"Nice" girls, like Sandra Bullock....

[xxoo]

But anyway, can you give me reasons why a guy would throw away his poontang on the side to go with you?

 

Why don't you ask the men on the thread who've done just that? Or post that question in the marriage forum, where more monogamous men post?

[Lovelybird]

At least, Sandra's man-picker is needed to improve.

 

There is a good reason why Nice girl picks bad boys. I hope she figures that out, and find her happiness soon

[Woggle]

As much as I don't condone cheating I sometimes question what exactly men get out of being loving and faithful husbands. Are there any women here who have loving and faithful men that actually appreciate it and don't get bored or don't lose the attraction and passion and have not grown resentful? I know there are trustworthy men but how many trustworthy women are there?

[Twenty-ten]

I am not saying I'm "exempt" from infidelity, I am saying that I trust my man is not cheating.

 

I am not saying it will never happen to me, I am saying I trust that if he wants to be with me and not be single and play around this is the better of the choices for him as HE sees fit.

 

I am not saying that just because someone makes a promise to be faithful that they will be faithful I am saying that because they do make that promise I will hold them to their word, just as I hold the same standards to my own word.

 

But anyway, can you give me reasons why a guy would throw away his poontang on the side to go with you? I'm looking for reasons other than "I'm all that". Unless you live in a small, isolated town then I can understand why you'd believe he wouldn't go for sex on the side, but if you live in a city then I doubt it.

 

Obviously you have never been in a committed loving relationship. If you had been I wouldn't even have to explain to you what the benefit of commitment and exclusivity is. The answer is simple, reciprocal trust, respect, and affection and sex with meaning both spiritually and physically.

 

Why does anyone have a relationship with anyone?

 

Monogamy ensures that both parties will be true to each other. No one forces anyone to be in a committed relationship, and you certainly do not have to commit to one person, I support that as well if that is what you see fit for yourself.

 

What I do not support is people who want to reap the benefits of a committed, exclusive relationship, and want to continue living a secret life as a single person. If you see no benefit to being tied down to someone then don't tie yourself down.

 

If commitment is not what you want then open the floor so that your partner can also have the same choices don't do it behind their backs so that you can reap the benefits of a solid relationship ie, affection, regular sex, companionship, friendship, emotional support, and shared lives, while you are getting secret benefits on the side.

[sweetjasmine]

Actually, I do believe it could happen to me. I hope you don't think I think like you, that I'm "all that". I just don't care for monogamy. Why should I?

 

What exactly is the catch? I bet it's not as bad for Latin men as it is for U.S. men. At least Latin men get dutiful wife. American men don't even get that and still receive the nagging.

 

The catch is the martyr act - "Ohhh, suuuure, I see how it is, after all, I'm just the stupid idiot who's been stuck here every single day of her life cleaning up after you and doing everything for you while you go out and have fun with your friends!!!!" - resentment, and severe nagging.

 

And that's ignoring the "your money is mine" attitude. Women in our countries are socialized to expect men to provide for them without limitations. Your money is hers, and if she has to take a job in order to help out with the finances, you're failing as a man.

 

One of the couples I know through family friends is a Brazilian woman and an American man. I saw them recently, and 10 years later, she looks just as gorgeous. Guess who paid for all her plastic surgery trips to Brazil?

 

And, of course, there's the caveat that these are the general attitudes, and they don't apply to everyone. I've known couples where those dynamics aren't extreme, but they do still exist to some extent. These cultural beliefs about gender roles are still very much relevant in South American societies.

[calizaggy]

As much as I don't condone cheating I sometimes question what exactly men get out of being loving and faithful husbands. Are there any women here who have loving and faithful men that actually appreciate it and don't get bored or don't lose the attraction and passion and have not grown resentful? I know there are trustworthy men but how many trustworthy women are there?

 

 

Sort of what I am saying.. So many women complain all the time "My husband is boring, he wants to watch tv" etc . However, I have met many women who date cheaters who are completely wrapped up into them.

 

And usually when a man cheats, IF the relationship ends, it is because he moved on.. Women talk a big game, but they want that cheater to stay with them over the other woman.

[Twenty-ten]

I live in the United States, a country with over 300 million people; more than half are females. Some women delude themselves into thinking they are the only females around, and that the guy is so desperate, and that she is so great, that it's damn near impossible that he'd bang another woman. Get real. Poontang is everywhere: my job, my apartment, the colleges in my town, the post office, Barnes and Noble, the library, Walmart, Applebee's, the grocery store, the mall, even church, as well as the local bars and clubs. The more I see women around me, the less I believe in the idiotic, outdated notion of monogamy. I'm currently trying to bang the older married brunette who works in the health food section of my local grocery store. I'm pretty sure she once believed in monogamy too, but I'm currently working to make her change her mind about it, and thankfully I'm succeeding.

