Professional Women

octane_orphan · Mar 28, 2005

How do you deal with professional women ?

For example doctors, lawyers that give you this blank kind of expression when you are introduced to them and they tend to keep a very cold front.

Similar question to - http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71988

omerta1111 · Mar 28, 2005

Many professional women, doctors & lawyers, are just like other women so long as they had social skills before they began their professional training (law/medical school|). Those who derive their self worth from their profession, however, break down into two groups.

1. Those who have delved into their career and put so much effort into it that when they are out of their element (the law firm, the hospital, etc.) they find it uncomfortable. They are really smart women but are insecure, thus they will likely be quiet and/or aloof in social situations, which often tags them with the b**** label. Being shy but coming across as b***chy then makes them even more reserved. Go light with these types, let them know its ok for them to be themselves. Professional women of this type can be terrific girlfriend/LTR material, they'll adore you for bringing them out of their shell, and because they are intelligent they are almost always a lot of fun both in the bedroom and out.

2. Those who have delved into their career and put so much effort into it that THEY NEVER SHUT UP ABOUT IT. These types are overly impressed with themselves and can be EXTREMELY annoying because they think others actually care about how well they did in school 10 years ago. Usually the chip on the shoulder comes as standard equipment. These types are rarely worth the effort...even if they are very attractive, the payoff is usually not worth the effort.

Look at it this way: with highly educated/professional women, usually the less they wish to talk about how important their career is, the more worth knowing they are.

JohnJones · Mar 28, 2005

I'm a lawyer and most of the women I know are too. Large firm lawyers with big salaries.

1) Most of them flock to the alter after law school like it's going to evaporate

2) They can, to the extent that it matters to them, be as picky as they want because they don't need someone to make money for them in the longterm.

white sox bill · Mar 28, 2005

Ha, funny you should ask. My ex GF from many years ago went back and got her Masters in education and is now a teacher. We still go out from time to time, but are not intimate. She really thinks she's the thing, but she hasn't had sex in over 5 years. So the Alpha Male in me came out the other day. Heres a brief dialog of our convo.

Her: I'm leaving for Florida with my friend Adina Monday.
Me: Yea you and her are close. You like her don't you?
Her: What do you mean "like" her?
Me" You know what I mean
Her: Yea you wanna see a video of us right?
Me: Already seen it. Your a carpet muncher aren't you (with a laugh)
Her: Your gross
Me: You know what you need is a good fuc*in'!! (laughing) I'm gonna bend you over and make you howl at the moon just like old times. You'll never look at another woman again after being with Big Bill
Her: (looking down and shy)I don't even know what sex is....
Me: Yea your gonna know when you get back home. But I don't want you hanging around me after I'm done. Your outta here after the dic*in' of your life.
Her: (smiling) yea yea
Me: Get out here I'll deal with you later

We bantered some more after that, I'll re-tap that soon!
Sorry just had to put that in!!

Francisco d'Anconia · Mar 28, 2005

I was talking to a doctor friend of mine about this just the other day. SHE even notices the strangeness of other doctors that had been interested in her. We agreed that they were definitely 'nice guys' that were just a half step or so out of sync with the rest of the world. Definitely brilliant in their professions however not much on social skills.

My friend is definitely up there in the monetary scale but that doesn't make her put herself over other people. She is proud that she makes bucketloads of money but she still shops at Walmart. The thing about her was that she wasn't always a huge money maker. She paid her dues but still had fun along the way so she is very comfortable with people who aren't doctors.

So what I'm getting at is that it's not really the profession, its the person. If they have social skills that are in concert with the regular guy on the street, what difference does their profession make? A person doesn't need to be a doctor or lawyer to be an @sshole.

Paulie Walnuts · Mar 28, 2005

picky broads

I have this one friend, a chiropractor. She easliy makes twice what I do. I dont let it phase me. She thinks that alot of men want her for her money, blah, blah. Her solution is to date in her league. My response is that the pickings are slim the higher you go. How many men make as much as you? I ask. You have the power to choose. Men will go out with women below their status if they make a lot. But women mostly will not. They are still stuck in the old fashioned notion that they have to find a man that makes more than they do. When you make 100k a year, the odds are very slim. Then they complain that guys are afraid of them. It's not that men are afraid of professional women, its that we figured out that we are looked down upon because we ar not as financially/profesionally successful, and will almost surelty be rejected. My attiutude is that I''m a great catch, and to hell with them if they dont see it. If they want to marry a wimpy guy with big bucks who cant change a tire or fix the plumbing you can have it. Surveys of older divorced professional women have shown that they like guys who can fix things around the house, and find themselves around a workbench. They understand that it is a practical skill, and a turn on.

stevera004 · Mar 29, 2005

Originally posted by JohnJones
I'm a lawyer and most of the women I know are too. Large firm lawyers with big salaries.

1) Most of them flock to the alter after law school like it's going to evaporate

2) They can, to the extent that it matters to them, be as picky as they want because they don't need someone to make money for them in the longterm.

1) It's altar, right? I don't enjoy being the spelling Nazi but come on.

2) Wrong. They are picky because they need a man to look up to. This 'look up to' is relative; a successful career woman will be looking to an even more successful career man. They are also under the illusion that men give a sh!t about corporate success (somehow they believe that men think like women in this regard). That's why it's so tough for 'successful' women to find men.

JohnJones · Mar 30, 2005

I don't mind spelling police. It's just like law review

On point 2, I don't think we disagree; all women are looking for someone they can look up to. I'm offering what I've seen that supports the idea that you don't need to beat her in cash to get somewhere: a number of women who are successful as we in the field describe it who are not as attracted to men of similar or superior financial success (and I'm not talking about rich men, just other young, male attorneys making the same or similar cash) but have a soft spot for a "real man," who, in my experience (while he cannot be impoverished nor an idiot) with his rugged independence and more stereotypically manly attributes can appear more attractive than the often-nerdy or recovering nerdy men in the profession.

