probably not.

>you'll not convince me that 25% of us salary is an important thing.

no, but you'll certainly whine about having to give up part of it to a women in whatever way that might happen. if it's not important, why whine about it? why cite third world countries, where 25% of a us salary is often more than a family makes in a year, if it's not important?

>so what men did in this unfortunate city ? being not able to prostitute, they probably, all died out of hunger...
how did you survive ?

many moved away. many turned to crime, as the crime rate went through the roof. others went on welfare, unemployment, tried starting businesses, doing odd jobs, etc. me, i worked my ass off to survive, usually with more than one job, lots of them crappy. that's what anyone does who doesn't have simple options and doesn't just sit around and whine.

>just other way around. you calculate 25% and care so much about it - i don't.

you say you don't care, but absolutely everything you write about and have written about is all about women being after your money. child support, paying for dinner, men having to give half the property, etc. women needing the money equation changed so they'll act right. the unfairness of men needing to pay for sex when women don't. money, money, money, money. to say that you don't care about money says that everything you've posted here is bullshit. either you stand by what you've written, or you don't.

joe>At NO POINT did I say that I was not annoyed about women whining. I find that also extremely annoying,

That's what you are saying now. But initially you did'nt say "I am annoyed about women whinning", you specified exactly men's whinnings. That's what feminist attitude is.

>I find ALL whining about how you're a victim and so the world should change for you annoying. In what way is that difficult to comprehend?

OK, here we agree. So women's whinning - "it's so difficult to raise a child, we are victims of husbands, who leave us" - are annoying. Why to support them ?

>And the purpose of this site is not finding cheap prostitutes -- to quote from the site itself, it's "Finding women and getting laid." You're the one who's obsessed with cheapness --

Are you serious ? So why women don't discuss where to go to "Find men and to get laid." ?

To find a women you don't have to go to Brazil, you can lay brazilian prostitute in your own city. the only problem is PRICE and QUALITY of service. That's what this site is discussing - nothing else. All guys that come here are interested in cheap prostitutes, including dgrn, who must be so busy meeting women, chasing for him, that I don't know how he can find time for internet.

So it's nothing wrong to try to find cheap prostitutes - I don't argue. The difference is that while other guys try to go to Philliphines for this, spending thousands for fly tickets and sitting 20 hours inside an airplain, I want to bring Philliphines directly to their doors. Is that bad idea ? You should just destroy marriage law, make women less independent, and prices will go down. Is it bad ?

Men, answer !

>you'll not convince me that 25% of US salary is an important thing. - No, but you'll certainly whine about having to give up part of it to a women in whatever way that might happen. If it's not important, why whine about it?

Because basically I don't want prostitution at all. I am for FREE sex for sex. I repeate, marriage law corrupt women, it shift their sexuality from sex to money. This is the biggest problem in US society, because poverty is exception, but anti-sexuality is rule.

alex:

as a first-time, and hopefully last-time, poster on this topic, just my two cents .....

there are those men that generally "have a clue", with joe_zop and drgn being the most recent of few examples on this board, and those that don't (yes, alex, you quickly spring to mind here).

quote: "so why women don't discuss where to go to "find men and to get laid.""

i am not sure what brought you to the above conclusion--i can confidently argue, much as i can on many of your other concepts, that you are squarely wrong. women often do, in fact, go out trying to find sex. (note: i assure you that statement was written, as hard as it may be to believe, in absolute sobriety and with presence of mind.) how do i know this? well, fortunately, or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, most of my closest friends are female (fairly attractive ones at that). as such, i am privy to the types of conversations they have with their other female friends (or i simply listen carefully when i am with a group of them and they are doing their "smack talk"). women do, much like men, but perhaps less frequently, go out looking to satisfy their sexual needs—one-night-stands are certainly an option. in fact, i often joke with them that they are worse than some of my male friends in this regard. and, if they fail that evening, which does happen more often than not, they return home dejected and disappointed (right rn?).

to me, the only real difference between men and women with respect to sex is that men are more willing to have sex without any romantic elements, whereas women tend to require them—they seek warmth, kindness, humor, and emotional security, among other things, rather than just sufficiently good looks and a heartbeat. furthermore, when they seek that one-night-stand, i assure you that the male’s financial position does not really enter the equation—simple logic would dictate as much (unless we're talking about exceptions like "doing" a celebrity where the financial benefits typically do not extend beyond an evening of debauchery). for longer-term relationships, which by definition are altogether different from one-night-stands, financial security may, in some cases, be part of the equation. however, let’s be honest here—don’t men also evaluate women on a variety of criteria (i.e. potential to be a good and/or nurturing long-term partner/wife, potential to be a good mother, intellect, personality, quality/compatibility of sex, family background, economic status, etc. etc.)? the specific criteria may differ, but the purpose is similar. in fact, i know women that do quite well financially and apply solely non-financial criteria to picking their long-term partners.

alex, i really think if you removed those blinders and buried them permanently in your all-too-vast skeleton closet, you would start to see the world as it really is. we do not live in a world, contrary to you wild imagination, where men are the only ones seeking sex and women, being the asexual creatures you deem them, leverage their bodies solely for financial benefit. of course, there are exceptions to this, as there are with everything, but in my experiences they are certainly far from the rule.

alex, you very much appear to be harboring inordinate amounts of anger toward women in general and, consequently, irrationally conclude that the "system" is out to screw you (generalizing the problem as being universally true is a rationalization on your part to make you feel better--imho). my best advice would be to seek the help of a good therapist--and do it quickly.

joe_zop and drgn:

boy, you guys have significantly more patience with people like alex than i could ever muster—i applaud you efforts.

rn:

your thoughts/comments, which i tend to find most insightful and genuine, are often very much in line with my female friends (aside from the 4,000 shags of course--lol)—if only more of the men on this board gave them the attention they deserve.

happy hunting!

fred

fred flintstone>

fred, i'm pretty sure that although you are "fred" - you are a woman.
it's your style of writing...

and then:

>well, fortunately, or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, most of my closest friends are female (fairly attractive ones at that). as such, i am privy to the types of conversations they have with their other female friends

> my best advice would be to seek the help of a good therapist--and do it quickly.

yes, women do discuss sex between themselves, in fact more, then men. but in a different way. what i am talking about : look at this site. it's open for everyone, do you see many women, discussing how to go to let's say thailand for sex, and how much male prostitutes will cost them there ? is that my 'crazy hallucination' that i see only men here ?

sorry, miss.

Ok, I'm done with Alex, as there's really been nothing new added in quite some time, and I'm bored with reading comprehension games. (Umm, there aren't many women here because the site's mission is clearly stated as being about men finding women, not the other way around... and if Fred's a woman, he's either gay or a good story teller in his other posts, as one of them describes travelling with a long-term girlfriend.)

Fred, I think you make some excellent points, particularly about the romantic elements, echoing the comment by drgn about romance novels, which I'd like to explore a bit more (and drgn I invite comments from you on this. You, too, RN -- feel free to take me to task on my massive generalizing, and I know these novels aren't exactly always bastions of feminist thought, though they do focus strongly on the concept of strong women who make their own choices in the face of difficulty.)

I've rarely been in a woman's home who doesn't have one of these novels, and I think one could also point to soap operas as being part of that same side of the coin. Part of my perspective is that this makes perfect sense -- men are raised (or wired, if that's your take on things) to be competitive, hence our general obsession with sports and things involving fighting, loud machinery and explosions, :) and women are raised to manage interpersonal relationships, so soap operas and romance novels are to women what sports and car chases are to men.

Given that lots of those romantic novels involve recurring themes (the mysterious stranger, the handsome man of means and quite possibly title, the trials of the rather difficult love through a series of trials -- and yes, I've actually looked at these things and even read a couple god help me) what should we non-literary characters make of all this?

My sense is:

1) Attention, attention, attention. That seems to be one of the recurring themes. Lots of attention paid to the woman, not usually manifested in "stuff" but mostly in experiences. And that means unbridled and genuine interest, not obsession. It often manifests itself in an ability to listen.

2) Gestures, gestures, gestures. Preferably unexpected and, at times, unexpectedly public. Not necessarily huge, but irregularly regular.

3) A light or gentle approach. Not too many of these novels involve the male protagonist directly and aggressively pressuring the woman, though he may well be involved in persistant pursuit. Note that consistent low-key pursuit is different from pressure. In those novels where the male is not someone of high social stature, and where he's aggressively macho, he still doesn't turn that on the female protagonist, but only uses it to her benefit.

4) The secret revealed. Less is more is fine as long as she gets inside to some degree and at some point, and giving too much away eliminates the interest. All these guys have some degree of mystery about them, which the women are driven and obsessed with solving and discovering. (Now [i]that[/i] sounds like real life!) Being taciturn about this is ok for the male character only if he give's it up later, so the woman can somehow help.

5) The mind reader or detective. The male protagonist never comes up with a gesture that isn't the right one. He comes up with it because he "knows" what she wants because he "knows" her. Or he's listened to her and takes something she mentioned and was clearly attached to and extrapolated from that. See #1.

6) Amazingly, consistency doesn't seem to be that important, as long as there's a good reason for the inconsistency. A fair amount of the time the female protagonist has to "forgive" the male in order for the relationship to move forward (her test) and he has to then reveal that there was a good reason for his transgression (see #4) and dramatically make it up to her.

The royalty and classic movie star looks side of the equation you've either got or not, but most of these books focus on behavior-based scenarios wherein the guy proves his fidelity, overcomes some great difficulty for her, swoops in and saves/changes her life, etc. Lots of it is about creating the aura, but, of equal importance, managing to sustain it. One aspect you don't see much of in these novels is the movement into the humdrum -- even in those where the protagonists get married, have a kid, and slip into a routine, the routine ends up being the defining critical barrier that must be overcome. Conclusion -- guys may like watching car chases and sports, but women want men to create some degree of that excitement for them in everyday life, in the relationship, specifically, and, better still, to let them help but not have to come up with the idea. This is, I think, one of the cruxes of the matter -- how to deal with routine, which most guys I know tend to absolutely gravitate toward. This tends to undermine #1 and #2.)

Yes, I acknowledge the gross generalizations involved here, and that this is kind of a silly game, but I don't want to go back to the fat discussion again and I don't see where having a bunch of guys telling Alex he's clueless -- freely acknowledging that I've been the worst offender in that -- is going to get anywhere.

Comments and thoughts?

Alex:

I find it hilarious that your sole conclusion to my post is that "you are a woman". Firstly, I can assure you this is not the case (nor am I gay by any stretch). Secondly, that conclusion further supports the idea that you are delusional and will rationalize anything which conflicts with your perspective in a way that is easier to digest for you. My advice remains--remove those blinders and "get a clue" (therapy could be very helpful in this regard). Once you abandon those delusional biases, you will be amazed at how differently the world really looks.

Fred

Fred -- I trust you know I was being ironic, as I was simply saying that if you were a woman travelling with a long-term girlfriend and on a monger board... :)

joe_zop:

Irony understood and no offense was taken, which is precisely why my comments were solely directed toward Alex.

Fred

I'm back...Relaxed and revitalised (and tanned!) after a gorgeous four day weekend at a tiny beach town in the middle of nowhere. Ahhhhh...

I'm going to ignore that petulant little Alex boy from now on, because that particular debate (or lack thereof) is becoming verrrrry tedious. I will say only one more thing on the matter before I leave it for good, and that is .....DAMN you're sexy when you're angry, Joe!! LOL

Welcome Fred, and thank you. :) I agree with your post completely. There is a lot of stereotyping being done in this forum (and I admit I've done it as well). It is quite ridiculous to say that ALL MEN this and ALL WOMEN that, because we can all respond with examples of people we know who do not fit the stereotypes. What we need to be doing instead, is accepting that some of us are having trouble getting laid (regardless of our gender) and trying to work out why that is. As you've pointed out, there are many women, like myself and your female friends, who CAN'T GET LAID!! Now if certain men in this section had bothered to HEAR that, rather than refusing to budge from their "Women can always get it and men can't" mantra, they would know that they only have to FIND that group of women and they're home free!! But they will never find this group of women, because no matter how much evidence points to the contrary, they REFUSE to acknowledge that those women even exist!

And I do hope you weren't serious about being a "hopefully last-time poster" in this topic...

Joe,

I have to admit that I am NOT a Mills and Boons fan...actually, I can't stand soppy romance stories! But I do think you summed up the "essence" of the romance novel brilliantly. I think, as you recognised, the most important thing on the list has to be "Attention, attention, attention". Women verbalise. We all know that. Women don't like to keep ANYTHING bottled up, and if there is something on our mind, we are gonna make sure that EVERYONE within a ten mile radius knows about it. Now there are plenty of men who find that intensely annoying...but what they need to realise is it's really a GODSEND. There is no guesswork involved for men!! Women tell you EXACTLY what they want, in no uncertain terms! Ok, so some of the things we say can be confusing and changing our minds the very moment you think you finally understand us, is something we are famous for. But that only happens with the big stuff...and the big stuff is not important. We just like to know that you are listening. For example, if I mention to you on Tuesday that I HATE Adam Sandler and then you turn up on Friday night with champagne, chocolates and the Water Boy DVD...I will not be impressed!!!

One of the best ways to get a woman interested (in my opinion) is to remember something that she said/did at the start of the night, and quote it back to her during conversation at the end of the night. It works especially well if what she said was funny...so it becomes a kind of "in-joke" just between the two of you. It not only shows you were listening to her at the time, but it shows you're still thinking about it. Even better, bring up something she said at a PREVIOUS meeting. There's nothing worse than when you talk all night to a guy on Thursday, and then he asks you all the same questions again on Saturday night.