 

I think I am all that because I believe that a man is with me not out of desperation or lack of choices, he is with men because he would rather be with me than playing the field. Simple as that.

 

If I had any inclination to believe he is giving up a better life for himself by settling for me I would not be with him. I trust that a man who is with me is making a rational decision not one based on desperation. Just as I trust that he also believes I am with him not out of lack of options but because I fully and willingly want to be with him and only him.

 

That's where the "all that" idea stems from. I can offer him something bigger and better than just some meaningless ties he sees in women who he views as a hole to get his rocks off and nothing more. If the "holes" were more fruitful for him he would be doing that, he would not be with me. No one is holding a gun to his head. You make it sound like women have to hold a gun to a guy's head in order to get him.

 

Bottom line, I trust he makes his own choices.

Edited March 21, 2010 by Twenty-ten

[threebyfate]

But you are right. It is kind of silly to try to convince deceitful men that trustworthy men exist

That's it in a nutshell. We see others through our own lenses. People who are capable of cheating or have cheated, NEED to believe that everyone else is the same way. After all, it normalizes their behaviour, at least in their minds.

 

Overall, yes, there are men AND women who will cheat. This is a given. But also another given, is that there are men and women who won't. Net result, choose wisely.

 

Anyone who's reading this thread, should be able to see who they shouldn't be getting involved with!

[calizaggy]

The catch is the martyr act - "Ohhh, suuuure, I see how it is, after all, I'm just the stupid idiot who's been stuck here every single day of her life cleaning up after you and doing everything for you while you go out and have fun with your friends!!!!" - resentment, and severe nagging.

 

.

 

 

I agree.. And I have to admit, there is no way she will ever let me go out without her. But if I am with someone I do not mind giving up that independence and it makes logical sense.

 

As for money, many American girls are in extreme debt.. Them working basically just pays for their school loans, car loan, credit cards etc.. The guy paying for his brazilian girls surgery is probably far ahead, considering that the dollar is 2 to 1 against the real and she is debt free.

[Twenty-ten]

And usually when a man cheats, IF the relationship ends, it is because he moved on.. Women talk a big game, but they want that cheater to stay with them over the other woman.

 

Unfortunately, this is true in many cases. That is a female weakness I will definitely give you that. I would never stay with a guy who cheated on me, but there are tons of women who would.

 

Yet earlier you were asking what is so wrong with a man touching another woman why do women take this so to heart? Yet when a man is cheated on it is rare that he stick around after their partner is unfaithful to them.

[sweetjasmine]

The guy paying for his brazilian girls surgery is probably far ahead, considering that the dollar is 2 to 1 against the real and she is debt free.

 

They've been married for I don't even know how long (their first daughter is in her 20s), and she's been living in the US for at least 30 years. So the currency exchange is completely irrelevant. They could very well be in debt or doing great financially - I have no idea.

 

My point is that part of the role of wife entails "his money is mine to spend."

[Twenty-ten]

They've been married for I don't even know how long (their first daughter is in her 20s), and she's been living in the US for at least 30 years. So the currency exchange is completely irrelevant. They could very well be in debt or doing great financially - I have no idea.

 

My point is that part of the role of wife entails "his money is mine to spend."

 

 

Don't bother explaining it to him sweetjasmin, didn't you know Brazilian women have pussies made of gold, hearts like Mother Theressa and the morals of a Buddhist monk?

 

It's like trying to explain to someone who is tripping on acid that there is no giant plant with barracuda fangs trying to swallow them, it's all in their heads influenced by what they consumed a few hours earlier.

[calizaggy]

They've been married for I don't even know how long (their first daughter is in her 20s), and she's been living in the US for at least 30 years. So the currency exchange is completely irrelevant. They could very well be in debt or doing great financially - I have no idea.

 

My point is that part of the role of wife entails "his money is mine to spend."

 

 

Actually before you said "guess who pays for her plastic surgery trips to brazil"

 

So, the currency exchange is COMPLETELY RELEVANT, as just 2 years ago it was 4 to 1.. Which means plastic surgery is CHEAP in Brazil.

 

And American women are not known as the most materialistic in the entire world?

[sweetjasmine]

Don't bother explaining it to him sweetjasmin, didn't you know Brazilian women have pussies made of gold, hearts like Mother Theressa and the morals of a Buddhist monk?

 

It's like trying to explain to someone who is tripping on acid that there is no giant plant with barracuda fangs trying to swallow them, it's all in their heads influenced by what they consumed a few hours earlier.

 

:lmao::lmao:

 

Oh my, this literally made me LOL. Well done.

[Twenty-ten]

:lmao::lmao:

 

Oh my, this literally made me LOL. Well done.

 

Wait for the come-down my friend, it's all we can do.

[sweetjasmine]

Actually before you said "guess who pays for her plastic surgery trips to brazil"

 

Meaning that she expects her husband to pay for everything she wants, including plastic surgery.

