Couldn't the same be said of what women want?
Sadly, RT, their tastes appear to be slightly more sophisticated. Beer did not appear to be involved.
Bah, humbug. Putting aside all the phony sophistication, women’s needs can be summed up quite succinctly: 1) safety/security;2) respect; and3) unconditional love.All the rest are optional bonuses. p.s. Not referring to them as "chicks" might be advisable with regards to point #2.
I believe that I answered the question in March '06. Thanks for the link Cynic.
Shows what any of you know - at least as far as what this girl wants:1) Unconditional love;2) Respect.Safety and security I can take care of myself (I've been doing it for years). All joking aside, all anyone really wants (male or female), IMHO, is for someone to accept them as they are. No relationship is perfect but that certainly helps.And being called a "chick" doesn't bother me ... I refer to guys as "dudes" most of the time.
Two out of three. Not bad…
Ick. Unconditional love is a suck on patience and forces compromise. If someone doesn't want to step up their game to keep up with me, their loss. It is also an excuse for bad behaviour.
No, it's not bad at all, RT. Bet you're feeling pretty smart right now ;-)
Unconditional love is a suck on patience and forces compromise.So, you'd rather be with someone who says things like "I love you but ..." or "I'd love you more if ..."? No thanks, that would suck up all my patience PDQ. I have no desire to change the person I'm with, whether they're Mr. Right or Mr. Right Now - I prefer to live in the moment. If things don't work out, you can always move on.
Hey, 25 years of marriage... what can I say? You get to know these things.
Red Tory said... women’s needs can be summed up quite succinctly: 3) unconditional love.Unconditional in what direction? It's always appeared to me that the "un" only flows in one direction while the conditions flow in the other.
Both directions - we accept each other as we are and deal with all the shit that comes along with it.
LuLu said... Both directions - we accept each other as we are and deal with all the shit that comes along with it.The point I was driving towards is that there's no such thing as unconditional love (at least not in relationships). It's a myth that's created by poets and perpetuated by greeting card companies. All love has its conditions and qualifiers, it's just a matter of acceptance of said conditions. For example, could you show unconditional love for an abusive alcoholic (i.e. continue to be with and love them irrespective)?To paraphrase Gordon Gekko in Wall Street: "If you want unconditional love, get a dog"
And the point that I was making was that you accept someone, warts and all, or you do that "moving on" thing I referenced. So no, an abusive alcoholic would not be acceptable to me because, trust me, the first time a man hit me would be the last. But is this something you know from the first time you meet someone? Of course not. So you learn as the relationship grows and changes and you decide what you can live with and what you can't.
There are various ways of defining “unconditional love” — from that of a dog to the feelings one has for “significant others” (e.g., wife, children, parents). In some respects there are similarities, but also significant differences. It’s also important to note that affection isn’t necessarily involved. I couldn’t abide my father, but I still “loved” him. Sometimes there isn’t a lot of choice in the matter. It just exists... frequently in stubborn defiance of reason.
Alas, all of the evidence collected by psychologists over many years suggests that even women who are fully capable of providing for their own safety and security are hardwired to evaluate potential mates on their ability to provide it.Studies focusing on homosexual relationships report a much higher level of stability for relationships between men than between women, simply because gay men tend to remain in a relationship as long as their partner remains physically attractive and sexually available, while lesbian relationships become unstable the moment one partner receives a promotion at work. Heterosexual relationships, of course, face both hurdles - the woman has to stay attractive, and the guy remain financially better off than the woman, or the relationship tends to deteriorate.These are, of course, broad trends taken over a whole gender. Individuals may, indeed, buck the trend - but given that such motivations tend to be unconscious, introspection is not a valid methodology for determining if you fall into the pattern.It's also worth noting that the studies focused entirely on those raised in western cultures, so it is quite possible that these are learned behaviors rather than intrinsic ones.None the less, the fact remains that more often than not, if a woman makes more money than her partner, the relationship will destabilize. Just as a man is likely to either move on or cheat if his partner has a significantly lower sex drive than him, or becomes less attractive.
I got dumped once because he didn't think I needed him enough. But then he was a big old Brit drama queen. Or gay.
LuLu said "All joking aside, all anyone really wants (male or female), IMHO, is for someone to accept them as they are."I agree with you LuLu...and while I will also agree that initially, most people are drawn to looks and attractiveness, eventually that wears off. Deep down, we want to be loved and accepted for who we are, flaws and all.I also think, that when it comes to matters of the heart that we can't help who we love. Have you ever fallen in love with someone and just told yourself "don't love that person!" ? It's not so cut and dry. Sometimes we love people and can't help it, even though we know we shouldn't love that person, or if they aren't good for us either.Just as a man is likely to either move on or cheat if his partner has a significantly lower sex drive than him, or becomes less attractive.well YIKES! Aren't we women all "cursed" then if this is how the average male thinks!Men usually become "finer" as they age, but in society that's not usually considered the case now is it! I would like to think that there are men out there that find women sexy, even after they are considered "over the hill" at 30.Then I think of the interview I saw where Roman Polanski stated that he believes that the majority of men are indeed, only attracted to younger women (15-17 yr olds)and what exactly do you say to that. Women in their 30's and 40's and even 20's can't compete physically with underaged girls. And we shouldn't have to.
Men usually become "finer" as they age, but in society that's not usually considered the case now is it!oops! Should read "Men usually become "finer" as they age, but in society in regards to women that's not usually considered the case now is it!
We pleasure ourselves with this amusing conceit that we become “finer” with age (like wine or other alcoholic beverages that steep for years in oaken barrels, apparently), but physically speaking, that’s simply not true
Post a Comment