Other hints that were on Joe's list...
* PDAs (Public Displays of Affection). Most guys seem to be completely against PDAs. (Probably because other women around him will see that he already has a girlfriend, and as such, isn't available). Women love it. (For exactly the same reasons!! LOL) PDAs serve two purposes...they show us that you are not afraid to let other women know you're "taken" AND it makes us think that we are so sexually desirable that you can't keep your hands off us, even in public. Most women are very insecure about their bodies and their attractiveness. You need to make her feel desired.
* The mind reader. Yes, yes, YES. Like I mentioned above, we like to know that you are listening to us. You do NOT have to be a mind-reader to know what a woman wants...she will TELL you! Probably repeatedly!! LOL If she hasn't already mentioned something, you will be forgiven a blunder or two. But if she has already said three times how she feels about a certain thing...God help you if you go ahead and do it anyway!

Two things I would like to add...
* Men don't necessarily fall for the heroine because of what she looks like or her social status. They fall for her because of who she is or what she has achieved. (For example, the soldier who falls in love with the scullery maid, after she devises a plan to poison the enemy king and helps them win the war). The majority of women in romance novels (not all, of course) tend to be intelligent and strong, AND they are respected for those qualities.
* Men in romance novels have both masculine and feminine qualities. The rugged pirate who fights for her honour in a bar brawl, but then holds her gently and strokes her hair as she sobs about how scared she was. The rich, handsome prince who is ruthless in battle and reigns with an iron fist, but would give it all up to spend every night cuddled up to her in front of the fireplace while their children run in circles around them. Women don't like total brutes, and they don't like wimps. They want something in-between.

Alex,

some women go to other countries to pay for sex. I've seen blond German women walking into her hotel room with a dominican man to get laid in Boca Chica. The German woman has you be the payer because how could a dominican man afford the German woman? This same German lady was at the beach the following night with a different guy as I was looking for another Dominican girl. There was also a group of women who went around looking for Dominican male prostitutes. The same way I was on the strip looking for women to have cheap sex with, these German women were looking for Dominican men.

Women pay for sex also. Women are just more secretive than men. They only discuss their conqests with their small group of female friends. They would never put up a Finding men post because of the prudish double standards of this society. Women are still shamed by sex if they are known to have had many sexual past partners. They are called "sluts". Men are glorified for having had many past partners and called "studs". I totally disagree with this hypocrisy that scares women from bringing their interest in sex in public. Women would rather be seen doing a PDA because it seems more romantic than out in Dominican Republic looking for men for sex. If American society was more lax with their sexual attitudes, there might be a "Finding men site" for women. There are male strip clubs, male escort services not just for bachelorette parties but also for rich women not to seem lonely at an event. See, Alex, women do pay for sex also. I have listed many examples of this. And women go to vacations as well to do the same things most people do on the board which is looking for paid sex. They just don't bring it out in the open like us men.

Food for thought..

Darkseid

As a follow-up on the "mind reader" theme -- I will share something that's served me in good stead for many years in buying presents for women -- when you go shopping with a woman, watch what she looks at first, not what she buys. What she looks at first is what attracts her attention or interest, before the rest of the package (price, practicality, etc.) kicks in. Figuring out the qualities that attracted her to those things and pulling them into the presents you buy is like shooting fish in the proverbial barrel -- you're bringing her something in tune with how she secretly imagines herself, as opposed to what she thinks she really should buy. I can't tell you the response I've gotten simply by going back and buying that slightly-too-pricey blouse or scarf that's completely different from what she has or whatever she looked at for quite a while before moving on.

One caveat -- this generally doesn't work with perfumes, as advertising or discusio with friends is what seems to drive the initial interest there.

The other is directly related to RN's note about repeating back something in conversation. Doing that with a present a week or month later always works -- not only were you paying attention, you had to put yourself out to get it, therefore you think she's worth both the attention and the effort and you place clear value on what she wants. And really, how tough is that stuff, especially since this kind of thing tends to resonate?

RN, I agree that women almost always tell you what they want -- even if it's not always clear even to them what that is at times :D I think if you're hitting the romance novel high notes then, as you so aptly stated, the big stuff is not important. I tend to think the big stuff is often put out on the table more to gauge the response and reaction than to actually state a position, and that the real idea is to get a discussion of the big stuff so there is a process conversation about needs, desires, and values. I find that half of the time agreeing to the big stuff is not really what's wanted, but what's wanted is the process of talking about it, sometimes even talking her out of it. (Of course, this is far from a prescription -- sometimes the big things truly are the big things.)

Of course, this is the process that drives men nuts -- women say everything that's on their minds, and men are supposed to manage to sort out the important things and not give undue weight to the rest. Conversely, anything a man says is treated as either a promise or epithet, and "you said..." can easily get thrown back in your face. (Woe to the man who does that with a woman!) And then women wonder why men are taciturn -- we love to play games, but we generally don't understand the rules for this one.

New to the American culture and have a question.
my question not on "how to win an american woman heart" but, how to end a relationship. how to make her let you go in peace.

fred flintstone>therapy could be very helpful in this regard

fred, thank you for your advice. i just returned from my therapist, and ... yes, now i see it !! - you are a man.
:)

darkseid>

yes, there are examples of women paying for sex. but not as many as men, far from this. and there is double standard for sex in society that lead to so many troubles, that i think it's problem no 1 in our world. some other guys here say - no, it's not so important - their opinion. so, if they like it - let them go on...

[QUOTE]Originally posted by American_Pharao
[i]New to the American culture and have a question.
my question not on "how to win an american woman heart" but, how to end a relationship. how to make her let you go in peace. [/i][/QUOTE]

Belching and farting a lot is a good start. DH

[i]"Belching and farting a lot is a good start. DH"[/i]

LOL! And they work even better when done in public. As does spitting on the sidewalk, going the grope on her best friend (or even worse, her sister) and wearing your jeans low enough to see the crack of your arse.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN
[i][i]"Belching and farting a lot is a good start. DH"[/i]

LOL! And they work even better when done in public. As does spitting on the sidewalk, going the grope on her best friend (or even worse, her sister) and wearing your jeans low enough to see the crack of your arse. [/i][/QUOTE]

And if none of THAT works, try cussing a lot more. I've gotten rid of a few that way.

Hello again folks.

I'm not as busy/travelled these days so I thought I'd stop back in.

I didn't go back and read all the past posts... there's a few too many. Glad to see the fat discussion is over.

Sorry to hear you still have no luck RN. Interesting to note that a hot chick with a brain still can't get a date (but sad for you). I wonder if it's because you live in the sticks (less potential "mates") or if you're trapped in the dateless neverland that seems common in the well to do countries. I'm curious: Do more women than men hit on you? (no reflection on yourself) I wonder if you're affected by the "She looks like too much work" syndrome. Personally, I won't hit on girls that look too good. Why? Because I know I'll constantly be on my toes fighting off other guys and trying to find ways to keep her happy. This may sound like a lack of confidence in myself, but really I don't need the aggravation. After all... love is only a lightswitch away.

Joe... your post a few back was right on the money. I have enjoyed great success when using the ideas you stated. My problem has always been in the consistency. If those are your words then you are indeed a wise man. If not... you should step away from the Cosmo mag.

On a personal note: I'm still dating the American girl from before. She's still in training when it comes to oral sex (I can't believe it's 2002 and this is still an issue), but she's become receptive to butt love... yay me!. I've been ridiculously lucky when it comes to BL... 50/50 at this point... don't know why. Lastly... it's off to Cuba in January. I fear that the embargo will end within 3 years. We all know that once the doors are opened, American missionaries will be all over the place like the plague on a rat. I want to experience Cuba before The Lord teaches them shame.

Fedup! Welcome back babe!! *kisses*

So glad to hear all is well with the girlfriend...nice to know that at least one of this sorry lot here (and sadly, I'm included in that bunch!) can still pick up! LOL

As much as I am grinning at the thought of being called a "hot chick with a brain" (thank you, THANK YOU!!!), it's not entirely true. I am your average jeans wearing, no makeup, girl-next-door. Other than my height, which I guess is a little offputting to shorter men, I am not the slightest bit intimidating. My problem seems to be that I'm TOO approachable, rather than being UNapproachable. I'm every man's best mate *groan*

Mind you...it is SOOOOO weird that you asked whether more chicks crack onto me! I had that exact conversation today at work!!! (I was propositioned by a woman this afternoon). YES, I get waaaay more chicks cracking onto me than men. And there has been a marked increase in the last 6 months or so. I have no idea why...any thoughts?

To the guy trying to dump his girl.

Do the exact opposite of what Joe said in his long post. Be inconsiderate, be late for appointments with her, scratch your crotch alot, pick your nose, scowl at children, complain about your rash "down there", etc...

Don't do the above if you're trying to put the move on a friend of hers. Then you need to be forthright and honest. Tell her that you feel there's no chemistry or magic in the relationship and you want to move on. American women are always planning for the future... it's a fatal flaw that forgives them for being constantly miserable in the present. Tell her you don't see a future with her and she will most likely back off.

Be warned that AW love to keep in touch with past boyfriends (soon to be you). The more understanding and pleasant you are during the breakup, the more likely she is to want to "keep in touch". If you never want to see/hear from her again then she needs to be disgusted with you.

Good luck...

Thanks for the welcome RN... *kisses* right back... long, hot, sloppy ones that slip ever lower... mmmmmm... that's the spot...

I can make some generalizations about you but please note that I don't have the best info about you (only what you write... not how you act) or the men of WA. My view is somewhat skewed for those reasons. However, men are men, and you don't seem to hold back your opinions, so here goes.

Guys want to hang out and drink beer with the gal who can slug back a six pack and still quote football stats. When it comes to dates, guys want a girl who is not a strong challenge to their masculinity. They want to be the ones who open doors, help you out when you need it, and provide a shoulder to cry on when you're down. Guys want to be the protector and the provider. Some sort of latent caveman yearnings I suppose. From what I gather, Aussie men are particularly masculine, making those yearnings even more pronounced. Enter you... beaten and battered (mentally and physically) by your ex you got up, brushed off the shite, and proved that you didn't need a man. Yes, yes, you say... "but a guy I'm hitting on can't tell that in 5 minutes"... No, but it's all in the attitude. Guys can see the tomboys just as fast as girls can see the desperate.

You're a counsellor, do you ask too many pointed or loaded questions? Guys hate being analysed. We all know women analyse everything, but we ignore that as part of dating. If it's obvious that you're making an analysis then we get squeamish.

Don't underestimate height. Short men are as obsessed with their height as they are with the size of their cocks. And let's face it... Tom Cruise looked ridiculous next to Nicole Kidman.

So why do the girls hit on you? They probably pick up on your strength and your free attitude toward sex. They probably also see that you're not likely to go all goo goo over them after the two of you spend some time between the sheets. I think lesbianism is a forbidden treat that many straight women are exploring (with strong pushing from modern media... to what end I still don't understand... men are so stupid sometimes) and they don't want to get caught up with a girl who's going to hang around when a boyfriend shows up.

Those are just my opinions... I had trepidations in writing this as I could be way off base... but I think I'm right.

One last thing:

The women I go for are brunette, slim (with not so curvy bodies), intelligent, small breasted (B cups are my favourite... a C is pushing it), confident, and who don't slap on gobs of face paint to go out. This sounds a lot like you. However, I can say without a doubt that I am in the minority. ALL my friends want a blond with big tits, not so keen mind, and a slightly vulnerable attitude.

Maybe you don't fit the mold.

