Sugar Daddies

reply to post by Bluesma

It is ironic that you claim communicating with all females is like talking to a wall or a five year old, when your ability to spell or use grammar is so handicapped. If you speak as you write, then it is no wonder effective communication is a problem for you. That was my point in response to your statement , perhaps a bit too subtle for you to have caught.

I do not speak as I write, nor do I think as I write, but I write as I please. And there is nothing subtle in anything you have said so far. I do believe your just an idiot who has been indulged to the point that you actually believe the # that comes out of you mouth, or you just happen to put down in writing. I do not think it gets much clearer then that.

But if you want I can try to make it clearer. Seems you have a hard time understanding basic concepts, must I repeat myself or should I just try to use different wording. I am already speaking, writing and explaining things to you on a 5grade level. You should get it by now.

Nothing here clarifies your position on “who is attracted to who?”. Both parties willingly went forward toward the other. No woman tore these men away from their activities against their will- no more than the men did for the women.

The chicken and the egg is a complex process involving billions of years of evolution. But to put it bluntly the chicken and the egg developed side by side from the time the first cell split in two and became a more complex organism, when it reached a certain fork in the road and number of cells, based on the ecosystem it became more prudent to copy itself by different means in a ever changing environment, hence instead of just splitting in half like a cell this colony of cells devised another means to achieve that...ie an egg.

And so the majority of females and sugar daddy's evolved side by side throughout the century, like the egg and chicken they are not two separate objects. They are one thing. So who is attracted to whom? They are mutually attracted to eachother, they just have different means of going about that. If one were to falter in that process then they would not be attracted to eachother. I mean you said it yourself...Duh!

Just as I could say I often find power an attractive element in an individual, if I feel he/she abuses that power, or has other unattractive parts of their character, that attraction is nullified. I cease to feel it.

I do not believe you. But as long as you believe you, I suppose it can be overlooked.

A man may find physical beauty attractive, but if the beautiful woman turns out to have other parts of her behaviour or character that he finds repulsive, he ceases to feel that attraction.

Depends on who your talking about. But there is a great majority who would put up with anything to be in the circus, just like there is a great majority of females who would put up with anything to be included in the higher echelons of society. So ya! Again! It depends.

The result then, is that attractions between individuals are not predictable.

Off course they are and can be, our whole society in some aspects hinges on just that very fact.

I never said any such thing!!!! I spoke of subjects of attraction. Attraction is not love, money is not love. Love does not play any part in any part of this subject.

Oh yes you did. You just used different wordings. And now your trying to mince words with me. You should like tottaly quit it Ok. Its annoying.

This is a rather crazy rant. You know nothing of me. I have a business of my own that I created and run myself, in a foreign country, for which I had to learn the language and culture on my own without help. I have three children I raised to be successful and educated. I have been married to the same man for more than 20 years (my only marriage), and left my country and family to support him. He had no job, no home, no car, no money when we met- it was I who helped him get to where he is now through loving support and advice.

OK I could be wrong on that part about you. Don't get all pissy.

However I mostly failed to explain and convey what i was trying to say. And in that I believe I was pretty much dead on. However it was not really about you, more like you and others are a representation of it all in an overall scale. Of which you and most females would have little to no concept off.

None of your silly notions have anything to do with me. As I said, HUMANS are all drawn to power (look up Nietzsche, and the Will to Power, consider his assertions). Sometimes it is the woman in a relationship who wishes to learn how to be powerful, from a powerful man… sometimes it is the other way around.

Its all the same thing, power, money, love, the way you and others differentiate between them is the only difference. And I am saying exactly that, and I am also saying that you all are not capable of anything else. In fact there may be nothing else.

In any case, it is not parasitism, it is interdependence and exchange.

Sure if you look at it from that perspective and overlook a mountain of other evidence then that's what it is...But in all we shall see. Like i said you all evolved side by side, the chicken and egg. So I suppose that would be the optimal and as good as it gets. But even that you remove a peg and the whole thing falls down...Jenga Jenga Jenga...I suppose its the name of the game, not the jenga board game, the real life game you all play. I call that game love and life.

Absolutely not. The adage “opposites attract” can often be observed for that reason. The Marilyn Monroe/Arthur Miller type of couplings and partnerships are not rare.

