I already stated it. If she is contributing nothing but *** and taking his money to spend on herself, that is pretty whorish. If a woman marries a well off man and stays at home but keeps up the house and does the majority of child rearing, that's not acting the *****.
I understand your nothing or something basic comment but my question was where do you draw the line?
If the woman washed one dish does that transform her from ***** to contributer? Your intentionally dodging my point.
It's a far cry for me to prefer that a man pay for our first couple of dates together if he asks me out vs. living with a man long term, expecting him to buy me everything I want, and contribute nothing but *** in return. This comparison is a reach even for you.
No just making a point that you set financial goals for men as part of your condition to be involved with them. This goes to the first question of how in many cases women tend to make financial considerations part of their dating process.
"Your actions define you, my dear."
As do yours, why get angry about anything? I don't.
It's quite the conundrum.
And leads to so many other problems as a domino effect. Women who are no longer looking for love are why single, never married mothers are the largest growing segment of society.
I also don't use "quilt" for "guilt". Who is playing word police now?
My initial "would be willing to" reply was perfectly acceptable and conveyed the same meaning. You're just splitting hairs now because you get off on being disagreeable
No, No ,No Ali, nice try but no cigar (or Bill Clinton) for you.
In the same sentence you used two completely different responsibility words for men and women who initiate a date. Men "should" women (you) "would".
Should implies a must proposition, would implies a possible proposition. But you also cleared that up so no big deal.
That's what worked out for our date at the time. If he were able to join me for lobster dinner, I would have been more than happy to pay for that.
I can afford things, TJ, and I am actually a very generous person.
And yet in all your years you have never found the chance to take a man to dinner? How about after the first date with a man you liked.....why not then return the favor and take him out instead? I am sure if your sensabilities would have allowed it you would have done it by now.
One thing that is evident is your very outgoing attitude, nothing would stop you from doing what you "wanted" to do.
Besides, what is wrong with me preferring that a man pay for the date if he asks me out? Shouldn't you be applauding me for having some standards and letting him exhibit his intentions for me through his actions rather than just spreading my legs for him just because he showed up at my door?
****, man. There is no pleasing you! If a woman doesn't have standards, she's a ***** and if she does have standards, she is also a *****.
Again, I never said that, why do you insist in getting all worked up over things I do not say?
Having standards is very important, I was simply discussing the details with you, if your feeling so insecure about a topic then that mens "you" have an issue on this, not me.
You can't slap someone in the face all the while disclaiming the fact that you are slapping them in the face.
I don't, never have. It is just you like to blow up, so I was trying to protray my intentions of open discussion so you might give it a chance based on it's merrits instead of getting all worked up as usual just because we are discussing women, a topic you tend to try and derail with your nasty ways most of the time.
Then why are you claiming that people who live alone are foolish and unnatural? To deem them as such is to try to force them to conform to a more "natural" state through ridicule and humiliation. Just let it be!
Foolish?????
looks around the thread for the word foolish.............. still looking
Nope, again another time you have tried to inflame a possition based on things I never said. Please stop this trend because it is dishonest for you to act this way Ali.
Conform????
looks around the thread for the word conform.............still looking
Nope, again another time you have tried to inflame a possition based on things I never said. Please stop this trend because it is dishonest for you to act this way Ali.
I don't generally speak in absolute qualifiers, as it leaves no room for exception and also leaves one to:
I don't need a man sitting beside me on the couch complaining that I didn't put enough pickles on his sandwich to make me happy....I can tell you that right now.
That seemed pretty absolute to me and you definately did not leave any room for exception so now your just talking out of your rear.
What do you want in a discussion Ali?
Using your example I can't say men like to have *** with woman because there is the tiny exception of a few men who like other men?.......I'm sorry but I refuse to ignore the norms just to make you happy or to make you feel better about yourself through the "bury your head in the sand" mentality.
Friends and family could most certainly fulfill a person's emotional needs. And a good, reliable fukk buddy can fulfill a person's sexual needs.
A long-term mate in not a necessity for a happy life. For some, it's a nice bonus, but not a necessity.
Friends and family cannot replace the affection one needs for emotional stability Ali.
Maybe that is why your so brittle and out of control here when someone says things you don't like. Your so out of balance from forcing yourself to exclude this part of existence from your life that it makes you more volitile when anyone does not think the way you want them to think.