A lot of men have the fear of rejection these days. American women are much more shallow these days than back in the fifties. American women are more independent and are more likely to reject men today than their past counterparts. Since more men are being rejected today than in the past, they fear the humiliation of being rejected by another girl. Some of these men never ask another girl again and end up withdrawing (Or even turning to homosexuality). This would have happened to me in college if I didn't take my first trip to Brazil. Back in college, I was fat and didn't exercise. EVERY American woman I asked out rejected me for those 4 years. It was outright miserable and I feel I wasted 4 years of my life being overweight. I stopped exercising for 4 years in college and concentrated too much on my school work and American women being as shallow as they are (with the exception of RN and a few others that love fat men), saw only the short fat Asian guy I was in college. When I went to Brazil in the summer of my junior year, I got my first "yes" since my breakup with my high school sweetheart (who joined a cult in college). It was in Rio when I spent that summer in Brazil. Not only was she more friendly than AW, but she was also better in bed. She also didn't mind that I was a bit obese. The point is that obese men and average men are a majority of men and they too are scared of approaching women. Also some physically fit guys who used to be fat are scared of approaching women. Then you have guys with one major flaw like being short like myself (I corrected the overweight problem but still suffer being only 5'5". A lot of guys in my situation are scared to death about approaching women because they still get their share of rejections from AW. A lot of these men never travelled out of the United States so there is no outlet to build their confidence. I was fortunate to have a friend take me to my first trip to Brazil (and out of the United States for that matter) to meet a NON-shallow woman so my confidence in asking even American women out is not shot like the men who had never had an acceptance in the US. (Yes, there are more men like this than you think! And they ask women that are not supermodels or even flabby women and get turned down.) I am not saying that ALL American women are mechanical machines that always turn down a guy or date them with alterior motives. Also you may have men of different races afraid to approach women because of society's pressure against dating outside the race. Now you only have a small handful of men remaining that are willing to approach you after sorting out men of the types I just described.
Women on the other hand are more comfortable than men in asking another woman out because they have the option of being a normal friend first then breaking through that "NO" barrier that they put up with men. Even if they get rejected at first, they are still "cool" with the woman they ask out and they can ask again later. Men on the other hand are labelled as "creeps" by the failed attempt or labelled as just a "friend" for life which leads to NO possibility of being accepted as a date. Only rarely can a guy labelled as a friend can be a date. A woman who is a "friend" can still have a chance at being a potential lesbain partner. This is unfortunate in American society. Maybe this is sparked by America's acceptance of lesbianism. In fact America places more shame in man-woman sex than on lesbianism on a woman. This alone repulses women from accepting too many men in their lives and that makes them much more choosy. Foreign women have less "shame" and would accept anyone they like because there is no societal pressure of being called a "****".

good stuff, fedup, and no, i've not looked at cosmo for at least a decade, so all that stuff comes either from listening to women in my family or who i know, or, in the case of the romance novels, from the fact that i'm someone who's taught writing at various points, so i can do textual analysis. as far as consistency -- i think the trick is to be consistently inconsistent, as long as some part of the aspects i mentioned are going on, since a healthy portion of mystery always seems good in the equation. you want her to figure out, figure out that she's not figured you out, and figure you out over and over again. hell, that approach works for her :d

only problem with the prescription on how to get rid of a girl is you're presuming the behavior you describe isn't there already lol -- women sometimes do have an amazing ability to put up with the most obnoxious behavior imaginable and be completely revulsed by it as well, depending on their emotional orientation toward a guy.

i think your comments toward rn about men and dominance/protection are right on. women "need to be needed" and so do men, just in somewhat different ways. and rn, i'm sorry, but as adept as you may be with a mug and a pool cue, i seriously doubt you're able to completely camouflage your brain, especially as i believe you've said in the past (and one would have to suspect lol) that you also at times "have a mouth on you." let's see: tall confident chick with a lip and the ability to more than hold her own with her brain = high potential to be handed one's danglies either figuratively or literally. tack on a couple of kids for good measure, and a job that says you probably know more about sex that he does, too. you're just gonna have to keep a sharp eye out for someone who dearly wants both an equal and a challenge, and who's confident enough in his ability to handle those things that he doesn't feel he needs control. that's as tough to find as the natural blonde with big tor****es who fits the rest of fedup's description...

as far as women being attacted to you, hmm, do you think the tomboy thing is also translating as butch? :) :o :d

I thought Rubbie said she was 5 foot 7 and blond. 5 foot 7 is not that tall. I am 5 foot 7 or maybe just a bit more and I like tall women (and short women and medium sized women). I have no problem approaching them. I just say I want to go up on them.

And I don't want a woman with big tits, and I know a lot of people who feel the same way. But FU is in his twenties and so are probably most of his friends/mates. His friends may not have learned the lesson that those of us in our 40s like me and JZ know: Gravity takes its toll! But even when I was younger I wasn't that into big tits (not that they are necessarily a minus if young and firm).

Now it is true that a lot of men prefer blonds, but I don't. I prefer brunettes. I had my Spanish class again last night and I think the Brazilian gal likes me because she has moved from the other side of the room to sit next to me. On the other hand it could be because I am the best student in the class and she is eager to learn. She has long jet black hair, blue eyes, fairly dark skin but a few freckles, perfect teeth (a big turn on for me) and is very slender. Height wise maybe 5 foot 4, a dazzling smile, and sticks her tongue out when she makes jokes.

But the point is that she is rapidly making herself unpopular with the other women (I am the only single guy in the class and it's about 5 to 1 women) because she is forthright, obviously sexual, and not at all shy. It sounds like that would make DS (Darkseid) run for the hills. Why is that? Is this the Rubber Nursey syndrome too? Could FU be correct in his Can-Am perspective?

So while not liking the JZ theory of being predictably unpredictable (I am a pragmatist and not much of fan of mystery, plus this smacks to me of old-fashioned coquettery), my inescapable conclusion is ...

RN needs to get the fuck out of the bumfuck section of Australia and go someplace more liberal, enlightened, tolerant, etc. Light a candle, don't curse the darkness. Your kids will adjust. Why does someone with a socially liberal perspective want to live and raise kids around a bunch of tight asses?

Did I say predictably unpredictable? I meant unpredictably predictable :) And it's not about coquetry, it's about springing irregular pleasant surprises -- which, in a relationship, is a [i]completely[/i] pragmatic approach. But I agree completely with your perspectives on gravity and blondes, and most especially the last statement -- why stay somewhere that's not working for you when you know of others that might be a better fit?

It's just been my experience that my irregular pleasant surprises are met with regular unpleasant surprises. Maybe that's because I am a

Dickhead

Wow...I hope you boys realise that all this "hot chick with a brain" stuff is swelling my head to grand proportions! ;) You know, I said this before a long time ago, and I'll say it again...never in my life have I had so many men give me compliments on my (real or imagined!) intelligence, as I have on this board. And to think that this is a forum for men looking to f*ck easy women!! LOL

Ok, Dickhead...I'm 5'9" tall (6' in heels) and depending on the amount of sun I get, I have either red or dark auburn hair. You probably heard me say at one time that I WISHED I was 5'7" and blonde! LOL

Fedup...did we know each other in a past life or something?? Your physical description of me was dead on. Don't ever worry about holding back with me...I'm not easily offended :) Maybe I AM a threat to their masculinity...I'm not too sure. I freely admit that I am a tomboy, but I have to say in my defence that I'm certainly not butch. And I can NOT do the airheaded bimbo act with any real success, but I CAN flirt like a girl *grin* And believe it or not, I am actually quite shy when I'm around strangers or large groups of people. Which is probably part of the problem really...the people I feel comfortable with are the people I can relax and be myself with (read: the yobbos at the pool table laughing and singing along with the jukebox), so they are the people I gravitate towards when I'm out. But these are the guys that are not attracted to me! The guys who WOULD be attracted to me are up the other end of the bar discussing poetry and politics, and I'm too unsure of myself to go near them! LOL As for over-analysing men, I am too scared to even ask them what sort of work they do, let alone ask any loaded questions! Put me in a group of men that I feel comfortable with and I can be sassy and smart and give as good as I get. But put me in front of someone I am attracted to (or feel inferior to) and I become a bumbling idiot!

And why are more girls are approaching me now than before?
Stuff analysing it...I'm just gonna start taking advantage of it!! LOL

Joe,

I hadn't really thought about the impact of my job...hmmm. Truth be known, I usually say I am in "community services" when asked about my occupation, and I don't elaborate too much on it if I can avoid it. Too many questions to be answered otherwise. [i] "You're just gonna have to keep a sharp eye out for someone who dearly wants both an equal and a challenge.."[/i] Ohhh I live in hope. :)

And Joe and Dickhead,

I am an activist at heart. In the last few years, I have decided that my entire purpose in life is to give a voice to the marginalised and defend the weak. I love to fight and I relish a challenge. What would I do with myself if I moved to a place where everyone agreed with me??

Oh, and re: Dickhead's Brazilian girl who all the woman hate. I've said it before here, but I think it deserves repeating...women are a woman's worst enemy. Men should remember (not you in particular Dickhead) that most women will try to impress other women BEFORE they try to impress a man.

I'll give you a tip...never approach a woman in a club if she is with other women. She won't want to look "easy" or she may be concerned that her girlfriends won't like the look of you, so she'll probably turn you down. Same goes for if you want her to behave like a bimbo or a sex goddess...other women hate that and we know it, so we won't do it in front of other girls. Always try to get us alone. :)

>What would I do with myself if I moved to a place where everyone agreed with me??

Umm, be happy and get laid a lot? :D

I'm also an activist, and the truth is that there are a wide variety of levels on which one can be effective, not always tied directly to geography. (And I'd personally like to know about that place where everyone agrees with me and there are no weak and marginalized, as I'll pack my bags tomorrow!) Having highly motivated and effective activists running around being personally miserable and occasionally despairing because of a lack of personal support and fraternity is not a prescription for effective social change; it's one for burn-out and cynicism.

But this is where I belong. I "fit" here... Regardless of whether or not I'm getting laid, I wouldn't be happy anywhere else. Millions of people flock here every year from all around the world...surely they must be onto something. :)

And it's not my hobbies that made me cynical...it's not being blonde and busty that did it!! LOL

5 foot 9? OK, I'll get a ladder. Leave the heels at home. But I would rather have a redhead than a blond any day, especially a green eyed red head. Got green eyes? That shit drives me WILD.

But I don't think my Brazilian gal is trying to impress anybody. I think she is just being herself. The American women in there are OK and not too stuck up, but they have no flair, no style, no panache, no joie de vivre. And of course, most of them are dare I say it? FAT. Come to think of it, out of about 12 AWs in there, only one is not overweight. But I think we've covered that subject before if I remember correctly :)

I agree with what JZ said about burnout. I'm sure Perth is a lovely city but the world is very large. I really feel that you would be a more effective activist if you broadened your horizons a bit. I frequently accuse you of having a first world point of view, and plus I think that you would find that some of the stuff guys say in here, with which you don't agree, is in fact true but just doesn't apply to RN in her current stultifying, albeit bucolic, environs.

PS: I have red hair too if you would like to start a large red ghetto.

you know rn, there's an old saying that goes like this: "it's a nice place to visit... but i wouldn't want to live there". millions of lemmings jump off cliffs each year as well.

i can see your reluctance to leave though. if you grew up there, and have friends there, it's hard to leave one place for another. i'm still struggling with this issue myself. i don't see location as being the big problem anyway. you may leave the town behind but you can't leave yourself.

as for your dating dilemma, mine is pretty much the same. i have always had my own circle of friends who i feel comfortable with and have no real desire to leave. however it does me no good as there isn't a girl in the group who i'd care to date (and vis versa). large groups also make me uncomfortable... i was never a party animal and i don't enjoy fighting to be heard (inner pacifist i guess). we both seem to have the problem of being unable to break out of this comfort zone and head for the unknown. i too, turn into a babbling nincompoop when faced with a girl i find attractive. everyone has their own insecurities i suppose, but it's interesting to hear that someone like yourself has the same problems. the answer is simple really, either go approach the guys talking politics (and perhaps get laid), or stay with the yobbos (and don't get laid) you feel comfortable with. being shy is a curse.

dickhead... any plans for the brazilian girl? to bad there aren't more like her around. it's likely that the constant derision that she faces from other women in this country will eventually turn her into a cynical prude. better jump her while you can (or perhaps send her my way :)

darkseid... you face the same self confidence issues that many am have. i relate it to what george carlin called the "pussification" of the american male. in our society it's not very hard to understand where this lack of self confidence came from.

For the record, I DO agree with most of what is said in this section. All the stories of money-hungry, materialistic, vain (or overweight) women ring very true to me, and it's stuff that I have witnessed many times before. The only thing I don't agree with is that ALL women are that way...and surely even the grumpiest of you guys would agree with that! *grin*

And wanting to see the world is all fine and dandy, but I don't have the time or the money (and I never will at the rate I'm going!), and there are other things keeping me here at the moment that are kinda out of my control. I would love to travel, and have every intention of doing so one day soon, but right now it's impossible. And leaving the state or the country on a permanent basis is not legally possible for me, due to Family Court restrictions. (Fancy that...a WOMAN who got screwed by the Family Court! Well, I never...)

PS...my eyes are hazel, but there's a little more green in them than brown, and they turn green when I wear certain colours. You're not the only one with Celtic ancestory. :)

"...and they turn green when I wear certain colours. You're not the only one with Celtic ancestory"

Or maybe it's the chameleon ancestry ;)

As our friend CBGB would put it: RN go to Europe...

Seriously, talking as somebody that left his country many times to live in others I can see RN point.
Wherever you go there is always a barrier (which in my case is also a language barrier but that is mainly cultural) that will prevent you to be 100% effective as you would be in the place where you were born and raised.
Also I add that it would matter more to me to make a difference in my home town and country rather than improving the living conditions of pandas in China. With this I don't want to say that I don't care about others, I am sure you guys are getting my point.

Also I was thinking the other day that I really value the opinion of a lot of the guys writing here and I find it kind of limiting the fact that whatever we write has to be somehow related to sex, prostitution, etc.
I know this are the subjects of these forums but anyway if one day I want to discuss other issues such as Iraq, politics, etc., please be aware that in my questions I am gonna drop here and there some references to american women, prostitution being not moral, etc. just to be in line with the forum purposes.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Fedup[i]
Dickhead... Any plans for the Brazilian girl? To bad there aren't more like her around. It's likely that the constant derision that she faces from other women in this country will eventually turn her into a cynical prude. Better jump her while you can (or perhaps send her my way :) [/i][/QUOTE]

married married married

must ... not ... think ... about ... it

OK, I will lay off after this BUT

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN
"[i]And wanting to see the world is all fine and dandy, but I don't have the time or the money"

Don't you have a "portable source of income"? :<)

"And leaving the state or the country on a permanent basis is not legally possible for me, due to Family Court restrictions. (Fancy that...a WOMAN who got screwed by the Family Court! Well, I never...)"

Emphasis on LEGALLY possible. Maybe that is why I enjoy travelling to virtually lawless places such as Bolivia, and places such as Méjico where there are many laws but few are taken seriously most of the time.

"PS...my eyes are hazel, but there's a little more green in them than brown, and they turn green when I wear certain colours. You're not the only one with Celtic ancestory. :) [/i][/QUOTE]"

What color do they turn when you are wearing NOTHING??? That's what's running through my mind right now (and rapidly moving south).

