Wanting a guy with both a good career & good looks considered having high standards?

[Thegreatestthing]

You can look up "Katie daisy" she's a bit like me,her bf is a musician and she's a very successful artist,they live in a nice cottage/cabin,she's a very very pretty girl.some don't care.

[Mangina]

You can look up "Katie daisy" she's a bit like me,her bf is a musician and she's a very successful artist,they live in a nice cottage/cabin,she's a very very pretty girl.some don't care.

 

I am sure if I look up the doctor who married a man with 1 arm i'll find that too. so a couple girls are genuine, big deal.

[Thegreatestthing]

That guy the one you're talking about is actually v. successful,grad school,bla bla and a scientist - that actually turned me off because years ago he was more artistic and writerly and I thought he would be bohemian like me,but he didn't follow that path at all.

 

You did not marry him, did you? he would not happen to be guy who texted you for 2 years and stopped when you told him to?

[NJ123]

I wasn't trying to twist anything. Was just sharing with you my experience because you seemed genuine at some point in the thread.

 

Tried to be helpful, and you chose to sh*t all over it.

 

Well, it just seems you want the guy to have a good job regardless of if he can live within his own means or not. Is that accurate to say?

[NJ123]

Okay....so if you're not serious about the guy why even date them in the first place..... And what's their to "overlook" if you're not serious about them in the first place? Do you just go out with some guys randomly for the hell of it if you already know they don't meet your required standards?

 

Miss Bee, I'm still waiting for a reply on this.

[NJ123]

Well, it just seems you want the guy to have a good job regardless of if he can live within his own means or not. Is that accurate to say?

 

Meant to say "Well, it just seems you want the guy to have a good job, but what if he had a low income job but could still live within his own means." Would you still want to be with that guy?

[Mangina]

Meant to say "Well, it just seems you want the guy to have a good job, but what if he had a low income job but could still live within his own means." Would you still want to be with that guy?

 

I can answer that for you. Not if they can get a guy who makes more.

[Mangina]

That guy the one you're talking about is actually v. successful,grad school,bla bla and a scientist - that actually turned me off because years ago he was more artistic and writerly and I thought he would be bohemian like me,but he didn't follow that path at all.

 

i use to be that way too. Now im trying to make a living which is probably what hes doing.

[Divasu]

Well, it just seems you want the guy to have a good job regardless of if he can live within his own means or not. Is that accurate to say?

 

Get this straight.

 

You were not there with me during these relationships. You know zero. No woman is going to be open with you given the response you so generously displayed.

 

Expect no woman, who are strangers to you, to owe you anything more than a smile and a wave.

[Mangina]

Miss Bee, I'm still waiting for a reply on this.

 

got it never replied either

[Mangina]

Get this straight.

 

You were not there with me during these relationships. You know zero. No woman is going to be open with you given the response you so generously displayed.

 

Expect no woman, who are strangers to you, to owe you anything more than a smile and a wave.

 

here is your answer nj123. so long as you know whats really up.

[NJ123]

Get this straight.

 

You were not there with me during these relationships. You know zero. No woman is going to be open with you given the response you so generously displayed.

 

Expect no woman, who are strangers to you, to owe you anything more than a smile and a wave.

 

Just seems you're trying to attack me in this thread. Who ever said I was owed anything? And you ducked the questions I asked. But it's your right not to answer them, but it's still weird that you're taking things so personal. We got along fine in every other thread so it's just weird to me.

[whatcanitellyou]

Edit: my mistake read the previous question wrong. But I think a woman should look for whatever it is that she brings to the table herself. If she has a bitchy personality, than in my opinion she has no right trying to get with a nice guy. Or if she isn't that attractive herself, than she shouldn't have it as a requirement to get with some fit body attractive looking guy that most women seem to love. I think in terms of a job though, it shouldn't matter since you're job doesn't define you as a person. Like I said, you could get along with someone perfect, but because their job doesn't meet your standards than you wouldn't want to be with them? In my opinion that would make me feel that person is too high maintenance & I wouldn't want to be with them anyway.