The cash isn't the issue because there's tons of guys in that bracket who make the same money and she does too. What affects her is that often the boys in the club come off as being ex-nerds who couldn't get lucky and have big chips on their shoulders.

stevera004 · Mar 30, 2005

Originally posted by JohnJones
I don't mind spelling police. It's just like law review

On point 2, I don't think we disagree; all women are looking for someone they can look up to. I'm offering what I've seen that supports the idea that you don't need to beat her in cash to get somewhere: a number of women who are successful as we in the field describe it who are not as attracted to men of similar or superior financial success (and I'm not talking about rich men, just other young, male attorneys making the same or similar cash) but have a soft spot for a "real man," who, in my experience (while he cannot be impoverished nor an idiot) with his rugged independence and more stereotypically manly attributes can appear more attractive than the often-nerdy or recovering nerdy men in the profession.

The cash isn't the issue because there's tons of guys in that bracket who make the same money and she does too. What affects her is that often the boys in the club come off as being ex-nerds who couldn't get lucky and have big chips on their shoulders.

Yes, we agree. I would state it a little bit differently, but we agree. My point with professional women is that it's tough if you are a professional man. If they are successful, you need to be *super* successful in order to get their respect (otherwise, if you are peers, how are they going to look up to you); *or* you've got to hit them from a completely different angle, and that is, from the 100% man angle (and this they respect, cause they don't understand it and can't be like this themselves).

Rollo Tomassi · Mar 31, 2005

Thoughts on the 'Professional Woman'

Most professional women are forced into an uncomfortable choice in life. Generally women in this demographic have decided to pursue a career at the sacrifice of caring for a family; some initially disdain the idea of being 'trapped' in a domestic life. Some are aware of this sacrifice and some are not. Most professional women swallowed the (all too comon) ideology that "you can have it all", a 'rewarding' career, a family and an equally professional, equally intellectual husband that will respect her choosing the career path and equally share in what she perceives as his domestic duties. And like most professional women, at some point they come to realize this notion is false because the sacrifices required to attain this fantasy defeat it's own conditions. For example:

Timeline of the Professional Woman

At age 18 she's progressed through high school with a high GPA and her single mother or 2 parent family (rarely is it a single father) has raised her to believe she can go far and through the financial aid avialable only for women and/or the college fund her parents planned for her she's ready for college. Not a bad thing for a woman who's ready to actually meet the challenges of a University and a 'promising' professional career.

At age 24-26 she's achieved a masters degree, perhaps a doctorate by 28. But, more often than not though it's a bachelors and an expectation of professional respect in the professional world. 90% of professional women graduate with education, psychology, journalism or communication degrees. That's not to say some don't seek out careers in law or medicine, they do, but in far fewer numbers. Regardless of her education, her expectations are the same as her peers - once in the workplace she will be rewarded and respected. Unfortunately, in the professional world, things dont go as smoothly as her Women's Studies teacher prepared her for. She discovers that to function as a professional she is also required to be responsible as a professional and more times than not, it's not all that 'rewarding'. In fact it entails a lot of rejection and a lot of hard work at the sacrifice of a personal life and personal relationships.

At 30 she sees the girlfriends she went to college with married and having their 2nd child. She still clings to the self-affirmation that her choice requires she have, but can't understand why she hasn't 'got it all' by now. She's single or may even be divorced at this point, but looking for that 'professional' and intellectual equal of masculinity that the fantasy sold her, yet it hasn't quite worked out that way. Most guys her age don't have the intellect she expects they should or they lack the status in their careers. Men more successful and mature aren't interested in her since she pales in comparisson to the 22 y.o. women they seem to prefer.

At 35 she's achieved quite a bit in her carrer, but has no prospect for a family at this point. She enjoys reading the articles in the women's magazines that affirm what she thinks she experiences often enough - that men her age are juvenile with 'fragile egoes' and only want to become involved with women in their 20's because they are threatened by a woman who would dare to be their equal. The truth being that men are hardly juvenile at this age, but rather calculating, they have a better understanding of what they want and what is satisfying for them. Particularly professional men of the smae or higher status than she, since they have more access to being particular with the women they choose to become involved with. They are aware that the 35+ y.o. professional woman's personality has been shaped by 12-15 years of expectations of 'having it all' and they are aware that she is generally not a good candidate to start a family with since he too knows the sacrifices and responsibilities necessary to achieve his own status. A career man rarely sees a career woman as a good choice for a wife, not because he's threatened by her status, but because he's known and worked with enough of them once he's reached 35+ years of age to stear clear of them.

Men, generally, could care less what kind of money a woman makes or what she does to earn it. Men's only condition for intimacy is (and should be) physical attraction. The idea that a man should respect and be attracted to a woman based on her professional status is a fallacy brought to us by the same faction that sold women the 'you can have it all' lie. The main contradiction being that men want sex and determine acceptability of the opposite sex based on the physical, not status, not money, not professionalism. We reserve our estimations of other men based on these traits, so unsuprisingly it becomes counterproductive for women to expect sexual acceptability based on characteristics for which we're accustomed to evaluating our own sex with. It should also be understood that these are the same traits women use to determine their own conditions for intimacy - men are naturally attracted to feminine characteristics and women attracted to the masculine. Again, it's another attempt to force the rules of the game into a different set of conditions rather than attempting to better win the existing game by playing it better. The analogy to this is the WNBA. Financially struggling and without the viewership of the NBA, the WNBA attempted to alter the game to make it more exciting by lowering the height of the official baskets. Change the game to suit the purpose of the gender.