Two types of people in the world: those who are Irish and those who wish they were! DH

[i]"Emphasis on LEGALLY possible. Maybe that is why I enjoy travelling to virtually lawless places such as Bolivia, and places such as Méjico where there are many laws but few are taken seriously most of the time."[/i]

Unfortunately, Australia is NOT a lawless country, and thanks to the laws in place, I can't get a passport for my children. It's that simple. *I* can travel whenever I like (or whenever I can get the cash), but my kids can't come with me until the youngest turns 16. I would rather spend the rest of my days in this city than be apart from my children for any real length of time.

That said, I am planning to come to the US for two weeks in the middle of next year. Don't know how successful I'll be yet, but I'm gonna be trying my hardest to make it happen :) One day I am going to go to Wales and Ireland too. Ok, I'm laying off this too now...

Stranger99,
I totally agree. It would be nice to have a "General Bullshit" type section where all of us who are "mates" on this site could chat about unrelated matters. The only problem I could see would be the morons who would undoubtedly gatecrash and stir trouble, seeing as there would be no established guidelines as to what they could speak about. I've always found that this section and the Morality section tend to go off topic quite regularly, and nobody gives too much of a damn. Maybe you could just end every political rant you make with, "And by the way, I saw a cute hooker on the corner of Hyde and Lake...." or "PS. My Mum is an American Woman". LOL

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN
I would rather spend the rest of my days in this city than be apart from my children for any real length of time.
[/i][/QUOTE]

That is commendable. DH

Well, RN, I don't think you need a passport to be elsewhere in OZ, though, right? And presumably you could bring your kids along in that event as well. Given how you've described WA relevant to the rest of the country, that would seem a more serious option.

For what it's worth, I didn't do any real travelling until I was past your age and have since seriously made up for lost time, so it's not like there's some kind of prescription on how it needs to happen.

Though the last thing we need is for you to move to the states, get fat, and cop an American attitude... (a lame attempt at topic relevance. :))

She said she couldn't leave the state with the kids. While WA is the biggest state in OZ, there ain't a hell of a lot there besides Perth.

I am getting p....d off by the technicalities of this forum (yes I am computer literate).

Having logged in, gotten a "welcome" message and all I wrote a very lenghty, highly interesting and whatever reply to RN in the "morality" section.

Then it happens again as almost every time before after this "registering" thingy was introduced - I click the "submit message" button and get - guess what - "you are not logged in"!!!!!! (Connection was never broken during the 20 minutes it all took). Happens every time except my only post yesterday.

Guess what if I try to "re-log" in...... either a repeated "you are not logged in" or a "welcome" - in the last case the the nobel prize winner of literature post I put together is no longer recoverable or is placed "before" my logging-in.

Grrrrrr.

DH -- yeah, but that restriction is more likely to be able to be changed than is the passport one, as the level of feared flight isn't as great. Admittedly, it would still take some effort if you want to be legal about it, but it's a far more surmountable obstacle. While there's nothing else in WA, a move to, say, Adelaide or Melbourne isn't as huge as ending in the US ro elsewhere.

Traveller -- I've had success when I've had problems by going into the control panel and disabling cookies for browsing and, at times, for login. The former seems to be more consistent in my experience.

Traveller,

Happens to me too babe. It happens considerably less since the server change for some unknown reason, but it still happens pretty often. What I do is log in, write the message, highlight the message, right click and copy, then press submit. If it goes through, great. If it doesn't, I go straight back to the main page, log in again and paste the message in again. I've got into the habit of copying every message I write, so I haven't lost any in a long time.

Joe,

I have an order that says I am not allowed to move outside a 500 kilometre radius from my ex-husband's home. Considering he lives on the coast, it means I can only move 500 ks east! Yes it is ridiculous, but that's the position a hell of a lot of single Mums here find themselves in. There has been a lot of discussion in the media about it...especially after a WA woman was forced to leave her new job in Queensland and return to WA last year...but nothing ever seems to be done about it. According to the Family Court, the "best interests of the child" have precedence over the best interests of the mother. Unfortunately, the court believes it's in the child's best interest to be close to both parents. (Regardless of whether or not the dipshit is paying child support!) I can't see why the courts don't force the EX to move if he wants to be near the kids, rather than preventing the woman from moving. Anyway, that's totally off-topic, and I'm gonna quit with the travel thing now...

As for MY feeble attempt to get back on subject :) ...Fedup said he was too shy to approach women. I said I was too shy to approach men. How many of you suffer from the same problem? How much chance do we all have of getting laid, if you are waiting for us to make the move and we are waiting for you to do it?!

RN - I hear your frustration and can understand it especially if he is not paying child support.

I am the ex-husband who faithfully paid child support and even sent extra when I had it. I would move to where the kids were and she would pack up and move and I am not talking small distances - Moved to Texas from the East Coast and she moved to Michigan - moved to Michigan and she moved to Kansas. I could not keep a job and keep moving.

One time she moved in a local area and did not get the check on-time - The Postal Service held it and I thought she had it - She had my wages garnished because she failed to tell me she moved. Made me look bad in the eyes of my employer - but she failed to let him know it was her mistake - and she wound up with two checks when her mail caught up to her.

Sorry - but wanted to put in my side - I know mine is unusual but I am sure situations like mine influence the court - even if it is not always right.

RandyOne,

I really feel for you babe. Please don't get me wrong...I do understand that these things can work out badly for BOTH parties, and it's almost impossible to be able to keep everyone happy all of the time. When a couple divorce and want to go their separate ways, it means that at least one of them is probably gonna get the raw end of the deal. My real complaint is that here it is always the woman who is tied down, and I don't feel that's fair. Especially when the ex isn't even paying child support. But I do know a lot of MEN who have been totally screwed over by their partners as well, and I feel just as much frustration for them as I do for my own situation.

I have to add...it's so nice to hear from a man who accepts his responsibilities to his children regardless of the behaviour of their mother. So often the children are punished by sparring parents and child support or visitation is withheld out of spite. You are a good man, RandyOne. And your children will realise that and thank you for it in the long run. :)

RandyOne -- I know of a couple guys with similar stories. Lots more. of course, who simply don't pay or bother with staying in touch.

Here's another unusual one -- a friend of mine just had his child support end because the kid came of age. This child was the result of a one night stand, and my pal paid on time, every time for eighteen years without a single complaint. At the request of the mother, he really didn't have any contact except when the kid asked for it, and he frequently sent extra money. His attitude, which is part of the reason he's stayed my friend for decades, was that how the kid came to be wasn't something the kid should have to pay for, and that he was brought up to live up to his responsibilities, so this was no big deal.

RN -- I do know what you mean about the absurdity of those kinds of things. My sister lost custody of her daughter to her ex because the judge disliked the fact that she was working in a convenience store and said if she had custody she'd raise her daughter Catholic (her ex was Baptist, as was the judge.) She was forbidden from taking the daughter to see her grandmother for a decade because ex-hubby was convinced she'd leave the state and never return.

One of the primary reasons that marriage sucks is because divorce sucks. However, I had a simple operation that made a vas deferens in my bargaining position. What was funny was the first gal I dated after I got divorced got pregnant (by someone else, obviously) and tried to sue me for paternity. I let her waste her money on a lawyer and then brought the medical records and a recent zero sperm count into court. Hell, I told I was sure it wasn't mine, I just didn't tell her WHY I was sure, and she denied sleeping with someone else. I guess it was an immaculate conception.

RN said "How much chance do we all have of getting laid, if you are waiting for us to make the move and we are waiting for you to do it?!"

ummm... I think you have your answer already

So here's what I think (we all knew it was coming). With women's strides to become equal in most facets of life they have gained more power, and the women don't know what to do with that power. Women have always had veto over who they'll date and ultimately fuck. The problem is that women still expect men to be chivalrous, make the first move, etc. This approach doesn't work anymore: Women wanted the power, got it, and now they don't use it. If women have achieved all this equality then why aren't they asking guys out? Maybe the girls should be driving to MY house and picking ME up. There's no clear leader in dating anymore, and we all know what happens when an army has no leader... chaos. By declawing Western men we have eliminated the alpha male and left the army without a head.

That's my rant for today... tune in tomorrow for another one.

Oh... If you all were wondering what happened to the whiners, they've taken over the "best girls for LTR board".

RN... If your ex doesn't pay support, and doesn't really care about the kids, then why can't you have the judge declare him as having abandoned them and rescind the travel ban? Besides, what happens if you win a contest for a trip to the Great Barrier Reef and the kids can't go?. That hurts them as they are unable to travel, see new sights, and learn about the world. Not only has this judge taken away your freedom, he has taken it from the children as well. Perhaps the court needs to be reminded of this.

The corrolary to your excellent point, FedUp, is that men also don't know what to do with women having power. This thread, when it's not focused on physical details, is often an illustration of that fact. And the other problem is that guys truly do get mixed signals on being chivalrous, etc. I've opened and held doors for people behind me all my life, and offered to carry things, for both male and female, regardless of age, as I was taught it was simple politeness. Although things have thankfully lightened up somewhat in the past couple of years, I still get far worse response to those acts by a certain percentage of women (primarily, I might add, those in whom I'd have absolutely no interest.) But let's face it, society at large and this board as well defines women as targets, and they often are exactly that for unwanted attention (something men have less problem with, though far from totally -- and I could tell some stories on that) as well as violence, so some degree of hostility/standoffishness is understandable.

I think alpha males still do fine -- it's those who aren't necessarily the leaders of the pack who are having real trouble as they've been told they can't follow that alpha example anymore, and there's not a model that satisfactorily replaces that one for all concerned at this point.

Joe,

re: What you said about getting a bad response from women when you hold the door open for them, etc...

It's not like that here. I read your statement and really thought about it, and it just doesn't ring true at all for my city. People here, male or female, hold doors open for each other and help with heavy boxes in the carpark and give way to each other (voluntarily) in peak hour traffic. When somone breaks down in the middle of the road, five strangers jump out of their cars to help push it out of the way. If you trip over in public, someone will help you up and ask if you're ok.

What I'm getting at is...is it really a matter of chivalry being frowned on, or is it that Americans have come to a point where they just don't interact with each other any more? One of the things that Aussies who have been to big cities in the US always comment on, is that "Americans can't/don't look each other in the eye". I was just wondering whether maybe the empowerment of women and the changing gender roles have less to do with it, than the overall attitude Americans apparently have to being "intimate" with strangers. Do women actually get SCARED when a stranger holds the door open for her, thinking that perhaps he has some ulterior motive? Are men afraid that if another guy helps him with a heavy box, that he just may run off with it?

Please don't take this comment as an insult...I realise I'm making gross generalisations on a country I have never even been to, but what do you think? Is it chivalry that you've lost, or is it human contact in general?

a few days ago, i was approaching a newpaper vending machine, at angle, while a woman was approaching at an opposite angle at about the same speed. as i got a few feet from the machine, and she was the same few feet from the machine, i gestured towards the machine and said, "ladies first."

"what's that got to do with it?" she snarled, with a real nasty look on her face.

i should have said, "i'm sorry, i meant cunts first," but i didn't. i don't think fear of being robbed is what's going through some women's minds when i hold doors open for them. i think it is the whole equality thing.

if the same situation arises again, though, i'll do the same thing. i do agree that aussies are much friendlier and politer than the average american, in my experience.

You know, Dickhead, that really pisses me off. Those women are totally f*cking things up for the rest of us. I could be wrong...because I was born well after the the bra burning days...but I honestly don't think that's what our "foremothers" had in mind when they demanded equality.

I always thought the fight for equality was about human and civil rights. The right to vote, the right to work outside the home, the right to equal pay for equal work. If I don't get the job it should be because I was not capable, not because I was not male. I should be allowed to manage my own money within a marriage. All the civil liberties that the white male took for granted should be mine as well. But I do NOT want to BE a man. Which idiot decided that ladies didn't want to be called ladies any more? The same idiot that told men to stop opening doors for women?

I'm not sure who to blame for this really...the feminazi man-haters or the men themselves. Yes, I have heard women say that they are offended by being called "girls" and that consider a man offering his assistance to be patronising. BUT, I have also heard men say "If she wants equality in the workplace, then she can ask me out/pay for dinner/buy me gifts"...what does that have to do with equality in the workplace? Women have gone on a power trip and started milking feminism for all it's worth, and men have got bitter and twisted and started using feminism against us.

Personally, I love it when a man says "ladies first". I don't expect it or demand it of course, but it's sweet to hear it. Would the woman at the newspaper vending machine preffered you to have said "Back off b*tch...I was here first"? There are women like me all over the world wanting to meet one of yesterday's "true gentlemen', and it's women like her that are turning them into assholes.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RN: [i]" Which idiot decided that ladies didn't want to be called ladies any more? The same idiot that told men to stop opening doors for women? "

Yeah, pretty sure it was the same idiot. DH

"Yes, I have heard women say that they are offended by being called "girls' "

I never, ever do that. You do, though. And if you do, wouldn't that encourage others to do so to? DH

"BUT, I have also heard men say "If she wants equality in the workplace, then she can ask me out/pay for dinner/buy me gifts"...what does that have to do with equality in the workplace?"

Well, nothing, but it still sounds like a good idea to me. :) DH

"Women have gone on a power trip and started milking feminism for all it's worth, and men have got bitter and twisted and started using feminism against us."

Agree. DH

"There are women like me all over the world wanting to meet one of yesterday's "true gentlemen', and it's women like her that are turning them into assholes."

YESTERDAY'S???!!? :( DH

Plus also too additionally besides, how's come every time I'm in a relationship I spend way MORE on her Christmas/birthday/anniversary/just to surprise you gift than she EVER spends on mine? Even the relationships where I make the same or even LESS than she does? Not that I'm an extravagant gift giver, either.