I do not know who that is...But on further checking up, I suppose everybody has there kinks and stuff which they would get off. And for others it would be a sort of hell. Lets just say dam! That blonde bimbo its a good thing she had looks, and the guy...Well now I know who to blame for those crappy plays. But in the end I do believe there is not such thing as missing out on love as you so pointedly pointed out with that whole thing. Now if only there were a way to stick them all together from the very beginning it would eliminate a whole lot of problems. Or at least for a few years.

I am not familiar with the "husband elevator joke". If you are not aware of the changes that have happened for women in society over the centuries, I am not going to spend my morning educating you on history. It has evolved greatly and continues to do so. That is not getting nowhere, from my perspective.

You lie. You are familiar with the husband elevator joke. It is as common as the woman keeps man around to squash bugs joke. And oh yes things have been evolving. Why the very world around you is a testament to that.

That is another crazy rant. The subject of females as vessels pertain to the needs people have to give, to project, themselves.

Nah its just an old pick up line, which got shuffled around, put in a blender, and a few thousand years latter somebody made a philosophy out of it, then from there it was compounded on and contemplated on, till we reach today's age. It pertains to things, the same way women in bars would pertain to buying alcohol.

The idea is describing something we experience each day, right now. Why do you write out your thoughts and opinions here, on a forum? Why do you feel the need to put it somewhere, to get it out, for others to take in?

Data gathering on false affirmation which have become cemented as facts. Most of which the source comes from females narrowed down to certain female types who thrive of it. Or at least that is one reason why I bothered with this thread or such threads.

The fact that you have that need gives this forum, this “vessel” a reason for being and a value just in it’s capacity to receive that output you have.

Ya whatever. The stars in the sky will all fade one day, and so will the sun. This whole thing is more then meaningless. What are you religious or something, if you substitute the world "vessel" for "fancy" you would likely get a better picture of yourself. All value is perceived, and I perceive that this whole thing has very little value.

This forum/vessel is not “nothing” it is providing a valuable service for you. And it is not sexual- what you project within it is not physical, it is mental. Your mind has needs too.

Like the chicken and Egg...The Sugar Daddy and The Female... The Physical and The Mental. All are ultimately part of one thing as well which evolved side by side. One process leads to another, the ebb and flow of things, pull and push, it is how things change, and ultimately how things stay the same. One can not exist without the other.

It needs your input and that of others, in order to exist (without posters it will die out)... does that make it "parasitic" in regards to you? Or is this an exchange???

See the above post. And no I was not talking about that about the whole prasitic existence were this will all lead. In fact its clear you just dont get it. As such there is no longer any need to drag this on. Return to your daily scheduled programing, and I will return to mine.

Is it starting to dawn on you yet?

Is it starting to dawn on you yet?

reply to post by galadofwarthethird

So who is attracted to whom? They are mutually attracted to eachother, they just have different means of going about that.

Well, if one eliminates all the childish name calling and blather, we can dig up some sort of answer to the topic!
Unfortunately, it contradicts your statements which took us in that direction- which were that it was the male who was attracted to the female, and she is simply taking advantage of him in a parasitic way.
Now you agree with my view instead?


The result then, is that attractions between individuals are not predictable.

Off course they are and can be, our whole society in some aspects hinges on just that very fact.

You can predict that a percent of females or males will react in this or that fashion, but you cannot make the same predictions for specific individuals.

Generalizations are extremely unreliable in predicting and judging individuals, in act and even more so in motivation. Your faulty guesses about me and my behaviour and history is an example of how far such ideas can lead you astray.




I never said any such thing!!!! I spoke of subjects of attraction. Attraction is not love, money is not love. Love does not play any part in any part of this subject.

Oh yes you did. You just used different wordings. And now your trying to mince words with me. You should like tottaly quit it Ok.

My exact words, copied and pasted:
They asked for money. Love and money are not the same thing.

How can you interpret that to mean love and money are the same thing?


In any case, it is not parasitism, it is interdependence and exchange.

Sure if you look at it from that perspective and overlook a mountain of other evidence then that's what it is...But in all we shall see. Like i said you all evolved side by side, the chicken and egg. But even that you remove a peg and the whole thing falls down...Jenga Jenga Jenga...I suppose its the name of the game, not the jenga board game, the real life game you all play. I call that game love and life.