This isn't to discourage women from entering the professional realm, rather there is a complete lack of understanding and unrealistic expectations put on the shoulders of the very women who espouse this restructuring of men's natural impulses. The round peg simply wont be put into the square hole here. Professional women rarely understand the huge sacrifices they make in entering the professional realm and once the sacrifices are made and regrets realized, they burden men with the responsibilities of their decisions and make it their fault that the game is played as it is.

On the flip side of the arguement, most professional men are AFC Nice Guys, due to the fact that the demands of becoming a professional, educated male with talent, abilities, skills, required him to sacrifice his personal life, development of social skills and the ability for an honest estimation of his own worth with regards to women and what their own motivations are for different stages of their own lives.

Wyldfire · Mar 31, 2005

Rollo, I know a lot of professional women who are married, have children and are working in a demanding profession. My own sister is a perfect example. She even works in a profession almost entirely made up of men...aerospace. She is currently working on the Cassini Mission and makes an insane amount of money. She has been married 30 years to the same man and has raised two sons. She travels all over the world for her job, yet still finds time to volunteer in her community.

Where I live, there are many, many professional women who are balancing families and careers. Maybe that has something to do with me living in a town that was basically built around a country club and being close to an Ivy League college...but I see a lot of women who have demanding careers and families.

JohnJones · Apr 4, 2005

I think smart girls who make a ton of money are hot as hell. Even hotter if they make more money than me.

Maniax · Apr 4, 2005

Rollo, I think you posted some good points and made some good arguments.

Wyldfire, you're way out of line here. I don't care how many women you know who "have it all" as you say, but for the vast majority of us who live in a nice little place I like to call "reality," it doesn't work that way. You can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs.

I'm an old fashioned guy, as I would assume many guys are, and I would not be interested in a woman who makes more money than me, unless there were seriously overriding factors (check out the discussion on physical attributes).

Sorry...but that comment is pretty damn retarded. Just because a woman is a doctor, lawyer or scientist it doesn't mean she isn't feminine for crying out loud. It means she is busy and has a demanding job, but it doesn't make her manly...Christ!

Says who? Last time I checked, guys decide what feminine means to them, not girls. A demanding job doesn't make a woman manly, it just makes her more manly/less feminine. Men are providers, have been since the dawn of time. You think some psychopaths who burn bras and cry out loud are going to change human nature?

A woman's choice of job has absolutely nothing to do with how feminine she is or isn't...unless maybe she's a mechanic or something, then perhaps. Saying all professional women are masculine is like saying all unprofessional men are feminine. It's DUMB.

It's funny you brought that up, because a job means a lot more to a guy than it does to a girl. A man without a job becomes psychologically depressed. A woman without children becomes psychologically depressed. Both sexes crave creative expression, although they express that creativity in different ways. Feminists are usually lesbians so I guess all that hot lesbian sex takes their minds off kids. LOL. I guess adoption is always a possibility.

See, it's not all that complicated. Men and women actually are pretty different. We think differently, we act differently, we dress differently, etc. While women are intelligent and can be good doctors, lawyers, etc, that doesn't mean they should be indoctrinated to do so, as done today. If women saw TV shows and videos and billboards and media propoganda of the life women who have bought into this lie have in their 50's, I think a lot of women would think differently.

In other words, if Sex and the City stayed on for another season or two, we'd see a much uglier and real side to their lives. If being a single 40 year old socialite, with no family, no spouse to warm your bed at night, just you and that money that you've worked so so hard to get, seems like a meaningful and unselfish life to you, then more power ya. For the rest of us, we'll take the road more traveled.

Oh ya, and BTW, mechanic chicks are hott!

Wyldfire · Apr 4, 2005

Originally posted by Maniax

Wyldfire, you're way out of line here. I don't care how many women you know who "have it all" as you say, but for the vast majority of us who live in a nice little place I like to call "reality," it doesn't work that way. You can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs.

My entire neighborhood (good sized community in one of the most wealthy towns in my state) is made up of professional couples raising families. I AM talking about "reality"...and the same can been found in any community like the one I live in. The women take very good care of themselves. They work out, visit the hairdresser regularly, get manicures, take walks with their husbands and children after dinner. These women are everywhere and they don't look even remotely unfeminine. They belong to the PTA, country club, are active in the schools, are den mothers for scouts, they carpool with each other and go to their kids' sporting events. These women are in no way "manly" but they are professional and they always look their best and like women.

I'm an old fashioned guy, as I would assume many guys are, and I would not be interested in a woman who makes more money than me, unless there were seriously overriding factors (check out the discussion on physical attributes).

That attitude reeks of insecurity.

Says who? Last time I checked, guys decide what feminine means to them, not girls.

And 99.9% of males base how "feminine" a woman is on her appearance mostly, with her overall personality and level of pleasantness coming in a not so close second.

A demanding job doesn't make a woman manly, it just makes her more manly/less feminine.

Please give SPECIFIC examples of how having a professional job makes a woman less feminine.

Men are providers, have been since the dawn of time. You think some psychopaths who burn bras and cry out loud are going to change human nature?

What on earth does bra-burning done around 60 years ago have to do with professional women and femininty TODAY? No one is out burning any bras...they just want a more interesting life than sitting at home watching Oprah and eating bon-bons. Back in the day a wife needed to stay home because it was more work. Thanks to technology we now have vacuum cleaners, microwaves, automatic washing machines and dryers, crock pots, automatic dishwashers and the like. All of the other women in the neighborhood work so stay at home mothers lack adult interaction that any human adult NEEDS to survive and be a happy, healthy person. Once the kids are all in school, a woman spends less than an hour on keeping the house clean and can prepare a meal at the same time. What kind of an existence would it be for anyone to have all that time on their hands without anything purposeful to fill it with? It is CRUEL to ask a woman to be a housewife in this day and age. It's the equivalent of the death of her soul.