Partially answering my own question: none of the women I've been in relationships have been able to handle money. But that is no excuse. They could learn, same as I did.

LOL!! Sorry babe...perhaps I should say, the gentlemen who yesterday were appreciated but today are frowned upon. Forgive me?? ;)

As for me calling women "girls"... I am getting all too close to being thirty years old. I LOVE still being called a girl! Think I'm gonna shag a guy who calls me Ma'am?? LOL (Unless it's said in a long, slow Southern drawl of course. Mmmmm.) Women who find the word girl patronising are just looking for any old excuse to argue, if you ask me. 'Spose it depends on how you say it though. If you said I couldn't do something "because you're just a girl" you would have to duck flying objects...

There's a tip to successful gift giving, that should save you a shitload of money as well. (Granted, this will not work on shallow, materialistic women, but if she's that bad...why are you with the selfish cow anyway???) The tip is...forethought.

Sure, we all like expensive shiny things, but to me those type of gifts say that you're rich...not that you necessarily love me. What would be better than getting a brand new BMW for my birthday?
* Taking me for a picnic lunch in the park, at the exact spot where we met five years ago
* Getting the DVD of the movie that was playing at the drive-in in '88, that we missed 'coz we were shagging in the back seat
* Organising a babysitter, running a bath and lighting candles, and surprising me with a night alone together when I get home from work
* ANYTHING that tells me that our time together means as much to you as it does to me.

That sort of thing just melts my cold little feminist heart. :)

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but you still have to spend more than $10 on my birthday present.

What...like free sex isn't enough for you?? *cheeky grin*

Although I do think that in the larger cities Americans can be more distant and have less interpersonal contact, I think in many ways that's a byproduct of cities. I see it less as I move out of the larger places. The bottom line is that I don't get the same negative reaction from men if I hold a door, or the elderly, or kids. Generally, I get warm thanks, occasionally a bit of conversation or banter, either of which is a welcome payoff for a slight act and which helps the day go by more pleasantly. But an unfortunately high percentage of women come up with the same reaction Dickhead describes -- and I'd hazard that every American male has felt the sting of having their polite gesture rebuffed at one point or another. If politeness is not either returned or accepted it will eventually cease to exist, and what does [i]that[/i] have to do with equality? And let me be clear that I'm not making a blanket statement -- this is not nearly half of women who have this reaction, but it's still a significant enough percentage that it's a trend as opposed to a series of isolated incidents.

No disagreement on your gift approach from me, RN, as it generally matches my approach, but I also know guys who have been called cheap bastards by their girlfriends for doing exactly those kinds of things as opposed to coughing up an expensive bauble that can be shown off.

the rudeness from women is most likely from the mistrust that they learn from living in a big city environment. there are more reported crimes in big cities than in little suburbab townships because of the bigger media influence in the cities. women are told to trust no one and they all believe that men are after them for just sex and that men hope to be polite to them to get into their pants. the media is influenced by feminism and prudity in many ways. the media never shows good things happening when a man holds the doors but they show all crimes in which a courteous gesture has an alterior motive like a man holding the door and then pulling a knife and [url=http://isgprohibitedwords.info?CodeWord=CodeWord125][CodeWord125][/url] the woman in the rooftop of that apartment building.
the rise of feminism is also another factor. feminism always stresses the historical abuse of men to the women. it is like blacks hating whites today because they haven't forgiven them for slavery. in the same way, feminist nazis stress unforgiveness to men and therefore to hate men and take advantage of the laws that favor women today. these same unforgiving, spiteful feminist nazis are the ones that snicker at you for being courteous. they also think that by a man being courteous to them is offensive and that the man thinks they cannot help themselves. this is their interpretation of courtesy. if that is the case then let the door go and make them catch the door so they can push it open themselves. this will make them a lot happier.

Sex is never free for a man RN!

There is some bullshit out here on this opinions board. Let me say this...after living in Los Angeles for most of my adult life: women in this town are bitches, plain and simple. I finally have a girlfriend without the attitude, or the belief that men owe her something (mostly money). They feel you should treat them like a princess, and i don't mind doing that, but they should not EXPECT it! It should be a welcome courtesy from a man who cares about them.

I don't care WHY they do it, it's a plain and simple fact that many of them do and that is sad. I have had hard bumps on my own life, but that didn't make me a cynical bastard.

By the way, my girlfriend (the one without the attitude) is a foreigner. This says something about American women, at least the ones in LA.

Blobster, the women in New York are East coast versions of LA bitches. They too expect their men to treat them like princesses, and if you can't meet their expectations like buy them jewelry and clothes or they will dump you. This means you must spend your entire paycheck to please them or you must be rich. I am middle class and I complain if they spend more than half my paychecks on their clothes. I had an ex-girlfriend that dumped me because I couldn't buy her more shoes even after I already bought her some (and the sex wasn't even that good either). She thought that sex was a way to repay me for the shoes. This is why i became more choosy with American women. Yes, I ask them out and date them only because I am stuck in America but I also ditch them as soon as they ask for something expensive and complain when I refuse to buy it. Yes, I would buy that for her birthday or anniversary, which is reasonable but some women ask me to buy something expensive the moment they lay eyes on it. New York women tend to be impulsive shoppers. Some of them hold high positions and make more than I do but are poor because they spend anything they get on clothes or jewelry. Then they try to hook up with a guy and spend their money.

Hey, all you guys in Cali listen to Tom Lekis 97.1 FM!3pm to 7pm mon - fri!

My personal Advice :

** FORGET ** American Women !!

Go to an ASIAN MASSAGE PARLOR if you want a woman

who'll treat you Right !!


P.S. i *know* what i'm talking about ...

.... i'm *married* to an American Woman !!!

Hi RN,

I was out with a group of friends (male and female) and along with the alcohol, the topic somehow turned to masturbation. Don't ask me how???

Here in the US, studies such as the Kinsey report and other legitimate academic researchers have found that approximately 94% of men masturbate (one author said the other 6% were probably liars). Ok, sounds about right.

When the isssue of FEMALE masturbation came up, matters became sort of tense if not deadly. I didn't say a word. My date already hates me I think.

Well, to your knowledge as a professional, what are the characteristics of female mastrubation? It's an unkown and pretty much a taboo subject here in the states - I think? I mean, like how often do women mastrubate? Do Oz women have all kinds of "medievil" hang-ups about it like women in the states? Is it a normal phase of human development and growth? Is it frowned upon in Oz culture? Is it looked upon as healthy and appropriate?

I guess, I'm asking what do you know about this topic? I certainly learned nothing on Saturday night. The women went from jolly to deadly serious when the subject turned to females. Also, if any of guys out there have any data or research we'd like to hear it.

Thanks.

94% of all men admit to masturbating and 6% are liars, whereas 6% of all women admit to masturbating and 94% are liars.

In most studies women admit to masturbating about a third less than men, with, for example, 62% fessing up in Kinsey. It should be noted that Kinsey asked how many [i]had or did[/i] masturbate, so that number looks at "ever" -- other studies have looked at things such as frequency and most recent experience. Various studies have the numbers for both sexes pegged at different levels, but women tend to be lower in percentage across the board. Many researchers say this is because a) women have traditionally been seen as serving their mates as opposed to pursuing their own sexual gratification, b) women who do think of themselves as sexual beings are negatively labelled, and, perhaps most pertinent to your experience, c) there is also more of a taboo about talking about it among women. Some researchers, for what it's worth, (such as in the book "Human Autoerotic Practices") are reporting that the percentages among women are on a definite rise.

My favorite little sex stat (ok, all, measure yourself by this ruler LOL) is that the typical person spends about 600 hours having sex between the ages of 20 and 70. Now, I'm sure this is a board of overachievers, but I'm not sure whether it's amusing or awful to think that for as much time spent in our culture and our lives around all things sexual, the average person will spend less than a month of his or her life actually getting it on... If you consider the average guy is supposed to last about 6 minutes, then that means having sex 6000 times, or, on average ten times a month during that span. Of course, if that stat takes in foreplay (say, 15 minutes or so, to be conservative) and/or masturbation then it's a considerably sadder and lonelier landscape out there, and one that explains the plaints so often heard here.

So if 96% of men admit masturbating per Kinsey, then a third FEWER of that would be 64%. That means that (100- 64) / (100 - 96) or 9 times as many women are liars as compared to men.

Six minutes? You gotta be kidding me. Get a blow up doll. Yeah, yeah, I read Kinsey too in my misspent youth. Now Masters was fucking Johnson throughout the course of their research so I feel it was probably superior research.

Hell, OF COURSE it was "superior research." He was getting paid while getting laid. That is the DEFINITION of superior research.

Did you hear about the Irish guy who got laid three times on his honeymoon? In, out, and in.

Yeah, well the six minutes thing comes from some other sources, but it's not far from what Kinsey and M&J had to say.

Interesting statistics. I guess Kinsey wore a watch while having sex with a blowup doll and ejaculated after 6 minutes. These statisticians are geeks and I doubt they can actually get a real woman to time fuck unless they paid a prostitute to be the test subject.

I feel If you just be yourself someone will notice it. When you are a gentleman even if she is nasty it will be in her mind. She may think about it later and think to herself this guy was just being nice. Plant the seed and everything else will follow. Did you really lose anything by her nasty attitude? All you did is is find she isn't the kind of person you want anyway. Often we don't do anything that helps us right away but the next person that comes. When you screw over a women you make it harder for the next person. This holds true in any country. I have lived in Asia 10yrs and found this to be true. Orginally from New York I got a clear cross section of different women.

Ohhhh Powerman...I think I just found myself a new hero! Well said, babe. :)

Paddy,
Haven't looked in this section for ages, so I just noticed your question. I'll write back to you a bit later on when I have more time (read: not at work!)

Re: The six minute theory...
Yet again I will probably be unpopular for saying this (what's new), but I am in total agreement with the six minute estimate. Actually, I would perhaps even put it at a little shorter...maybe 3 - 5 minutes. Certainly there are men who are a lot quicker than that, and there are men with more stamina than an Eveready battery...but in my experience the "average" man would definitely not go past six minutes. In fact, one of the first techniques a hooker has to master, is how to STOP a man from reaching orgasm! It's really quite difficult to fill up a one hour booking when the actual sex act only lasts for five minutes.

Or then again...maybe I'm just good in bed??? LOL :)

I think the average man would climax more quickly with a prostitute than with a non-prostitute for a number of reasons:

1) Time is money
2) Many prostitutes want to rush you
3) Pimps knocking on the door or apprehension of same
4) No reason to try to impress
5) Suboptimal environment you don't want to hang around in
6) Overly frustrated or "backed up" which is why you sought the hooker in the first place
7) Condoms make it more difficult to maintain an erection so you are unwilling to take the risk of "slowing down"
8) Passive aggressive attitude towards the sex worker, leading to a concept of treating her as a handy, convenient, efficient receptacle
9) Fear of law enforcement and risk directly proportional to time spent

Having said all that: Five minutes? Get a clue.

Well yes, pretty much all of that makes sense to me. :) But I wasn't just talking about clients...I have (ok, HAD) a sexlife outside of prostitution as well. And I stand by my original observation...the "average" time, from point of entry to point of ejeculation, (excluding foreplay, etc) is not usually very long at all. Mind you, I've had men who have gone on so long that I've started noticing cracks in the ceiling, too! LOL Five or six minutes is really a very long time though...longer than it sounds. When you consider how many thrusts you can manage in that time...

And it wasn't a criticism...just an observation.

A guy can last longer if he controls his breathing patterns, much like running long distances. I compare ejaculation with the time it take for one to pant and rest in running because the energy in both sex and running comes from the diaphragm of the lungs, or in kung-fu, they call it the hara which emits chi, or internal energy. If you breathe long, slow and relaxed breaths, you can run longer distances and last longer in bed. I learned this in kung-fu class for running and I experimented with sex and it works! I tried this with an ex-girlfriend and lasted 20-30 minutes with her the first cumming and then lasted 3 hours the second ejaculation, where before I learned the breathing exercises, I too lasted only 7 minutes. This doesn't take away from the intensity of the orgasm but makes you have a longer one.
I also want to last long with prostitutes because I want my money's worth and yes, I do want to get a full hour of pussy, not 5 minutes because I paid for an hour so I also apply these techniques for them. I don't care about what happens outside the session or if cops bust in. They would have to pull me off of her to stop me.

well, as someone who's had both the 5-6 minute experiences and the hour-plus-long ones, all i can say is given that lots of guys seem to think that six inches are actually ten, why shouldn't they think that six minutes are an hour? it's just sexual arithmetic :d

but for what it's worth, dh, i tend to find that condoms delay, rather than speed up cumming, because of the loss of sensation.

Condoms make you last twice or maybe three times as long because there is also lless friction with it on. Also, I actually looked at the time before I started humping and then looked at the clock after I ejaculated because I want to make sure I don't get ripped off by the prostitute. I pay for an hour so I expect an hour!

yes, to clarify i do believe that normally condoms delay rather than speed up the firing of the load. the scenario i mentioned is an uncommon, although not rare i believe, subset of condom issues.