 

So, the currency exchange is COMPLETELY RELEVANT, as just 2 years ago it was 4 to 1.. Which means plastic surgery is CHEAP in Brazil.

 

Which is why she went over there. But again, my point is that she expected her husband to pay for it.

 

And American women are not known as the most materialistic in the entire world?

 

No, I wouldn't say that they are.

 

Even if they are, it'd be an erroneous assumption to think that women (or people, actually) in every other country in the world aren't materialistic. And in more traditional, patriarchal societies, if a woman has to take a job to help support the family, it means that her husband is less of a man for failing to provide for everyone's needs. With American women, at least a lot of them aren't insulted by having to take a job.

[desertmoon]

I have heard a lot of people say that. "Well, she chose to marry a "bad boy" what did she expect? That he would be faithful??" Firstly, I find that so distasteful all the way around. It's an insult to both cliches. Both the "nice girl" AND "the bad boy".

 

Why is it distasteful? Why is it insulting? What is a "bad boy"/"nice girl" to you? Do you not think Jesse James is a "bad boy" based on press releases? (and we know how reliable that is..lol) and Sandra Bullock, a nice girl?

 

Just because someone is into motorcycles and tattoos does not make him an unfaithful, cheating dog and he shouldn't be regarded by society as one either. People sometimes do things when they are younger that they never do again, crazy & wild things. Whether that has anything to do with infidelity or not. No matter which social stereotype you fall into it should be expected that you will be faithful to your partner and your partner should be able to expect that from you as well.

I agree. Jesse James was with a tatted up porn star before he married Sandra Bullock, I guess, even at almost 50 his taste in women actually has not changed-makes you kind of wondered why he ever married Ms, Bullock

 

That said - I would be insulted if I were Sandra that I was cheated on with a woman who was so unintelligent. She just comes off as completely trashy & very minimal intellect and maturity level. UGH.

And you know this woman is all of the above, how? I hope you are not saying all tatted up strippers are dumb ?

[Stung]

personally i don't think that sandra is so nice, shes an actress and can fake whatever persona she wants to the public

 

in addition there is no way shes "nice" if shes gotten to that level of success

 

I think people are quibbling over the usage of the word 'nice,' again just as they do in the 'nice guy' threads...sweet doormat or basically good, balanced person?

 

I am not close with Sandra Bullock but I happen to have met her a few times as I am fairly close with someone she was involved with several years ago. I certainly don't claim any intimate knowledge of her personal thought process or her relationship history or what-have-you, but I can say that she seemed, in person, like a bright, grounded woman. She wasn't quite the affable goof she sometimes plays on-camera but struck me as being a bit reserved, with a wry sense of humor. She certainly seemed 'nice' in the sense that she did not act like a diva, or a drugged out party girl; she was personable, friendly, relatable.

 

I have heard people say that she does not always have time to sign autographs or is not always sweet on-set, and so what? She has multi-million dollar contracts to fulfill, she's got a job to do. I have also heard others say that she DOES make time for fans, that she IS genuinely nice on-set. All this suggests to me is that she is a human being who has on and off days like most of the rest of us. I know she gives a lot to charity. I know she apparently made a big mistake and fell in love with a questionable man she shouldn't have trusted. Yes, I do feel sorry for her for that.

 

FWIW I have no idea if she was ever on the 'casting couch.' I do know that said couch still exists, but I think it's a mistake to believe it applies to everyone in all walks of fame. Some people earn their way in Hollywood through perseverance and hard work and talent, some people trip or luck into it through nepotism or networking or sheer blinding good looks and luck, and yes, some people do their networking on their backs or their knees. I don't know exactly how Sandra got in and neither does anyone else on this thread, I'm guessing. Even if she was, would that in and of itself necessarily negate all 'nice' aspects of her character and make her a bad person?

[Taramere]

Line of thinking? Do you mean the line of thinking that 'bad boys" will do "bad things" even when they have promised and vowed they won't?

 

Yes, because first of all....Jesse James isn't a different species. He's an individual who has clearly made some pretty unconventional choices in his life. His arms are covered in tattoos. He's got a history of being involved with strippers and was married to a porn star. On that basis, we the viewers believe we can assess the character of Jesse James to a tee - and how ridiculous of Sandra Bullock to be unable to do the same.

 

Except that (I'm assuming here) none of us have ever met Jesse James or held a conversation with him. We don't know him. We only know a few quick facts about him and pictures passed onto us by the media. Evidently Sandra Bullock met him, liked him, there was a spark and they connected emotionally. Fell in love. Presumably they talked a little about past relationships. People usually do when they're starting out in a relationship. His previous marriage. At one point he had married a porn star. Why does a man do that? Is it because he's a crazy guy who will try anything once? Or is it possible that he's got a streak of humanity about him that makes him see and relate to other people's humanity...regardless of controversial choices or mistakes they've made in their lives?