It's funny you brought that up, because a job means a lot more to a guy than it does to a girl. A man without a job becomes psychologically depressed. A woman without children becomes psychologically depressed. Both sexes crave creative expression, although they express that creativity in different ways. Feminists are usually lesbians so I guess all that hot lesbian sex takes their minds off kids. LOL. I guess adoption is always a possibility.

Not true...in fact, I bet my job means more to me than yours does to you. I'm a single mother raising my kids without any financial support from their father. If I don't have a job my children don't eat. I dare say it would affect me much harder if I lost my job than it would affect you if you lost yours. I have dependents to provide for...and you probably don't.

See, it's not all that complicated. Men and women actually are pretty different. We think differently, we act differently, we dress differently, etc. While women are intelligent and can be good doctors, lawyers, etc, that doesn't mean they should be indoctrinated to do so, as done today.

Why shouldn't a woman do those things if she wants to? It's HER life, afterall...and HER choice. Who are you to decide what is proper or improper for a woman to do with her life?

If women saw TV shows and videos and billboards and media propoganda of the life women who have bought into this lie have in their 50's, I think a lot of women would think differently.

Let's see some statistics. You keep stating your opinions as if they are fact without providing any anecdotal data whatsoever to back up your claims. Let's see some facts, shall we?

In other words, if Sex and the City stayed on for another season or two, we'd see a much uglier and real side to their lives. If being a single 40 year old socialite, with no family, no spouse to warm your bed at night, just you and that money that you've worked so so hard to get, seems like a meaningful and unselfish life to you, then more power ya. For the rest of us, we'll take the road more traveled.

You clearly watch far too much television...

Oh ya, and BTW, mechanic chicks are hott!

Whatever floats your boat...personally, I find male mechanics to be kinda nasty. They're always dirty and they smell bad even after showering. Not my thing...

Maniax · Apr 4, 2005

My entire neighborhood (good sized community in one of the most wealthy towns in my state) is made up of professional couples raising families. I AM talking about "reality"...and the same can been found in any community like the one I live in. The women take very good care of themselves. They work out, visit the hairdresser regularly, get manicures, take walks with their husbands and children after dinner. These women are everywhere and they don't look even remotely unfeminine. They belong to the PTA, country club, are active in the schools, are den mothers for scouts, they carpool with each other and go to their kids' sporting events. These women are in no way "manly" but they are professional and they always look their best and like women.

First of all, unless you didn't know this, most of America is NOT wealthy. That already makes everything you're saying here representative of a minority. But let's forego that little booboo.

If these women work out, go to a hairdresser, get manicures, etc. Then I can only assume they don't work for a living, or have a part time job. There is no way these women can have a 40+ hour job a week and manage all of that. Usually if a man can support his family (which is the case in wealthy households), the wife usually doesn't work, or works part time. Which is fine, but that wasn't the example we were talking about. Try to stay on point...

That attitude reeks of insecurity.

A man wanting to take care of his woman reeks of insecurity? Maybe women seeking to oust men at every turn because they're unsure of their femininity is insecurity.

And 99.9% of males base how "feminine" a woman is on her appearance mostly, with her overall personality and level of pleasantness coming in a not so close second.

Talk about crap statistics. Says who? You? Thankfully (for us guys anyways), you don't have a penis between your legs so you'll never really know what guys think of girls.

What on earth does bra-burning done around 60 years ago have to do with professional women and femininty TODAY? No one is out burning any bras...they just want a more interesting life than sitting at home watching Oprah and eating bon-bons. Back in the day a wife needed to stay home because it was more work. Thanks to technology we now have vacuum cleaners, microwaves, automatic washing machines and dryers, crock pots, automatic dishwashers and the like. All of the other women in the neighborhood work so stay at home mothers lack adult interaction that any human adult NEEDS to survive and be a happy, healthy person. Once the kids are all in school, a woman spends less than an hour on keeping the house clean and can prepare a meal at the same time. What kind of an existence would it be for anyone to have all that time on their hands without anything purposeful to fill it with? It is CRUEL to ask a woman to be a housewife in this day and age. It's the equivalent of the death of her soul.

I agree with what you're saying, IF the woman doesn't have little children. Subjecting children to growing up without a mother is CRUEL and is the death of their innocent little souls. Many women are content to be a housewife, and do things like workout, get manicures, be part of community projects... Hey wait a minute! Aren't those the same things you posted above?! Anyways, would you consider them to have sold their souls to the devil? Additionally, I never said women SHOULDN'T work, but if a husband can support his family alone, or there are little children in the equation, or whatever other reason, she DOESN'T have to work. It's her choice if she wants to or not, and you'd be surprised how many women opt out. Today women are indoctrinated to work whether they like it or not, by people like you who look down on housewives. Well aren't we self-righteous? And here we were talking about giving women choices. Apparently the feminist rhetoric hasn't corrupted their clean souls yet. Final point, women should put family first, then career.

Not true...in fact, I bet my job means more to me than yours does to you. I'm a single mother raising my kids without any financial support from their father. If I don't have a job my children don't eat. I dare say it would affect me much harder if I lost my job than it would affect you if you lost yours. I have dependents to provide for...and you probably don't.