Ok...Paddy,

Do women masturbate? Hell yeah, we do!! And I would think a hell of a lot more women than the 'studies' suggest, would do it on a regular basis. I'm in agreement with Joe as to why. I think the biggest reason why your female friends shut up, was probably because women who talk 'like that' in public are quickly labelled. Only sl*ts and wh*res overtly talk about sex with men around. Plus, any talk of female genitalia will automatically be seen by the men in the group as an open invitation to ask for sex. Then there is the common assumption that men "need" sex more than women do. Men have an excuse to have a wank every five seconds ('coz we all know their balls will explode if they don't!), whereas women...who don't NEED sex like men do...don't have any real reason to touch themselves. A woman who desires sexual gratification that often MUST be a nymphomaniac. (Hence, another reason to ask her for sex!) I think your female friends probably just didn't want to be viewed as sexual beings/objects by the men in your group.

As for Oz culture...I'm not sure how to answer that. You have to remember that in my work now, and obviously in my previous work, I openly talk about sex all the time. The people around me are perfectly comfortable talking about sex too. I know all the intimate details about all of my co-workers sexlives...and that's just from light conversation at lunch!! LOL So of course nobody in my social circle would have any hangups about female masturbation. However if you asked, for example, a churchgoing mother of five who married her first love, I daresay her and her social circle would hold very different views.

Overall though, I would say that Aussies in general are pretty relaxed with most aspects of sexuality. (Although many Aussie men still have hangups about homosexuality, but that's gradually changing). Masturbation is considered by most to be perfectly healthy and normal. Women may be reluctant to discuss intimate details with men around still, but that's more to do with the sexist reasons above than being uncomfortable with the subject itself. All-girl conversations are MUCH more relaxed! But in groups of mates, where there is no sexual tension, both male and female masturbation is talked about (usually joked about) with ease.

I seem to be getting the impression that there is a much bigger gap between the stereotypical male and female in the US, than there is here. It seems as though we have a greater level of gender equality...and I mean in interpersonal relationships, etc, not in law. I've heard many Americans refer to Australian women as "ballsy" (as opposed to American women being "b*tchy). The stereotypical Aussie male is macho and chauvenist...but the stereotypical Aussie woman is also strong and spirited. What do you guys think? What does the "typical" man and woman look like in America?

The first time I went to Oz, I was struck by how open, friendly, relaxed, informal, and so forth the people were. I guess I thought they were alarmingly forward compared to Americans and especially compared to Europeans. I am not shy by any means but like most Americans, I don't really strike up conversations with strangers very much.

On the plane on the way over, I sat next to an engineer from Melbourne. The flight had been delayed and the airport bar in LA was closed, but I had a bottle in my carry-on, so we had had a few drinks together before we boarded the plane. His pride in his country was obvious as he drew me a detailed street map of Melbourne, including all major facets of the transportation system.

Then on the bus from the airport to the train station, the bus driver chatted me up the whole way and made numerous suggestions as to restaurants, places to go, etc., and provided a complete technical history of the "Puffing Billy" steam train.

In Sydney, I was sitting at the bar alone, having a drink while waiting for my room to be ready. This was clearly unacceptable to the two Australian couples in there, who insisted that I join them. Within an hour, we knew all about each other's hobbies, ethnic backgrounds, etc. Twice Aussies I've just met have invited me home. That might possibly happen between two single guys in the US but these were couples who invited me home. Never happen in the US and definitely would never happen in western Europe (well, never say never but it would be very rare). Maybe y'all get lonely because it is such a big country with such a low population density?

Then on a later trip I met an Aussie gal (who actually turned out to be a Kiwi but I didn't find that out for a few years) who was travelling by herself in South America. Not too many American women have the stones to do that. The American woman I was travelling with couldn't believe it and was very concerned for her safety. She was a tiny little thing too. The Aussie gal was like, "Ah, no worries."

I did find Australian men to be rather overtly macho, which is fine by me. I didn't hear anything racist or sexist out of anyone and as long as I don't have to put up with that, raging tetosteronal behavior is a good think.

And I think I already mentioned how friendly, straightforward, and yet completely ladylike the hookers were ...

Definitely Australian women are more "masculine" than American women as far as fitting in with sports talk and so forth. And boy, do they swear a lot as compared to American women. I like that too, actually. I would say you could put women in a continuum: Latinas - Americans and Canadians - Western Europeans - Oz and New Zealand. That takes you from the most "traditionally feminine" to the least traditionally feminine.

I love Oz. Too bad your immigration policies are so bloody tight. I'd move there in a heartbeat.

However, I would caution against making assumptions about American men or American women based on what you read on this board because there is probably a very low percentage of conservatives on this board than in our population as a whole. There are a lot of right-wingers in the US. Similarly, my perception of Oz and New Zealand are probably skewed by spending most of my time hangin out on the streets, in bars, and in brothels as opposed to attending meetings of the Perth cultural and historical society!

Hi RN,

As always, thanks for your informative and lucid responses. I now have a better understanding and appreciation of not only the subject matter but also the cultural forces which must always be factored in. Lady, it's educational being around you.

Regarding how the women responded (or actually their lack of response) that evening really drives home how cultural and environmental forces shape how we respond to this basic human function called SEX which, as we all know, has been transpiring between men and women since the origin of our species. I've mentioned to my students more than once that sex between humans existed milllions and millions of years before religious and Victorian morals. In a way, certain institutions have "hijacked" this basic human function. I always react with anger when I hear on the news how a woman and her guy were "busted" for prostitution. Who gave local governments the right to control and punish people for engaging in a basic human activity? I also think that the local cops and district attorneys enjoy this activity largely because they're voyeuristic, like all of us, and it's very low risk for them. Why don't they go out and tangle with REAL criminals? Sorry, I'm rambling.

Never having been to Oz, I can't comment on differences but I think that Dickhead (he's no Dickhead by the way) accurately characterized matters. American women are b*tchy and a world-wide phenomenon. I know that I'm generalizing but having been to many different countries and cultures, the differences are startling to say the least. Upon your and Dickhead's recommendations, Oz is definitely on my itinerary.

Again, thanks for the information and clarity.

P.S. Excellent posting Dickhead.

I completely agree with you, Dickhead, and I'd add one more thing -- my experience in Oz was that people were far less likely to take offense than here in the states, or perhaps more accurately, they were more likely to take taking offense as just a normal thing that one could get over and forget as quickly as it happened. Far too little of that in the states. And I found that also to be true for Aussie women -- yes, aggressive and brash but in a far more jovial way than American women, who take a no in a situation like that as a comment upon everything holy as opposed to a situational response. (And I'd actually say that American women by and large have lost understanding of situational responses -- everything flies immediately to either their self-image or to a general societal statement as opposed to no meaning no.) I think Americans are generally fairly friendly and open compared to many other parts of the world, certainly less judgemental in terms of social status issues in terms of people doing specific jobs, but we definitely have a kind of false politeness that is a way of holding people at arms length. In the US when we say, "I'll be there later" or "in a few minutes" it's often considered a low-offense way of saying, "why don't you screw off" but in other parts of the world it is considered a promise of future interaction.

Personally, I think Americans in general are gradually turning into Brits (as it seems portions of society have always aspired to) in terms of a nasty undercurrent of superiority and holier-than-thou-ness, but perhaps that's one of the negative side-effects of being the big kid on the block. And American women have lamentably been leading that charge.

Yes, JZ, agree that Americans are pretty friendly and also generous and helpful, but just not really very gregarious. We'll help you with your heavy package, or help you push your car if it stalls, but then we want to get back into our cars as fast as possible and get home to watch (insert favorite inane, brain-softening TV show here) rather than pursue the acquaintance any farther.

And yeah, Paddy, even though I got the nickname from a physical anomaly, I'm a Dickhead. Trust me.

Dating an American woman is just a great way to lose the shirt off your back, that is all American women want money. Look what happened in the Jack Welch divorce case, Mrs. Welch soon to be ex is going to get $150 Million!!!!, yet she is going to fight for more!!! As that isn't enough for a tired old hag such has herself!! Boy what old Jack could have got in Europe for that much cash!!! He would get enough hot sex for a a few milleniums!! Boy what a sucker. It makes me feel great that I have finally seen the light and will not have sex with American women and avoid them totally.

Wow Dickhead...as a 'lil Aussie patriot, let me just say THANKS! :) That was a beautiful post, and it really fits with everything that *I* believe about Oz and it's people. I'm so glad to know that it's not just my own biased opinion...and I'm truly happy to think that tourists are leaving our country with such an impression. Not allowing someone to drink alone is definitely part of our pub culture, and it doesn't surprise me at all that people invited you home with them. Sadly it's changing a little as our crime rates rise, but I think, at heart, 'mateship' is still VERY important to most Australians.

And don't worry...I wasn't really making any assumptions about the behaviour/traits/political opinions of American men and women. I was more or less just getting the impression that the 'traditional' gender stereotypes were a little further apart than ours were. Like you saying that Oz women were more "masculine" than American women...that was more or less what I was presuming too. (And yes...we do swear something terrible! I never really noticed it until I read the online Dictionary of Slang, and realised just how many four-letter words were an everyday part of our language).

Joe..."No Worries, Mate" is our unofficial national motto! Life is too short to hold a grudge. :)

Paddy...you're welcome. :) Please remember that my opinions are only my own though...not only as an individual woman, but as a 'foreigner' too...so I may be wrong about American women's attitudes to sex. My comments were only conjecture, but I would presume that sexism (or the social taboos around women's sexuality) is worldwide, and that my experiences with it would be similar to those of American women.
Plus, Aussie or not, I can say "Hell yeah, we masturbate all the time" much more easily on an anonymous prostitution board, than women drinking with a group of friends can!

Masturbation is a wonderful thing. I grew up very poor (so poor I had to jack off the dog just to feed the cat), and if I didn't wake up with a hard on, I had nothing to play with for the rest of the day.

FYI - according to CNN, a recent discovery by scientists explains it all..............

Story is, in a common US-resident type of small lizards the females are in total control of the sex and reproduction stuff.

Not only does the female have full exclusive control of her choice of partner(s), but when seeking a "live-in" mate, the female will invariably seek out the male who occupies the biggest and most comfy rock, whether that male is big or small.

But she will then also mate with several big mates who are not live-ins, and something in her system ensures that her male offspring stems from the big male partners........ All while living with the tiny oldie with the big rock......

Enough said...... :-)

I saw a news report that more females nowadays are cheating on their husbands than in the older days where men had more power. This is related to Traveller's analogy of the lizard. Since women's power grew over the past years especially since the 70s and women started having more rights than men, women are less afraid to cheat on their husbands because they can get away with it with less dire consequences than a cheating husband. A cheating wife doesn't lose a house or custody of a kid but a cheating husband can lose ALL of his assets AND the kids. Before the empowerment of women, a cheating wife had no power and if she was caught cheating she gets almost nothing and loses her source of income which is her husband. Women back in the 20s did not work and were housewives. Husbands back then were more likely to cheat because they held more power. Now women have more rights than men and aren't afraid to cheat on their husbands because we've been neutered with divorce laws that ALWAYS work against us even if we hire the best and most expensive lawyers and even if the WOMAN is caught cheating. We can't win these divorce cases no matter what we do and the woman never loses anything except maybe custody of the kid only if she is an abuser. For those poor souls getting a divorce, I would take all my assets and leave America and settle down in some foreign island with the rest of the money and maybe start a business to continue cash flow.

Hi Darkseid,

I was intrigued by your recommendation of guys going through a divorce to liquidate their assets and get out of the country. I agree completely. My best friend's wife was screwing around and, of course, he's about to get 33% of his wages garnished before taxes (he has two kids) so she can sit home and go shopping for the rest of her life. Long story.

In any event, I recommended the same thing to him in terms of consolidating his assets and leaving the country for Costa Rica or something several months ago. Do you know where a guy can actually get information about doing such a thing? There have to be many issues in terms of laws, visas, taxes, where to stash your money, etc. I've heard of guys using off shore accounts in the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, etc. Is there a "book" or "guide" or some sort of resource out there to help coach a guy through such a maneuver? It's a huge, huge step and needs to be done correctly.

Any information would be greatly appreciated. Do any of you other guys out there know of any such resources?

Thanks

Paddy

Paddy, allow me to step in and dole out some advice on your request. First of all, my heart goes out to the guy who's gonna end up subsidizing the financial black hole that is his soon-to-be-ex wife. While she sits on her ass watching soaps, eating bon-bons and aspiring to look like Mimi (from the Drew Carey Show), fucking every stiff prick of age and filling her kids' heads full of negative propaganda about her soon-to-be ex, he MAY get a pittance of visitation and constant threats of withholding such custody from his ex. My best friend's brother ended up being hubby number FOUR when he thought he was number TWO (she treated him like "Number TWO, if you know what I mean! ;-)) and during the divorce proceedings, (the marriage lasted a few days less than six months) she tried to have the court make him give her HALF his assets AND pay to remove her mini-boulders that she grew to dislike! How's THAT for balls? Anyway, Paddy, I HIGHLY suggest that you and any guy who's sick and tired of falling prey to these financial vampires buy a book titled: "How To Be Invisible", by J.J. Luna. It was printed by St. Martin's Press and I can not POSSIBLY overemphasize the value of this book. It starts out telling the reader that there is a very good chance that at least ONCE in your lifetime, you WILL BE SUED. We all know this is the most litigious nation on the face of the earth: ANYONE can sue anyone ELSE for ANYTHING. This book is worth MORE than its weight in gold! I hope this helps!