 

 

While in theory I agree with you, f-ugly men think they're entitled to supermodels all the time under the false assumption that women aren't visual and when they can't get them they moan about how women don't like nice guys. And the same guys that moan about women who look for money also think they're entitled to 10's, so apparently they're allowed to have shallow standards but the women they want should be altruistic. Men that have money won't look for a nice lady, they'll use their money to get the best body it can buy, yet she's labeled a gold digger. So apparently men are allowed to use shallow criteria but women can't.

 

A guy who wants a fit body should provide a fit body. There have been a number of studies showing that men rate themselves much higher then women rate them.

 

As for a job, I see nothing wrong with standards. I make more money then my husband because i'm in a high paying field and I could care less. What I didn't want was an unambitious bum who's happy to flip burgers for a living. My husband is a hard working, accomplished guy and the fact that he happens to make less than me matters not. And he has a fit body so he gets a fit body from me.

[NJ123]

While in theory I agree with you, f-ugly men think they're entitled to supermodels all the time under the false assumption that women aren't visual and when they can't get them they moan about how women don't like nice guys. And the same guys that moan about women who look for money also think they're entitled to 10's, so apparently they're allowed to have shallow standards but the women they want should be altruistic. Men that have money won't look for a nice lady, they'll use their money to get the best body it can buy, yet she's labeled a gold digger. So apparently men are allowed to use shallow criteria but women can't.

 

A guy who wants a fit body should provide a fit body. There have been a number of studies showing that men rate themselves much higher then women rate them.

 

As for a job, I see nothing wrong with standards. I make more money then my husband because i'm in a high paying field and I could care less. What I didn't want was an unambitious bum who's happy to flip burgers for a living. My husband is a hard working, accomplished guy and the fact that he happens to make less than me matters not. And he has a fit body so he gets a fit body from me.

 

Well, yes of course it goes both ways. Men demand things that they can't hold up to themselves either. If their not an attractive guy, than they shouldn't be bitching about not being able to get an attractive woman. It's just reality in that regard. And true a lot of men with money basically just buy really attractive women. But personally if I was wealthy, I'd still rather have an attractive woman with a great personality over a 10 out of 10 who has high maintenance issues & a bitchy attitude. But if a woman's standards are that the guy needs to have a lot of money, she better have a lot of money herself.

Edited November 15, 2014 by NJ123

[NJ123]

And the reason their labeled gold diggers is because they don't bring anything to the table themselves. What do a lot of those women have themselves that are with rich guys? If they have no job or a **** job & only a great body than their rightfully labeled gold diggers for wanting to be with a rich guy. If they have a great job themselves than their not a gold digger.

[StanMusial]

Just look around you man, don't worry about anything someone says on a forum or even in person.

 

Best answer, from a guy calling himself Mangina.

 

OP, it's fun and entertaining to debate this stuff online but the answers are right around you. All around you. Even if every word you read on here is the Gospel Truth, it might never apply to you due to geographical/cultural differences, the people you choose keep company with, any number of circumstances really.

 

My advice is to stay away from successful career women that date waiters, and broke/indebted women that date rich guys.

[NJ123]

Best answer, from a guy calling himself Mangina.

 

OP, it's fun and entertaining to debate this stuff online but the answers are right around you. All around you. Even if every word you read on here is the Gospel Truth, it might never apply to you due to geographical/cultural differences, the people you choose keep company with, any number of circumstances really.

 

My advice is to stay away from successful career women that date waiters, and broke/indebted women that date rich guys.

 

What exactly is wrong with that? Is it because of the resentment she'll have for the guy eventually? It seems there's a stigma around that if a woman has a successful career that she's automatically considered a bitch.

[NJ123]

here is your answer nj123. so long as you know whats really up.

 

Yep. They refuse to answer the hard hitting questions.

[whatcanitellyou]

And the reason their labeled gold diggers is because they don't bring anything to the table themselves. What do a lot of those women have themselves that are with rich guys? If they have no job or a **** job & only a great body than their rightfully labeled gold diggers for wanting to be with a rich guy. If they have a great job themselves than their not a gold digger.

 

True enough. I guess the reason this irks me is because there's no comparable calling out on the guy; what kind of woman would a lot of these guys be able to get without all of their money? Why is he allowed to use shallow standards but she's not? It's essentially a business transaction where he uses his money to get much better then he normally could and she uses her body to get money, and he's decided being able to bang her is worth it. He could easily say no and look for a good woman, but instead the insinuation is that he's somehow a victim in all of this.