Life has put you in the position of being the breadwinner, both the mommy and daddy. Unfortunately, this special case is becoming more the norm. Psychologically, my job is infinitely more important to me than yours to you, because it defines a core part of my personality. If you had no children, that would be tantamount to me not having a job. You don't have to be alone, but maybe you choose to be alone. Has the thought every crossed your mind of introducing another male role model into your children's lives? I'm sorry to say this, but no matter how hard you try, try 150%, your children will still be left with emotional scars and inherit problems because of a lack of a father/father-figure. I know, I was one of them. If you're trying to get another man into their life and yours, I commend your efforts. If not, then I have to ask, Why are you so CRUEL and why do you proceed to destroy your children's souls?

Why shouldn't a woman do those things if she wants to? It's HER life, afterall...and HER choice. Who are you to decide what is proper or improper for a woman to do with her life?

Exactly, so if a woman wants to be a housewife, don't look down on her, or the husband's who support her decision. Apparently, the ONLY choice is working and trying to have this one-upmanship game with men. How convenient for you.

You clearly watch far too much television...

Maybe, but unfortunately, TV is an accurate if not telltale marker for how women approach life today. TV influences a huge amount of people today. TV glorifies single women who leave their families at the wayside for their own selfish career motives. Looks like they're destroying their own souls very effectively indeed, why do you need me?

Wyldfire · Apr 4, 2005

Originally posted by Maniax
First of all, unless you didn't know this, most of America is NOT wealthy. That already makes everything you're saying here representative of a minority. But let's forego that little booboo.

If these women work out, go to a hairdresser, get manicures, etc. Then I can only assume they don't work for a living, or have a part time job. There is no way these women can have a 40+ hour job a week and manage all of that. Usually if a man can support his family (which is the case in wealthy households), the wife usually doesn't work, or works part time. Which is fine, but that wasn't the example we were talking about. Try to stay on point...

The town is wealthy, with upper middle class being the lower social "ranking" in the town. My neighborhood is upper middle class. Both parents usually work...and women are fully capable of working full time, doing the housework, carting the kids around, getting their hair and nails done and working out. Even in the most wealthy of families, more often than not the wife works too. It's not because she has to, but because she wants to. No one wants to wander around all day aimlessly with no purpose in life. People (women included) want fulfillment.

A man wanting to take care of his woman reeks of insecurity? Maybe women seeking to oust men at every turn because they're unsure of their femininity is insecurity.

A man who feels inadequate over a woman's earning power being higher than his IS insecure.

Talk about crap statistics. Says who? You? Thankfully (for us guys anyways), you don't have a penis between your legs so you'll never really know what guys think of girls.

Oh give me a break. I've been around here long enough to know that for the most part what I said is true. How often do you hear the guys on here talk about approaching a woman because of anything other than her appearance. Get real.

I agree with what you're saying, IF the woman doesn't have little children.

I don't think pre-school age children should be in daycare full time. I do, however, think it's very important for children to socialize with their peers in a pre-school setting a few hours a week. Although I have always worked I have NEVER put my kids in full time daycare. I have always had family members provide childcare for me.

Subjecting children to growing up without a mother is CRUEL and is the death of their innocent little souls. Many women are content to be a housewife, and do things like workout, get manicures, be part of community projects... Hey wait a minute! Aren't those the same things you posted above?! Anyways, would you consider them to have sold their souls to the devil? Additionally, I never said women SHOULDN'T work, but if a husband can support his family alone, or there are little children in the equation, or whatever other reason, she DOESN'T have to work. It's her choice if she wants to or not, and you'd be surprised how many women opt out.

My point is that there are VERY FEW women who are stay at home Mom's. There used to be a lot of them, and they formed companionships and friendships with other stay at home moms. That made it bearable. That has changed. And there are only so many activities a mother can find to occupy her time all day long. That's why so many of them spend a small fortune on the home shopping network and going shopping. Bored housewives spend a ton of money and gain weight while watching talk shows and soap operas that lead them to be dissatisfied with the old man and their unsatisfying life.

Today women are indoctrinated to work whether they like it or not, by people like you who look down on housewives. Well aren't we self-righteous? And here we were talking about giving women choices. Apparently the feminist rhetoric hasn't corrupted their clean souls yet. Final point, women should put family first, then career.

I don't "look down" on housewives. I feel sorry for them because I walked in their shoes when I first got married. I was unhappy, felt stagnant and felt like a prisoner. I was so lonely for adult interaction that I actually invited Jehovah's Witnesses inside to visit and do bible studies when they came knocking. I HATE organized religion...so the fact that I did that speaks volumes about how bored and unhappy I was. NEVER again...I would die first. And "feminism" has nothing to do with adults NEEDING adult interaction and purpose in life. The only reason wifes didn't make a fuss about staying home way back when is because their neighborhoods were a-buzz with activity during the day...so they had that interaction. Now neighborhoods are like a ghost town during the day.

Life has put you in the position of being the breadwinner, both the mommy and daddy. Unfortunately, this special case is becoming more the norm. Psychologically, my job is infinitely more important to me than yours to you, because it defines a core part of my personality.

Sorry, but defining your personality doesn't hold a candle to the drive to feed your children. Would you sacrifice your very life to protect your personality traits? I highly doubt it. I would give my life without thought if it was to protect my children. There is NO drive more powerful than a parent's drive to protect their children.

If you had no children, that would be tantamount to me not having a job. You don't have to be alone, but maybe you choose to be alone.

I would still have to provide for myself if I didn't have children. I am alone by choice.

Has the thought every crossed your mind of introducing another male role model into your children's lives?

My children have 3 uncles and I was engaged for 5 years to a man we all loved very much. He was murdered in a home invasion at a friend's house a few years ago. I had considerable grieving to do and so did my children. I am very, very picky about who I bring into my kids' lives.