Hi Paddy,

Anyone who is getting a divorce would have to liquify all his assets into cash (including the house and cars. Sell everything!!) Get a passport and visa to a place other than Europe because if you go to Europe you'll get caught because of the ties the US has with that continent. So I would recommend Latin America the Carribeans or Asia where they cannot track you. Basically once you get a divorce you are treated as a criminal anyway and if you don't pay half your paycheck, you'll be thrown in jail. If you do, all you are is just a prisoner that is just not behind bars because you work 40 hours a week and give your money to Mimi from Drew Carey. That is why you must leave the US anonymously and live like an underground person. Open a cash business and hide all IDs and passports and assume a different name. (You may still need your US passport in case you get into this bind in your new country.) I stress that you need to run things with cash because setting up a bank account would get you traced. If you have no accounts anywhere, they cannot trace where your new home is. Avoid credit cards as well. Buy your new home with the cash that you would have lost if you have gone through the divorce.

Paddy,

You said: [i]"he's about to get 33% of his wages garnished before taxes (he has two kids) so she can sit home and go shopping for the rest of her life."[/i]

Are you saying that 33% of his wages amounts to enough for her to support herself and two children?

If so, then the 77% that he is left with must be a HUGE amount of money. And if not, she most certainly won't be sitting on her arse watching TV all day...she'll have to work one job to pay the balance of the expenses and that means paying for childcare, which practically needs a second job to cover the cost of it!

It got me angry a few months back, and it's got me angry again. How DARE these men whine and cry about having to pay child support? How DARE they consider liquidating their assets...or even creating a new identity!!...solely so that they can deprive their children of money??? I don't give a shit whether it was the husband or the wife who did the screwing around...the kids DIDN'T DO IT! Why punish THEM???

Now I'm sure you all know my position on alimony....I don't understand the concept (because we don't really have it here) and I don't see any reason for it in most cases. But I DO see the reason for child support...and that's because the kids are YOUR responsibility as well. If this guy has to pay 33% of his wage to his children...stiff shit, I say! I have to pay, at the very least, 80% of my wages to my children. Accommodation, school, clothes, food, travel, utilities...it all costs me three times more than it costs my ex-husband, because he's alone and I am a family of three. 33% (and it's only 18% here) is bugger all compared to what I spend. I don't feel sorry for your mate at all.

And you can flame me all you like, guys...I won't budge on this topic. You get a woman pregnant...you bear the consequences. It's called taking responsibility for your own actions.

Well, RN, I agree wholeheartedly with your views about men supporting their children, as I have stated before (me, I had an operation to prevent that crap), but I would like to point out that 33% + 77% = 110%. Maybe this is why you have money problems from time to time? :)

A lot of divorce money goes to alimony which is money that the wife sues the ex husband for for herself. If she doesn't accept what the ex husband gives her for support of the child and she wants to be greedy and sues for a third or more of his salary and assets then she deserves to be stiffed. Some ex-wives won't even let the ex husband even 500 yard away from their kids. These are the women that MUST be taught a lesson. If she is however a good woman and accepts only child support (NO ALIMONY!) AND she lets the ex-husband see the kids at least for the weekends then I support the idea that the ex-husband must stay here and pay 18-20% of his wages to support the kids. I think greedy bitches should be screwed over for being that way.

UNDENIABLE FACT: kids should be provided for through a mutual and equitable agreement made by the parents if said parents are going to separate. I have NO argument with that. If a man helped bring kids into the world, he should step up to the plate and face the "Nolan Ryan special" that's bound to head his way. What I DO have problems with is the type of woman who would act as a Hoover on her ex's wallet while at the same time, attempting to deprive a father of deserved time with his children and filling their heads with half-truths or outright lies in order to tarnish his image in their eyes while painting herself as the innocent victim. Too many times, men have to walk on eggshells and grind their teeth to get visitation and to prevent threats from a woman that she will seek to enforce through the man-hating court system.

RN: I've read only a few of your posts and I bang my head against the wall when I hear of women hooking up with slime that are analagous to Dr. Henry Jekyll: he's brilliant, dashing, exciting (choose your own superlative to fill in the blank) in the beginning, but Mr. Hyde takes over and BAM! These women are then in a situation that they should have instinctively known FROM THE BEGINNING wouldn't work. I'm sorry you've met up with quite a few cads, and red-cape-and-red-boot wearing guy-defender that I am, I do NOT defend the stool samples I've read about that turned your life upside down.

Darkseid, I like the way you think, regarding the adherence to cash-only. However, I DO believe that if you employ a little guile, you can still live through accounts and credit cards if you watch your P's and Q's.

LOL Dickhead! You're right...it seems I'M the dickhead this time. :) I was a bit pissed off when I was writing that, so I must have got confused (that's my excuse, and I'm sticking to it!)

sinanjumaster,
I didn't mean to sound like I was looking for pity. I only relate my experiences as examples, and I do it because so many men in here seem to have warped ideas about what it's like to be a single Mum. I just get so tired of these guys who are so hung up about "paying the ex-wife". That is NOT what child support is, and I get the impression that a lot of these guys honestly don't see that! Alimony...yes, that's a different story (although I do believe it could be fair in some cases). But child support is not something that should be dodged.

I do agree with you that some women are just out to screw their ex husbands over financially, and I do think that practice is revolting. I also absolutely ABHOR people using children as tools for bartering...give me heaps of cash or you'll never see the kids again. However, if men run off to avoid the alimony claims, etc...their kids miss out. It's not fair to punish the children for the sins of their parents.

And I must say, even though I think it is disgusting that women would not let the men see their children...I don't believe that means they shouldn't have to pay child support. Whether or not you are actually involved in your children's life, you are still their father. If someone took my kids away from me and I was never going to see them again, I would still want to know in my heart that they had everything they needed. I would pay money for them even if I wasn't seeing them.

Hi RN & Guys,

I seem to have triggered quite a firestorm here. All I was looking for was some information for a desperate friend.

In reference to my friend that will be having 33% of his wages garnished, his soon to be ex. is already living with another guy and neither of the two kids live with her. My friend has one child living at home with him and another away at school. He pays for everything for the kids. Always has and always will. His ex is overweight, unskilled and profoundly lazy. Despite this he will still be getting 33% of his wages garnished due to the draconian divorce laws in Wisconsin. Lawyers say it's the worst state in America.

I agree 100% that men are responsible for their children and their overall welfare. Absolutely! I not only believe this but practice what I preach and am still totally supporting my last child who is a graduate student at an elite private university. This school costs $9,800 per semester not to mention her room and board, books, the lease on her car, etc. etc. It's the best money I've ever spent and am happy to do it. However, does the mother have no responsibilites? Is it her responsibility to stay out at night boozing and having encounters with strange men? Is it her responsibility to stay at home, not work and contribute nothing? This is an atypical case I suppose but this guy has really been screwed.

So, again, any more advice on getting out of the USA? Where to go and how to go about it?

Even if my good friend does leave the country, he will still support his children but wants the money to somehow go DIRECTLY to them and not through his ex. If the money goes to her first, the kids will never see it. If you knew the circumstances, this is not an irrational fear by any means.

So, I guess that I should have thrown out more details to begin with. This guy is a decent and professional person who married the wrong girl. We tried to tell him this before he married her but he was "in love" and wasn't listening. Sound familiar?

Regards,

Paddy

Paddy,
Now I DO feel decidedly sorry for your mate! Sorry I jumped the gun, but I figured the '(he has two kids)' in your original post meant that was who the money was for. Alimony is something else. How does that work? How does a woman manage to get alimony when she's already living with someone else and doesn't even have custody of the kids? Your divorce laws suck!

But seriously though, you said the kids already live with your mate. Is he intending on dumping them in order to run away from the ex? What is he going to do with them? Isn't there any way he can fight this, without losing his kids, and win??? If he leaves the country and disappears he may never see his kids again. Could he really live like that? It's just that it's so rare to see a man who was granted custody, and it usually only seems to happen if the woman is an unfit mother or if she didn't WANT them. If that's the case, is he considering leaving the kids with that sort of woman? This all seems terribly unfair...how can these b*tches live with themselves??!!

As for not listening to your friends when they tell you your partner sucks...my best friend told me not to marry my ex, and I ignored her. Then two years later I told her I hated HER new partner, and she ignored me. We are now both divorced! LOL We have promised to listen to each other from now on. :)

Hi RN,

No problem with jumping the gun as you put it.

My friend's ex. is living with her "lover" in another city now. My friend's daughter is living with him at his home because she didn't want to leave her high school, friends, etc., and move to another city to be with her mom. She's only 17. The oldest is away at school in Arizona and is quite independent.

Despite this, his ex. is going to get 33% of his monthly salary or else she can get half his pension account, half the house, half his investments, etc. The laws in my state are really irrational and very much favor the woman.

Yes, we've discussed the loss of contact with his kids to the point of exhaustion. It's really painful stuff and there are no viable solutions. He's really disillusioned and it's a no win situation. He vascillates back and forth. One possibility is to cut his losses, leave the states and start over if and only if he can channel money to his kids for the next few years without his ex. or the courts intercepting it. He's working on a process to do this right now.

You know, RN, this guy is 49 years old and he honestly wonders why his life and his future should be decimated by his ex. and the courts. He's worked very hard in life and has done all of the right things. His only mistake was to marry this woman.

By the way, He's checking into Oz and New Zealand as possible places to emigrate amongst others. Are these viable options in your opinion or is he better off in Bora Bora or something?

Thanks,

Paddy

Paddy,

I don't know a hell of a lot about it, but I believe Australia's immigration policies are extremely tight. I'm not sure that a man his age could get residency very quickly here... if at all. Don't take my word for it, but I'm pretty sure he'd find it difficult. (I think Dickhead looked into this too?) Australia and New Zealand have special agreements between each other, but I know nothing about NZ's policies regarding people from other countries.

Re: paying the kids directly...has he looked into Internet banking? He could put money into an internet account from anywhere in the world, and they could just transfer from the net it into their personal accounts. I just can't believe this alimony thing. How long are these 33% payments to the ex supposed to last? And doesn't the fact that she's living with someone else come into account? Sheesh...it's so ridiculous!

[i]"this guy is 49 years old and he honestly wonders why his life and his future should be decimated by his ex. and the courts. His only mistake was to marry this woman."[/i]

I know exactly how he feels on this one. It's so sad that people can do this sort of thing to each other...and their children. And people wonder why I am determined to stay single these days!

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"

Should be more like "Have a child with a girl in the US and you're screwed"

Here is my suggestion for your friend Paddy: Agree to the 33% wage deal as divorce terms. As I read your last point this means he gets to keep the house, investments, etc... Once this is finalized he should immediately sell everything he owns and transfer it to an offshore company that he has created for himself. Now that all his assets are out of the country (and safe) he can declare bankruptcy in the US. Depending on the type of work he does, he can then operate his business out of the other country... thus denying the wife her alimony... and she didn't get half he owns either.

He cannot just cash in everything now and run to another country. The wife's lawyers will slap a hold on all assets and he'll lose them. If he does manage to escape with the goodies a judge will declare him a felon and he will be arrested if he ever returns to the US (to see his daughter).

By doing this he can continue to see his daughter, give her money without the wife garnishing it, and live in the US legally.

From what I've read/discussed with others it will require approximately 10 to 15 000 dollars to hire a consultant to arrange the offshore accounts. He will also have to pay the taxes for cashing in his pension fund, investments etc... an accountant can figure out how to defer some of this too.

Good luck

On a personal note: I too have recently been stung by the AW.

My GF has a job where she works 10 to 12 hours per day, plus 4 more on saturday (for a 40 hour week salary, and the company does not give her time off in lieu of overtime - why do people in the US put up with this??? - in Japan they would call this working oneself to death) and is therfor constantly tired. She has little to talk about other than work (because that's her entire life), and can't keep her eyes open past 11:00. For the past 2 months we have been doing nothing but going out for dinner, fucking, and sleeping away saturday and sunday. I'm bored out of my tree and have not been putting any effort into the relationship for the past 6 weeks. The sex is boring... I do all the work and she's given up her blowjob training courses. I know she won't back down on work, she's a habitual over-achiever, and sacrificed an ideal family life to move to Florida and pursue her career/school. She has proven many times that nothing will come between her and her (in my opinion) pointless careerism. On top of this she has become clingy and seems to think I should move in with her when she buys a house in the new year.

To get to the point...

I told her that I was not happy with her over working, her moving the relationship at too fast a pace, and think it's time to end things. She goes ballistic and tells me that I've been neglecting her (which I have... for the above reasons) and that I'm a total bastard. Now when we talk she always has a snide remark about me in some part of our dating (I told her I could stay with her if some things changed). So far, nothing has changed.

So this is what I get for being honest and mature with a girl: Misery. Had I just called up one day and said "have a good life" I would be free. But nooooo... I decide to be a decent guy and tell her the truth.

I'm sooooo... Fedup

And that's exactly why I don't want a partner!

My advice to you Fedup, would be....

If you love something, set it free.
If it comes back, it's yours.
If it doesn't...it never was.

An oldie but a goodie. If you stay with her and wait "until things change" there is a good chance that it will just go nowhere. Won't get better and it won't get worse...it'll just drag on like it is now. You have no motivation to leave because you are waiting for her to change, and she has no motivation to change because she knows you're not leaving. I say end it. If she truly loves you, she will make the necessary changes to win you back. If she doesn't bother, then at least you know sooner rather than later.

Yeah I know...I'm a callous b*tch. Women suck.

Oh, by the way...I have ten cigarettes left. When they're gone, I'm not buying any more.
Well, I'm gonna try not to...

Wish me luck. :)

C'mon RN! LOL You know yer gonna have a Jones fer the nicotine soon after that tenth ciggie has burned its last ember...

1] The check's in the mail
2] You're the best I've ever had
3] Size doesn't matter

Seriously though, cold turkey IS possible... my old man smoked heavily until 1975 and went cold turkey EVER SINCE. I don't like him as a person, but that is one accomplishment I have to begrudgingly admire him for.