 

Maybe in many ways he's a nicer guy than the man who'd sneer down his nose in superior fashion at the porn stars he privately jerks off to. Maybe some of the choices he's made, which we are deriding both him and Sandra Bullock for, came from him being led by emotions. Emotional decisions are often bad ones....but they do at least indicate the presence of some semblance of humanity. Perhaps that put him a step ahead of the majority of men Sandra Bullock meets in Hollywood.

 

I'm speculating, of course, but so is everyone else. What we do know is that Sandra Bullock fell in love with this guy, married him and has apparently always spoken with incredible warmth about him. Which suggests they had something going for them, and that they were happy. On that basis, maybe she really didn't see this coming. Perhaps she believed that regardless of the tattoos, the porn star ex wife and whatever else deems him a "bad boy" in society's eyes, he would know when he had a good thing - and wouldn't spoil it.

 

I wonder if Sandra Bullock would be judged less harshly for her choices if she'd married a "nice" sensible shark-eyed studio exec who wouldn't hesitate to put the frighteners on any woman who threatened to expose an affair she'd had with him.

[xxoo]

I've thought about it, and have a theory about why politicians, celebrities, athletes, and other highly successful people (including icons like Martin Luther King, Jr) have high rates of cheating. They tend to be risk-takers.

 

As with any personality trait, risk-taking has positive and negative aspects. The positive aspects allow them to take chances and acheive greatness. And one negative may be that they are more comfortable with the risk that is involved in cheating, even if their "monogamous" relationship is truly important to them.

 

People who do not cheat may be far less comfortable with risk, on the whole. When they consider the risks and benefits of getting a little strange, the risks seem much more significant and likely, helping them keep their pants zipped.

 

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting all risk-takers cheat, or that only risk-takers cheat. Just that the tendency to cheat may be correlated with general comfort with risk.

Edited March 21, 2010 by xxoo

[Twenty-ten]

 

And you know this woman is all of the above, how? I hope you are not saying all tatted up strippers are dumb ?

 

 

She posed for one of her skank spreads with swastikas and props with nazi symbolism including she has another nazi tat on her stomach and a "W and P" on each leg for "white power". How many white supremacists do you know that are known for being intelligent and mature?

 

If that doesn't spell stupidity, well..... just look at her.

 

Even if there were any hope that she is not dumb, she's still scrape the bottom of the barrel, trash.

[torranceshipman]

Women, whether they be nice or whores, end up falling for bad guys reguardless..

 

This is incorrect. My boyfriend is definitely a nice guy and I'm more in love with him than anyone I've ever dated. My friends swoon over him (lol) when he always stands up to take my coat, pull out my chair etc, and shows so much consideration...he has a great, respectable job, loves my family, really shows me he loves me, never makes me feel insecure...I find him damn sexy cause of all of that (plus he is handsome and successful, suppose that contributes!). If he was a bad boy, well, bad boy means flaky and immature in my view - yawn - he wouldn't be as interesting to me if he was like that.

[Twenty-ten]

This is incorrect.

 

 

Well he is hardly "incorrect" just because you don't go for bad guys. I don't either, but that doesn't mean a lot of women don't. A lot do.

 

Apparently this is the new heartthrob for girls ages 5-15, tell me it is not ingrained into the female brain to find "bad boys" more attractive. When was the last time you saw a star that girls went crazy over that looked like this? And he is not exactly an ugly kid he is quite cute but he just doesn't have the bad boy image.

[calizaggy]

I find it all VERY predictable..

 

Sandra is 45... Jessie is 40..

 

If she wanted a "monogamous guy" perhaps she should have married an older man.. Perhaps 50-55... But no, she wants the hot bad boy all the women are after..(perhaps all the divorced soccer moms are depressed this did not work out)

 

 

So he finds a woman who is 24. (Go Jessie!) Not a tough decison for him at all, and I doubt she was the first or only one..

[Twenty-ten]

Right because Donald Trump, James Cameron, David Letterman, Tiger Woods, Hugh Grant all never cheated on their younger wives.

 

I'm sure you will find fault in this set of women for marrying a man that was too much older than them.

 

As per the age difference between Sandra and Jesse she looks at least 10 yrs younger than him, who cares if she is 4 yrs older it's all about how you look not the numerical age. Not to mention Sandra is 100 times better looking than the 24 yr old scrag he cheated on her with.

 

It's not about going younger, it is about going with another piece of garbage who is on his level so that his penis doesn't have to feel reduced, as it does next to a woman who is 10x hotter and more successful and talented than he will ever be.

 

This is a good example for women to take note of, who are tempted to settle for a man that is beneath them in obvious respects.

Edited March 21, 2010 by Twenty-ten