I'm sorry to say this, but no matter how hard you try, try 150%, your children will still be left with emotional scars and inherit problems because of a lack of a father/father-figure. I know, I was one of them. If you're trying to get another man into their life and yours, I commend your efforts. If not, then I have to ask, Why are you so CRUEL and why do you proceed to destroy your children's souls?

My, how presumptuous of you. Listen, buddy...you don't know me and you know nothing about how I have raised my children. I've been far, far better at playing the traditional "father" role than most fathers are. I have 3 teenagers...19, 16 and 14. All are still virgins, have never drank, smoked or used drugs. I always know where they are, what they are doing, who they are with. They respect me, trust me and are damn good kids. In fact, they are WAY better kids than the vast majority of kids their age with both parents in the home. My boys were taught NOT to buy into male bashing and to stick up for themselves against being treated unfairly. I have gone to bat with the schools for BOTH of them when sexist policies against boys reared it's ugly head in their directions. I taught them how to play baseball, soccer and basketball. We camp, fish and build things. So you, sir, can kindly take your nonsensical diatribe and cram it up your uptight arse.

Exactly, so if a woman wants to be a housewife, don't look down on her, or the husband's who support her decision. Apparently, the ONLY choice is working and trying to have this one-upmanship game with men. How convenient for you.

I don't "look down" on women who don't work. I simply feel sorry for them because I KNOW from FIRST HAND experience how bad it SUCKS.

Maybe, but unfortunately, TV is an accurate if not telltale marker for how women approach life today. TV influences a huge amount of people today. TV glorifies single women who leave their families at the wayside for their own selfish career motives. Looks like they're destroying their own souls very effectively indeed, why do you need me?

Why do I suspect you're either British or Canadian?

Maniax · Apr 5, 2005

The town is wealthy, with upper middle class being the lower social "ranking" in the town. My neighborhood is upper middle class. Both parents usually work...and women are fully capable of working full time, doing the housework, carting the kids around, getting their hair and nails done and working out. Even in the most wealthy of families, more often than not the wife works too. It's not because she has to, but because she wants to. No one wants to wander around all day aimlessly with no purpose in life. People (women included) want fulfillment.

That's fine, but once again, a woman's responsibility is to put her family first.

A man who feels inadequate over a woman's earning power being higher than his IS insecure.

Well, women are insecure about their looks all the time (or what other purpose does the question "Do I look fat in this?" fulfill?), and I don't seem them apologizing for it. Hate it or love it, people are the way they are. That's why men and women have different roles in life, so they each feel secure in their own skin, their own job. When they try to jump into each other's business, yes, insecurity ensues.

Oh give me a break. I've been around here long enough to know that for the most part what I said is true. How often do you hear the guys on here talk about approaching a woman because of anything other than her appearance. Get real.

Unfeminine doesn't have to only be in looks. You can act unfeminine, dress unfeminine, etc. A woman who looks hot but acts like a man is not as uncommon as you think. It's not all about looks. We're all not as shallow as you think.

I don't think pre-school age children should be in daycare full time. I do, however, think it's very important for children to socialize with their peers in a pre-school setting a few hours a week. Although I have always worked I have NEVER put my kids in full time daycare. I have always had family members provide childcare for me.

Definitely, I agree with you on the pre-school thing. You have had family to take care of your kids. Although not as good as having the mom around, it's better than daycare. The thing is, this country is built on the nuclear family. Most people move away from their parents/relatives, so dropping their kids off to daycare like they're a UPS package is what most people resort to. Then we wonder why things like columbine happen. Maybe the parents should put in more effort/time with their kids.

My point is that there are VERY FEW women who are stay at home Mom's. There used to be a lot of them, and they formed companionships and friendships with other stay at home moms. That made it bearable. That has changed. And there are only so many activities a mother can find to occupy her time all day long. That's why so many of them spend a small fortune on the home shopping network and going shopping. Bored housewives spend a ton of money and gain weight while watching talk shows and soap operas that lead them to be dissatisfied with the old man and their unsatisfying life.

You're right, but not surprisingly, you're contradicting yourself anyways. How? Well look what you said above:

The women take very good care of themselves. They work out, visit the hairdresser regularly, get manicures, take walks with their husbands and children after dinner... They belong to the PTA, country club, are active in the schools, are den mothers for scouts, they carpool with each other and go to their kids' sporting events.

That sounds like a lot of activities. In any case, I never said women SHOULDN'T work, I said that family comes first. So if a woman's work conflicts with her putting dinner on the table, and the family has to eat out all the time, that's a problem. If the woman's work leaves the house looking like a pigsty, that's a problem. Does that mean I want women to be locked up in houses? Absolutely not. But once again, their MAIN responsibility is the home/family, NOT work. The MAIN responsibility of the man is WORK. That doesn't mean they can't overlap, but in general, they both have their seperate spheres of influence. Would a woman accept a man who couldn't put bread on the table because he was too busy cleaning the house? Or because he had to watch his son's little league game? Let's cut the double standards shall we?

I don't "look down" on housewives. I feel sorry for them because I walked in their shoes when I first got married. I was unhappy, felt stagnant and felt like a prisoner. I was so lonely for adult interaction that I actually invited Jehovah's Witnesses inside to visit and do bible studies when they came knocking. I HATE organized religion...so the fact that I did that speaks volumes about how bored and unhappy I was. NEVER again...I would die first. And "feminism" has nothing to do with adults NEEDING adult interaction and purpose in life. The only reason wifes didn't make a fuss about staying home way back when is because their neighborhoods were a-buzz with activity during the day...so they had that interaction. Now neighborhoods are like a ghost town during the day.

I think you have a good point there. However, just because you don't like being a housewife doesn't mean other women don't like it. I'm not supporting one view over the other but I think it's unfair for you to state that your own views mirror everyone elses. Everyone still has a choice of what they prefer. And that's the whole point, women have a choice too. And if they choose to stay at home, then you have no reason or right to pity/feel sorry for them. Why would you?

