RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers?

RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

SternSkipper -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:19:58 AM)
quote: f get`n it regular was taken out of the math,how many men would marry a dead-beat? If gettin it regular WASN'T part of the math, I'd rather be alone. At that point money has no bearing.

LinnaeaBorealis -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:22:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou Women should be in the kitchen baking pie, wearing lingerie, putting together pretty outfits, suckling babies, having sex with their man, cleaning the house, going to PTA meeting, working on the flower bed or buying stuff at the grocery store, so they aren't supposed to work for money. So, obviously they should be looking for an employed man. It is just the nature of things. [:D] Exactly!!!! BUT...not only does the man have to be employed, he needs to be pulling down around $250,000 per year as well. He also had better be ready to lose 50% of his assets and 55% of his income if that marriage ends after the 15 year mark. Sounds good to me!! Now to find such a person. Oh wait, I'm kinda beyond the suckling babies stage of life. sigh

SternSkipper -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:24:43 AM)
quote: if you were interested in discussing the article itself, rather than whether women were "gold diggers" or not? Try.... it's S.O.P.

NeedToUseYou -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:27:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou Women should be in the kitchen baking pie, wearing lingerie, putting together pretty outfits, suckling babies, having sex with their man, cleaning the house, going to PTA meeting, working on the flower bed or buying stuff at the grocery store, so they aren't supposed to work for money. So, obviously they should be looking for an employed man. It is just the nature of things. [:D] Exactly!!!! BUT...not only does the man have to be employed, he needs to be pulling down around $250,000 per year as well. He also had better be ready to lose 50% of his assets and 55% of his income if that marriage ends after the 15 year mark. Naw, after the marriage, we're moving to Iran.... No worries. They are much fairer there the man gets 100% full custody, and the option to stone his ex. It is much more rational way of dealing with divorce.

Charnegui -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:30:17 AM)
You see a lot of smart guys with dumb women, but you hardly ever see a smart woman with a dumb guy. A prosperous man is someone who earns more than his wife can spend. A prosperous woman is she, who can find such a man.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:40:41 AM)
~Faste Reply~ I didn't read all the posts, or the article, so I'm simply answering the OP's question. No I don't want a guy who is unemployed, but having a job doesn't not equate to having enough money for someone to be a gold digger. One of the final straws before I got divorced was that my ex was unemployed. This was way before the economy became what it is, so there wasn't the issue of not being able to find a job. I went to work while he was collecting unemployment and because of that, we actually were doing better financially. The problem was that even though he became a "house husband" for the time being, he was unable to get laundry done, would call me at work to ask how to cook a frozen dinner (rather than simply read the instructions) and he always used "I was too busy taking care of our son" as an excuse for why the other things weren't done, to the point that I then had to put our son in day care, so he supposedly had "time" to do housework and look for employment. In the end, when I had enough, I told him that if I was going to work, and still come home and clean the house, cook the meals and take care of our son, he made himself obsolete. No one and I mean NO ONE is that good in bed that warrants keeping them around. So yes, although I am disabled and don't currently work, I would not want someone who was unemployed. Although as I'm pushing 50 (turned 47 in June), someone being retired is not a deal breaker. So I guess the issues is them having some kind of income of their own, whether through a pension, investments, disability or whatever that makes them self sufficient.

rulemylife -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 9:40:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou quote: ORIGINAL: LadyPact Channeling Eric Cartman this morning, are we? Don't question me woman, you need to RESPECT MY AUTHORITY! Authoritah. You Will Respect My Authoritah!

lockedaway -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 10:25:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou Women should be in the kitchen baking pie, wearing lingerie, putting together pretty outfits, suckling babies, having sex with their man, cleaning the house, going to PTA meeting, working on the flower bed or buying stuff at the grocery store, so they aren't supposed to work for money. So, obviously they should be looking for an employed man. It is just the nature of things. [:D] Exactly!!!! BUT...not only does the man have to be employed, he needs to be pulling down around $250,000 per year as well. He also had better be ready to lose 50% of his assets and 55% of his income if that marriage ends after the 15 year mark. Naw, after the marriage, we're moving to Iran.... No worries. They are much fairer there the man gets 100% full custody, and the option to stone his ex. It is much more rational way of dealing with divorce. lololololol oh my... There is a trend in many states now where fathers are actually getting true 50/50 child custody arrangements. This is after many years of the father being treated as nothing more than a sperm donor. Still, paying alimony of $1,000.00 per week for life will make you wonder whether your retirement plan isn't your Kimber .45

LadyPact -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/9/2011 11:18:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NeedToUseYou Don't question me woman, you need to RESPECT MY AUTHORITY! Glad you got the joke. I couldn't help but laugh.

DavidLee44UK -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 1:53:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imperatrixx quote: ORIGINAL: DavidLee44UK lol imperatix YOU DIDNT START THREAD as i said in my previous thread about split testing threads/posts/videos which insight negative and positive comments more successful and if we all thought same life would be boring ... i never said i started the thread, i never said everyone should all think the same, and i seriously need an english translation of that middle sentence because i have no fucking idea what you are trying to express with it. no you didn't i did its called an opinion it look like onion but has a few more letters

NocturnalStalker -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 2:08:43 AM)
Mind-blowing epiphany: Everyone is an opportunist.

sexyred1 -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 1:21:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep for me, it would depend on the reason, especially right now when people are having a lot of difficulty finding/ keeping jobs. a lot of really great people are unemployed and it doesn't say anything about their character; they just got caught in the downsizing nets. if someone's unemployed and sits on his duff and does nothing about it, that's different from someone who finds other ways to make ends meet while still trying to find a regular job. i don't look at unemployment as a dealbreaker unless the reasons behind it are totally within the person's control and that person chooses to do nothing about it. unemployment, in and of itself, doesn't say anything about a person's character at all. Thanks for saving me the keystrokes. Being unemployed has nothing to do with character. I was downsized in March and just started a new job last week and just got another offer, so I guess my character went downhill for those few months I was out of work. I am so glad my character has been restored.