Hi RN and Fed Up,

Thanks for your thoughts in reference to my friend and his attempts to extricate himself from a bad, bad situation.

He's working with a trusted accountant who has advised some of the things that you suggested. Lawyers here will not help him because they would be assisting potentially felony behavior on his part.

The idea of internet banking to get money to his kids is an excellent one. Also, his accountant suggested that he take the 33% hit, liquidate his assets and then escape. Still, the only way he'll see his kids is if they come to visit him - wherever that might be.

Yes, Fed Up, having a kid with an American woman is a real dangerous undertaking given the laws here. When it comes to divorce law in America, guys are at a real disadvantage.

Good luck quitting smoking RN. It's not easy but you're a rather strong willed and tenacious person. In other words, if anyone can quit you're the kind of person that can. One last thing. Every medical study that comes out in the states about smoking indicates that it is sooo dangerous that it almost defies description. I'm sure that they're saying the same thing is Oz too. Again, best of luck.

PS My friend has confirmed your views on immigration to Oz. I think that he's focusing on New Zealand instead.

Paddy

Hey, this one just to say go RN about curbing fags!

Also let me throw here a link to help those willing to leave the US
[url]http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/argentine_option.htm[/url]

It is pointing the Argentina option above because it is now without a doubt one of the best places in the world to escape (guys, if you don't read already the Buenos Aires section, begin now), but pretty much all the countries are covered.

respect to all

sinanjumaster...you're wrong! I lasted the whole dayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!! (Although I'm shaking like a leaf and I'm pretty sure my head is about to implode LOL). I'm using patches so I'm cheating a bit...but it seems to be working so far.

Thanks for the encouragement you guys. :)

Hey Paddy,

If your friend already has money saved up, he can live with his children comfortably for the rest of their lives in Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. The currency exchange is excellent because 3 reais equals 1 US dollar. If he has a house and sells it and also transfers his assets to a brazilian account, he probably doesn't have to work or could own a moderately profitable business in Rio. Rio has the benefits of a big city and a tropical beach. College in Rio is FREE, unlike American colleges. You just have to make a B+ grade point average (or else you go to a catholic university which costs $1500 a semester). Brazil also has a very lenient immigration policy.
As for the divorce laws in Brazil, you might lose half of your assets you earned AT THE TIME YOU WERE MARRIED. That means if you earned $10,000 during the marriage but owned a house before that, she ONLY gets $5,000 and nothing more. It would therefore be best to buy ythe house before getting married. If you end up stuck again, move to another country and liquidate the assets. Moving to another country gives you a clean slate and federal officials won't be able to track you.
I read your friend would like to go to New Zealand. I heard it is also nice. I hope your friend could get in there because moving out of the US would be best. He also has to keep a low profile while you leave so that's why it's best to liquidate and don't use the credit card for flights or housing arrangements. Divorced husbands in the US have the same rights as criminals (which is very unfortunate) so you have to keep low like one until you get settled in your new home.

I would say that your friend should avoid buying a house (at least in his own name). It is safer to rent and pay cash. The most important thing is to get some kind of alternative ID that will allow you to get do things.

In any Western European city the Albanian mafia will sell you an Italian ID card for around 200 dollars. Use a non-Italian name though, and say that you just have citizenship, or you will get busted when people find out you don't speak Italian. You really need some kind of a passport though, as you need your new country to stamp your residence permit in an actual passport.

Also, the cash business. It depends what he does, but he should probably spread any investments around about a bit to avoid getting burnt or ripped off.

If he is American then he can probably make a living (payment in cash) by teaching English to advanced students (where you don't need to speak the other language) in almost any country in the world; so he has that an insurance option if things mess up. (same thing applies in a lot of countries for French, Germans, Italians, Spanish speakers, etc although English language is easiest to find customers for). If he also pays his rent in cash then there is no official trace of him anywhere. If he goes for that option then he also doesn't absolutely need residence or a work permit in the country, although that is going to be the legal requirement in most places.

Getting money back to the kids. Western Union (ie where you walk into a WU store and hand over cash, and they hand it over the same amount minus fees at another store, to another person you name on the other side of the world) is a good way of sending money. I'm not sure if the recipient would find out which country the money had been sent from. If so, and he thinks the kids might let it slip, then he needs a third person (like you Paddy), to pick up the money from WU and hand it over to the kids in person.

OK, I rather feel the need to weigh in here with at least one discouraging word, since this whole concept has gotten pretty universal sympathy and support. While I do have a great deal of sympathy for this guy, who is clearly (or at least is presented as) a prime example of a relationship gone bad and the dark side of divorcelaws, there's also a point at which this becomes a little silly -- give up a professional career, a house, your children, go work under an assumed name perhaps in a third world country, getting a low-paying job teaching English, living like a criminal, and so forth, all to avoid unjust divorce laws. You can even deal with the mafia for fake ID cards, great. Surely the law of diminishing returns has to kick in here somewhere along the line.

Doesn't this approach basically say, ok, I now wish to wear sackcloth and ashes and brand myself as a victim for all time? What about actually getting on with your life? The one-third of his income that he'd have to give up would still leave him with a far greater income and style of living than he's likely to end up with overseas. And there still [i]are[/i] no doubt legal recourses he's not exhausted -- alimony isn't always all that cut and dried, and it's also subject to change based on future circumstance.

Again, I've great sympathy for this guy, but somewhere along the line there also needs to be a reality check so you're not [i]truly[/i] thinking that it's your only option -- there certainly are other folks who have survived going down this route -- so you are able to make cogent choices. The bottom line is that the breakup of a long marriage is always going to be hugely traumatic no matter what the circumstance, and he should think about how much that is also factoring into the equation.

Hi Joe, Mano, Darkseid & RN,

Thanks for all the input and excellent ideas. My friend is surprisingly working on many of the ideas you people thought of independently.

Yes, Joe, trashing his career, job, home, leaving his country and his whole way of life is almost unthinkable. What really galls him, however, is that his to be ex. is going to get 33% if his monthly wages before taxes while she's living with lover boy. She'll never marry the guy because under state law she would lose the money. His ex. and her boyfriend will just sit back and collect his hard earned money month after month after month this way. Sweet deal for the two of them. It's like a 3rd income for the two of them. By the way, she told my friend that she'll take him for everything he's got. She declared that she'll "ruin' him if it's the last thing she ever does.

I guess that he needs to get away and start over. On the net he came across a group of divorced American guys who have settled somewhere in the Netherlands. They seem to like it there and the Dutch women are very accomodating and liberated compared to Americans.

Thanks again.

Paddy

Hey Paddy,

Divorce is always an offspring of hate- hatred between a married couple in a marriage gone sour. It ALWAYS leads to revenge and usually the woman gets the last laughs. Obviously this woman is really out to get your friend Paddy and she will sue for more if given even a slightest opportunity. It starts off at 33% of his wages but she'll want more and she'll try to even sue for 66% like what happened to my unfortunate co-worker who gets his wages garnished for alimony, child support (the only thing he should be responsible for) and mortgage payments to the house that now belongs to his ex-wife. NOT including the child support, he garnishes 50% of his paycheck for the mortgage and alimony. With the child support, it's 70% which leaves him 30% for himself BEFORE taxes then he gets taxed a third of that so he's left with 20% to spend on himself and on top of that his retirement contributions were compromised as well. He makes $65,000 a year before taxes and he is only entitled to $13,000 of that after taxes, alimony, child support, and his wife's house is paid off. The only merciful thing his wife left him was visitation rights to the kids on weekends and that was after months of grovelling. $13,000 a year is not a well off income and is as much as what a cashier in Starbucks makes. He was forced to live with his parents and sell his car because he couldn't afford gas and car insurance. He basically lives like a pauper. The New York State divorce laws really sucks and are probably written by nazi-feminists because he is taken to the cleaners. If he fled to a Third world country with all his saved income, he would have lived a better life. He could have liquidated his house and assets and bought a house and owned a business in Brazil or Dominican Republic and work as a cop and still make more than $13,000US per year. A cop in DR makes $15,000US per year or in Brazil they make $21,000. Still much better than $13,000. So Paddy, get your friend to leave this place and declare bankruptcy here besides sex is practically illegal here anyway and we all travel to foreign countries to get it. If it is legal here, we wouldn't be going thousands of miles for it. Yes America is the best country to make money but it is only UNTIL YOU GET DIVORCED. The reason I didn't move is that I am not divorced and I get to enjoy all of my paycheck after taxes ($65K wages - $18K taxes = $47K spending money). If I were to get into that hairy situation, I'd leave this country also no matter how good it is but this country will treat you bad if you are a divorced man. Best of luck to your friend, Paddy, and I hope he gets away free from this horrible mess.

Darkseid

Perhaps your friend should hire a detective to follow the ex for a week and report on her doings. If he can discredit her claims of poverty (she's living with another man, both having jobs, etc...) then he's a step ahead. If he presents an offer to the judge to open a trust fund in the daughters name at the same time, the judge might see him as a reasonable man and cancel the alimony.

This detective may also be able to prove that the ex was dating the guy while your friend was still living with her. If that's the case the judge will cite her for abandonment and adultry. Sure grounds for refusal of alimony.

That may or may not work. Sometimes it doesn't because she will use Paddy's friend's money to hire a much better lawyer and remember, the laws ALWAYS favors the wife even if she was cheating. That's unfortunate in America but that's the way it is. There is always cases in which this fails and it's always becuase the judge favors the ex-wife and because she has a better lawyer. The lawyer can say that she gave up 10 years of her life taking care of the household instead of finding a career and the judge will definitely reward her for "lost income" for being a housewife whether she cheats or not. She could argue that she could have went to college for 4 years and worked a career for the other six but instead she had to stay home and tend the kids and take care of the house. She would argue that she deserves compensation for that service and that since she maintained and kept the house she deserves to keep it. The judge will forget about the fact that the husband paid for the house in the first place. However, if Paddy's friend has the better lawyer and the judge happens to be a male divorcee himself, the odds could go in HIS favor for refusal of alimony.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by joe_zop
[i]OK, I rather feel the need to weigh in here with at least one discouraging word, since this whole concept has gotten pretty universal sympathy and support. While I do have a great deal of sympathy for this guy, who is clearly (or at least is presented as) a prime example of a relationship gone bad and the dark side of divorcelaws, there's also a point at which this becomes a little silly -- give up a professional career, a house, your children, go work under an assumed name perhaps in a third world country, getting a low-paying job teaching English, living like a criminal, and so forth, all to avoid unjust divorce laws. You can even deal with the mafia for fake ID cards, great. Surely the law of diminishing returns has to kick in here somewhere along the line.

Doesn't this approach basically say, ok, I now wish to wear sackcloth and ashes and brand myself as a victim for all time? What about actually getting on with your life? The one-third of his income that he'd have to give up would still leave him with a far greater income and style of living than he's likely to end up with overseas. And there still [i]are[/i] no doubt legal recourses he's not exhausted -- alimony isn't always all that cut and dried, and it's also subject to change based on future circumstance.

[/i][/QUOTE]

What you say is bascially true. It depends a lot on his life in the USA and what he feels about that generally. From what I can pick up from Paddy's posts he seems willing to give it up, and he has the resources not to need to teach (which by the way is quite well paid even in poorer countries if you consider the lower costs of living, and his ability as an American to land a job in the most expensive private schools for businessmen).

As for the thing about the sackcloth and ashes bit, well if he has the right attitude in his new country and doesn't think "I'm here because I am a victim", then he will probably have a ball. Most people who actually *choose* to become ex-pats do anyway. If he is sitting in the sun at a bar made of wood, and drinking beers costing 20 cents, then there isn't much "economic activity" going on that is going to show up in that countries GDP figures but his quality of life is fine, better than commuting and working 9-5 for some asshole boss in America. If he is the kind who needs a mercedes and a rolex then he has to stay in the west and keep working even harder but it sounds like he is willing to give up all that shit. Quality of life in is fine for people who live in poor countries but have enough money to keep from drowing - sure, feel sorry for the poor souls who live in the favelas and don't have enough to eat, but Paddy's friend won't be among them whatever happens.

Yeah, I agree that the mafia is a last resort - I just thought I should float the possibility. ;)

Hi Darkseid, Fedup, Joe and Mano.,

Many, many good points made but you wise gentlemen.

Yes, the ex-patriate move is a huge one and has to be executed correctly is it's to be done at all. Also, in my friend's case, it's irrevocable since he'll be out of compliance with the divorce decree when she doesn't have 33% of his salary coming. Darkseid, you made an excellent point in that she'll come after more that her 33% as time goes on. In fact, she's already threatening to go back to school which he'll have to pay for. In my state, one has to pay for her education until it's equivalent to his. He's an MBA so she can milk that one forever. By the way, she never contributed a dime to his tuition. He had his BS before he met her and his company paid his MBA tuition. It's an irrelevant point under the law according to his lawyer. She's also playing a few other angles already. She views him as a walking ATM machine I think. Typical stuff around here.

I hope that he can make it to some tropical paradise where he can hang out on the beach, drink beer and be appreciated by some senorita for the guy he.

If you take a step back and look at the plight of American men in terms of the women here and the fearsome divorce laws, well, we're really in an awful situation or state of affairs. You know, some guy could make a lot of money if he started a business assisting American men in becoming ex-patriates. You know, a package deal which would take care of visas, housing, banking and all of the other details which would be entailed in "escaping" America. Any entrepreneurs out there??? What do you think???

Paddy