Sorry, but defining your personality doesn't hold a candle to the drive to feed your children. Would you sacrifice your very life to protect your personality traits? I highly doubt it. I would give my life without thought if it was to protect my children. There is NO drive more powerful than a parent's drive to protect their children.

Once again, it doesn't matter how much you're willing to sacrifice yourself. The point, this sacrifice comes from an external stimulus, not something within. If you won the lottery tomorrow, or didn't have to worry about financial security anymore, then your "drive," as you put it, would most likley be extinguished very quickly. You think guys don't go to work to feed their families as well?

My children have 3 uncles and I was engaged for 5 years to a man we all loved very much. He was murdered in a home invasion at a friend's house a few years ago. I had considerable grieving to do and so did my children. I am very, very picky about who I bring into my kids' lives.

I am very sorry for your loss and I commend your efforts for trying.

My, how presumptuous of you. Listen, buddy...you don't know me and you know nothing about how I have raised my children. I've been far, far better at playing the traditional "father" role than most fathers are. I have 3 teenagers...19, 16 and 14. All are still virgins, have never drank, smoked or used drugs. I always know where they are, what they are doing, who they are with. They respect me, trust me and are damn good kids. In fact, they are WAY better kids than the vast majority of kids their age with both parents in the home. My boys were taught NOT to buy into male bashing and to stick up for themselves against being treated unfairly. I have gone to bat with the schools for BOTH of them when sexist policies against boys reared it's ugly head in their directions. I taught them how to play baseball, soccer and basketball. We camp, fish and build things. So you, sir, can kindly take your nonsensical diatribe and cram it up your uptight arse.

It doesn't really matter how "well" you've raised them. The point is, a child's growth without both parents is stunted, in one way or another. That doesn't mean they won't be able to work through those issues, but it's much of a harder job. I understand that if it was in your power, you would have had things a bit different. But for you to think that you can do a better job parenting alone than with a partner seems a bit presumptuous of you, no? I'm sure you're a fine parent, but even you can't deny that 2 heads are better than one, that 2 people can do a much larger job than one alone. We parent because we want to see our children succeed, not to pat ourselves on the back on how good parents we are, although I'm sure you did a fine job.

This is a problem which leads to much sexual confusion in this country. Women can't show men how to be men. It just doesn't work this way. I don't want to restate my previous posts, so I'll just pont you to it: http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72199&perpage=20&pagenumber=3

I don't "look down" on women who don't work. I simply feel sorry for them because I KNOW from FIRST HAND experience how bad it SUCKS.

Once again, presumptuous. I'm starting to like this word! How do you know that everyone else hates it as much as you do, or at all?

Why do I suspect you're either British or Canadian?

Once again, your assumptions, presumptions and suspicions are incorrect. 100% born and raised american.

Wyldfire · Apr 5, 2005

Originally posted by Maniax
That's fine, but once again, a woman's responsibility is to put her family first.

No...any adult's first responsibility is to themselves, because if you don't take care of your own needs first you aren't worth a damn to anyone else. A parent's (both male and female) first responsibility AFTER taking care of themselves is taking care of their children. Parents should work as a team...whoever can earn the most money should be the main bread winner. The other parent should work if they want to but be the one who covers the extra stuff with the kids. Usually this is the woman, but occassionally it is the man. All aspects of making contributions to the family are equally important and necessary. I don't think it matters who does what as long as everyone is happy and all family needs are met.

Well, women are insecure about their looks all the time (or what other purpose does the question "Do I look fat in this?" fulfill?), and I don't seem them apologizing for it. Hate it or love it, people are the way they are. That's why men and women have different roles in life, so they each feel secure in their own skin, their own job. When they try to jump into each other's business, yes, insecurity ensues.

What does this have to do with being "professional" and earning power? Men are also insecure about their penis size and receding hairline...but both issues are irrelevent in this discussion.

Unfeminine doesn't have to only be in looks. You can act unfeminine, dress unfeminine, etc. A woman who looks hot but acts like a man is not as uncommon as you think. It's not all about looks. We're all not as shallow as you think.

Actually...yes, men ARE that shallow. It's okay, though...because so are women. I sure am...and I'm not in the least bit ashamed of it, either.

Definitely, I agree with you on the pre-school thing. You have had family to take care of your kids. Although not as good as having the mom around, it's better than daycare. The thing is, this country is built on the nuclear family. Most people move away from their parents/relatives, so dropping their kids off to daycare like they're a UPS package is what most people resort to. Then we wonder why things like columbine happen. Maybe the parents should put in more effort/time with their kids.

My kids have ALWAYS been cared for in our home. With my youngest (she will be 5 tomorrow)...the only people who have ever cared for her for me to work have been her grandmother (who lived with me at the time) and her big sister, who was also there for the birth. She is like a second mother to my little girl.

That sounds like a lot of activities. In any case, I never said women SHOULDN'T work, I said that family comes first. So if a woman's work conflicts with her putting dinner on the table, and the family has to eat out all the time, that's a problem. If the woman's work leaves the house looking like a pigsty, that's a problem. Does that mean I want women to be locked up in houses? Absolutely not. But once again, their MAIN responsibility is the home/family, NOT work. The MAIN responsibility of the man is WORK. That doesn't mean they can't overlap, but in general, they both have their seperate spheres of influence. Would a woman accept a man who couldn't put bread on the table because he was too busy cleaning the house? Or because he had to watch his son's little league game? Let's cut the double standards shall we?