LinnaeaBorealis -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 1:24:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep for me, it would depend on the reason, especially right now when people are having a lot of difficulty finding/ keeping jobs. a lot of really great people are unemployed and it doesn't say anything about their character; they just got caught in the downsizing nets. if someone's unemployed and sits on his duff and does nothing about it, that's different from someone who finds other ways to make ends meet while still trying to find a regular job. i don't look at unemployment as a dealbreaker unless the reasons behind it are totally within the person's control and that person chooses to do nothing about it. unemployment, in and of itself, doesn't say anything about a person's character at all. Thanks for saving me the keystrokes. Being unemployed has nothing to do with character. I was downsized in March and just started a new job last week and just got another offer, so I guess my character went downhill for those few months I was out of work. I am so glad my character has been restored. Loving it!!!! I am completely characterless myownself. Which is why I choose to be single. Why would I want to foist my characterless being on perfectly wonderful humans???

sexyred1 -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 1:28:44 PM)
It never ceases to amaze me how many people are clueless about the job market. No matter how talented you are in corporate America (or uncorporate America) you can be out of work for a short or long time. I personally know many smart, industrious people with great integrity and character who have lost their jobs in this economy. I don't assume anything when someone says they are unemployed. If they tell me they never want to work and live off someone else, that is a different story. But I never met anyone who was out of work who said that. They, like me, busted their asses looking for a new job and some, like me, got a new one in 3 months.

LinnaeaBorealis -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 2:55:03 PM)
When I got fired from the trucking job I ended up in a Catch-22 situation. I could get another job with another trucking company, but not until I had 6 months' over the road experience, but no trucking companies would hire me so that I could get that 6 months. And when I tried to apply for jobs which were appropriate considering my intelligence & abilities & skill sets, I was completely overlooked due to the fact that I'd been driving a truck for the previous 8 years. I only had a chance to explain myself to one HR person over the phone & his response was that they were looking for someone whose experience was more recent. When I started doing the job that I was applying for, I'd had NO experience, just had a brain that worked. So I ended up applying for my social security retirement early so that I wouldn't starve, & it took 18 months before I found a home to live in. Right now, my pain prevents me from getting even a part-time job. But I'll tell you what!! I have a really good character, strong unwavering morals & ethics & if I was every given the chance again, I would learn how to do any job I was allowed to do & learn how to make it more efficient & I'd work my ass off for whatever they paid. Because my work ethic is that strong. But lots of people think that truck drivers are dumb so they see that on my resume & just round-file it. Sad!!

tammystarm -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 2:59:38 PM)
thats hard. But i must say... if and that is not likely, i was to look for someone, i admit looks are not that important the personality is, but a job is a must.... please forgive me i know believe me do i know how hard this economy is... but.... the men i have always dated were much older and most of them had a longstanding career , im not sure if i would know how to handle someone who didnt. But than again here is me, on disability.....

TreasureKY -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/10/2011 3:35:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 ... But I never met anyone who was out of work who said that. They, like me, busted their asses looking for a new job and some, like me, got a new one in 3 months. You obviously never met my ex. [;)]

jennylandis -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/13/2011 10:40:50 PM)
no, i don't think its a contradiction or gold-digging. whats wrong with needing someone with a job, it's not like they need a millionaire, they just don't want noone with no ambition. i agree with that 100%.

WyldHrt -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/14/2011 12:08:00 AM)
quote: It never ceases to amaze me how many people are clueless about the job market. No matter how talented you are in corporate America (or uncorporate America) you can be out of work for a short or long time. I personally know many smart, industrious people with great integrity and character who have lost their jobs in this economy. I don't assume anything when someone says they are unemployed. If they tell me they never want to work and live off someone else, that is a different story. But I never met anyone who was out of work who said that. They, like me, busted their asses looking for a new job and some, like me, got a new one in 3 months. Just to go back to the beginning, the OP said nothing about dating or having a serious relationship with someone who is unemployed. It was strictly about marriage. While I may well fall madly in love with a man who is currently unemployed because the economy sucks, I wouldn't go for the paper until things were financially stable for both of us. I don't make enough to support a spouse and am a little old for 'Livin on a Prayer' [8D] Jus sayin

NuevaVida -> RE: Women: Realistic or Gold Diggers? (7/14/2011 8:19:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 ... But I never met anyone who was out of work who said that. They, like me, busted their asses looking for a new job and some, like me, got a new one in 3 months. You obviously never met my ex. [;)] Or mine. Which is the reason I wouldn't have been interested in the Mister if he had been unemployed. Come back and find me once you've secured a job, and we'll talk. I'm not interested in supporting another man, which is what I did for more than half of my 20 year marriage. I've been out of work before, too. Once it was for a year, by choice (necessity, actually). All other times I had been laid off, and was working again in a few months, because, as Sexyred said, I busted my ass to find another job. If the Mister had been unemployed and not busting his ass to find something, I'd have passed him by. If he was unemployed AND busting his ass when we met, I'd have likely continued conversation but with careful observation and no commitment to a relationship. This has nothing to do with "gold digging" and everything to do with not wanting to support someone again (and spousal support after a divorce can indeed be paid by the wife, btw - I had to). I don't care that he might make less than I do, only that he's a responsible man who is able to support himself and his daughter, with or without me.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 5 [6]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875