 

Besides, women that use their looks to get stuff have a very finite window of being able to do this, whereas a rich guy will likely continue to have money so he can always trade her in. In that sense she has to get a good ROI

 

I don't get it anyway, I've always paid my own way in life. And I wouldn't want a super rich guy anyway, I'd always be wondering if he's thinking he could do better than me. I'm in very good shape and reasonably attractive, but am certainly no supermodel.

[Mangina]

Best answer, from a guy calling himself Mangina.

 

.

 

it was either that or white knight.

[Mangina]

Yep. They refuse to answer the hard hitting questions.

 

so have you learned anything? ill help you out. the girls you were defending on the other thread were actually exactly what that guy was describing, despite his ugly demeanor.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Mangina

[MissBee]

Okay....so if you're not serious about the guy why even date them in the first place..... And what's their to "overlook" if you're not serious about them in the first place? Do you just go out with some guys randomly for the hell of it if you already know they don't meet your required standards?

 

Maybe you should try asking questions in a more open and less hostile manner and without already presuming to know the answer.

 

There are different kinds of dating. For me, there is dating with the intent to find someone I'm serious about (who will therefore be compatible with me on most fronts) and then dating more casually, where you enjoy that person's company, get along well and are attracted to them but perhaps are not a good long term match for whatever reason (either they aren't looking for that now, or you have different views on family or whatever the difference might be).

 

Some guys I start out trying to see if something serious can develop then I realize it can't and we still see each other but know that we will not be moving forward to a committed relationship. Therefore, something I'd overlook is: whether or not you want kids. If I am thinking of a serious relationship then that factor is very important to me, if I like you well enough but am not interested in you being my possibly husband, then I can overlook that.

 

Does that make sense to you? All it has to do is make sense by the way, you don't have to agree with it.

[NJ123]

so have you learned anything? ill help you out. the girls you were defending on the other thread were actually exactly what that guy was describing, despite his ugly demeanor.

 

Well to be fair, the women I were defending in the other thread I don't believe posted in this topic & had different views than most of the women in this thread do. Unless those women were lying the whole time about what they were saying?

[MissBee]

Yep. They refuse to answer the hard hitting questions.

 

 

Your questions aren't hard hitting as much as they are presumptive.

 

Further, ummm it's a Saturday night dude...do you think people are just here all night glued to their computers? This isn't instant messaging, people answer questions when they see them and you cannot assume someone is glued to LS just waiting to respond . Shoot...you acted like you asked whatever it is you asked days ago...when it's been hours, if that.

 

It's a weekend...people have lives. If you must know, I was having a glass of wine and chatting with some of my girlfriends who came by thus wasn't glued to my tablet waiting to respond to you...sorry. They left a few minutes ago and I came on. However, I'm going out later and am also doing some homework, so let me inform you of all my offline activities which are occupying my time lest you think I am shunning your supposedly "hard hitting" questions because I don't reply in 2 seconds.

[NJ123]

Maybe you should try asking questions in a more open and less hostile manner and without already presuming to know the answer.

 

There are different kinds of dating. For me, there is dating with the intent to find someone I'm serious about (who will therefore be compatible with me on most fronts) and then dating more casually, where you enjoy that person's company, get along well and are attracted to them but perhaps are not a good long term match for whatever reason (either they aren't looking for that now, or you have different views on family or whatever the difference might be).

 

Some guys I start out trying to see if something serious can develop then I realize it can't and we still see each other but know that we will not be moving forward to a committed relationship. Therefore, something I'd overlook is: whether or not you want kids. If I am thinking of a serious relationship then that factor is very important to me, if I like you well enough but am not interested in you being my possibly husband, then I can overlook that.

Does that make sense to you? All it has to do is make sense by the way, you don't have to agree with it.

 

Okay, so why do you even bother still seeing each other? That does NOT make sense to me. Unless you just want something from him. (sex, money etc.) If you know he's not the one for you, than you're wasting the guys time period. Do you flat out tell them you don't see it getting serious & than you both agree to some sort of FWB arrangement? Or is it just on your end knowing it won't get serious?