If I were with someone who couldn't make as much as I could and we decided I should work and he should cook and clean and both of us wanted to do that, then yes...I would accept him just fine. Makes no difference to me as long as he respects me as a human being and treats me as such. I don't judge men based on how much they earn. It's irrelevent to me. As long as there is something in his life he's passionate about (art, hobby, etch) then it's all good.

I think you have a good point there. However, just because you don't like being a housewife doesn't mean other women don't like it. I'm not supporting one view over the other but I think it's unfair for you to state that your own views mirror everyone elses. Everyone still has a choice of what they prefer. And that's the whole point, women have a choice too. And if they choose to stay at home, then you have no reason or right to pity/feel sorry for them. Why would you?

The women who like the housewife thing usually have young children at home...and they aren't so bloody bored and lonely. Women who don't work and don't have kids at home are either miserable or spend their days doing "therapeutic shopping".

Once again, it doesn't matter how much you're willing to sacrifice yourself. The point, this sacrifice comes from an external stimulus, not something within. If you won the lottery tomorrow, or didn't have to worry about financial security anymore, then your "drive," as you put it, would most likley be extinguished very quickly. You think guys don't go to work to feed their families as well?

Actually..even if I were to win the lottery (which I don't even play) I would still work.

It doesn't really matter how "well" you've raised them. The point is, a child's growth without both parents is stunted, in one way or another. That doesn't mean they won't be able to work through those issues, but it's much of a harder job. I understand that if it was in your power, you would have had things a bit different. But for you to think that you can do a better job parenting alone than with a partner seems a bit presumptuous of you, no?

My ex-husband is a violent abusive alcoholic with Borderline Personality Disorder. When I say I can do a better job raising my children by myself I am not only being honest, but am 100% right to make that claim. And again...while all the teenagers of the two parent homes are off getting drunk and high, having sex, getting pregnant, etc...my 3 teenagers aren't doing any of that stuff. Obvioiusly I'm doing something right.

I'm sure you're a fine parent, but even you can't deny that 2 heads are better than one, that 2 people can do a much larger job than one alone. We parent because we want to see our children succeed, not to pat ourselves on the back on how good parents we are, although I'm sure you did a fine job.

Sometimes two heads are better than one...and sometimes they aren't. I have done a great job raising 4 kids by myself. If it isn't broken, don't "fix" it...that's my policy.

This is a problem which leads to much sexual confusion in this country. Women can't show men how to be men. It just doesn't work this way. I don't want to restate my previous posts, so I'll just pont you to it: http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72199&perpage=20&pagenumber=3

I'll have to read it later...I have to get ready and go to work.

Once again, presumptuous. I'm starting to like this word! How do you know that everyone else hates it as much as you do, or at all?

I've never met a "happy housewife" (no little kids at home) in my 39 years...and I've only known a few "happy" "stay at home Mom's".

SELF-MASTERY · Apr 6, 2005

BIGLAW destroys the humanity out of its associates. I've known three biglaw lawyers and the job just kills them, what personality they once had is taken away once they receive a high salary and the joy of serving ungrateful partners.

I love smart women, but I cant see a worth while LTR with a woman that gives more time to her job than to her family. I might be labeled old school, but hell, I need attention, Im high maintenance.

I feel that professional women (whatever that means) are good to poke around with, but that is all, they make lousy wives and girlfriends.

My ideal is a financially secure AVAILABLE women.

Im currently in a pseudo relationship (**** ON CALL) with a BIGLAW attorney. I barely see her, when I do, its a booty call, 11, 12 at night, she's always working late and on the weekends.

Sorry for the rant. I agree with everything that has been said.

Money- marriage- Im a little insecure with making less than a future spouse. It is really hard not to commingle self worth and money when momey is all everyone I know talks about. Every conversation is about cars, houses and clothes. Please dont mistake me for some redeyed leftist, I'm not, just a young guy figuring out the connection between career and happiness.

maybe we should all marry school teachers?

Genghis Juan · Apr 7, 2005

I'd just like to add my 2 cents here.

Biologically, the way men are wired will NEVER change, regardless of how much "progress" women and society make in terms of making the genders "equal".

A man will still be visually oriented and primarly and initially evaluate a woman on the basis of her physcial appearence and youthfulness. Even men who are very mature, still perform this evaluation internally. Its the way men are and it will never change no matter how much our shytty public school try to educate young boys otherwise.

Secondly, I disagree, NOONE can have it all. You can't have an excellent career and invest the time for raising kids the best possible way. There simply isn't enough time in the day. Kids should be raised by parents, not hired maids, the way nature intended it.

Some of the most F-ed up kids that go into schools and kill their fellow students were raised by upper-class, materialistic, YUPPIE couples who both worked long hours so they could "have it all".

Its the mythical and dark side of the American Dream. We are the most selfish and individualistic society on earth. It will take a generation or two for the results of this indoctrinated generation of women to see the results of a society in decline. Its the arrogant and presumptious side of the Women's Lib movement that says that women can have it all.

The bottom line is you can't have it all. Life is a zero-sum game, a gain always comes at someone's or something's loss.

A woman can't expect to work 60 hours a week, making $200k as a lawyer, and still invest the time to be an excellent and nuturing mother the way biology intended it. No way.

Furthermore, a woman can't depend on a man finding a career oriented, corporate type of woman very sexy. It just doesn't work. It will never work. Men don't evaluate women on the same criteria as women evaluate men, because we are wired differently, and progress and social engineering will never change this.

Professional Women

Don Juan

New Member

Master Don Juan

Senior Don Juan

Master Don Juan

New Member

Senior Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Senior Don Juan

Master Don Juan

Banned

Master Don Juan

Don Juan

Banned

Don Juan

Banned

Don Juan

Banned

Banned

Senior Don Juan