Who is the “you all” refered to here? Women and men ? Human beings? Entities that live and that love?
If you are exempt from this reference, what are you exactly ???


If you are an alien, or a rock, that might explain your lack of knowledge about key thinkers and concepts of our civilisation. On the other hand, you just might be a kid.


The fact that you have that need gives this forum, this “vessel” a reason for being and a value just in it’s capacity to receive that output you have.

Ya whatever. The stars in the sky will all fade one day, and so will the sun. This whole thing is more then meaningless. What are you religious or something, if you substitute the world "vessel" for "fancy" you would likely get a better picture of yourself. All value is perceived, and I perceive that this whole thing has very little value.

Subjective value. If you have no desire or need for this service, then why come here? Has nothing to do with religion (or whether I am “fancy”). Demand and supply. If there is a demand for something, it gains a value.

Like the chicken and Egg...The Sugar Daddy and The Female... The Physical and The Mental. All are ultimately part of one thing as well which evolved side by side. One process leads to another, the ebb and flow of things, pull and push, it is how things change, and ultimately how things stay the same. One can not exist without the other.

Exactly my point- judging the seasons as good or bad can be done too, if you wish. But that will always remain a personal, subjective, moral judgement. All things evolve for a reason- to further life.

reply to post by Agit8dChop


You have major sexist issues.

Funny how you have no problem with the man making the proposition. It is all the evil woman's fault?

See a shrink and work on your mommy issues.

Bluesma

galadofwarthethird
talking with most of the female gender is already like talking to a wall or a 5yr old, and never mind that you may as well be in a different dimenshion when bringing up certain subject

After what I already read from you, "dude", I would suggest that experience might stem from the fact that you simply have some difficulties in cognition. It is possible women may have the distinct impression they are talking to a wall, or five year old in you.

The maternal types like me probably can't help trying to break it all down into smaller pieces for you, as one would for a small child, to help you with your "dimenshion" digestion.

For one you mentioned that these women want "love" in return for "nothing"
They asked for money. Love and money are not the same thing.

Two- what do you identify with? If you were to share yourself with another, what would that mean giving?
Are you your money?
Are you your body?
Are you your will?

Would your "gift of self" be material, physical, or mental?
This is just the beginning of the discussion of females as vessels to be filled.

edit on 24-1-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)

I wish I could give you a hundred stars.

reply to post by Bluesma

Well, if one eliminates all the childish name calling and blather, we can dig up some sort of answer to the topic! Unfortunately, it contradicts your statements which took us in that direction- which were that it was the male who was attracted to the female, and she is simply taking advantage of him in a parasitic way. Now you agree with my view instead?

I always agreed with your view. You just seem to have a hard time grasping things, maybe you should re read the previous banter. And is it is quite parasitical, but all of that is just depended on a variety of factors including how ignorant the people in question are of some things. And generally like you said the female is attracted to a male purely on social complex issues and survivability in that ecosystem ie society, beyond that it is merely up to them to put definitions to the things there doing and are going to do. You remove that, not only does the whole thing falter but falls short by lightyears, for instance what is the difference from a woman being attracted to money as apposed to a woman being attracted to wealth or any of the other things you said?

Its all just mincing words, and not only have. And like I said females evolved under that paradigm but the majority would not be able to function or be any other way, so yes you may call it willpower, others call it Sugar Daddies, it all just depends merely on situational circumstances, but the outcome of the people in question will remain pretty much the same and so it would in who and what there attracted to. Now who for centuries have been attracted to whom?

Like I said its a chicken and egg thing, its a preset predestined social complex, in some people for instance you and many other females it is practically written in your genes, so ya its quite possible to know who most females will fall in love with, once you know all the machinations of the thing they like to call love, and the thing they like to call love is merely an extension of a survival and adaptability process, also a social complex, the ladder climbing kind for many. Hence things are spiced up...But it all depends on just what you call a thing, its all basically semantics on a metal projection planetary scale. Of which you and most females would not be aware of, and if you were you would go all doe eyed on the subject. In all its just semantics.

But listen here Bluesma, I suppose I must be more nice to you people and quit calling you mean words. But technically that is what I see you as, and I mean! if you want! I can avoid all that and not call you that. Yet till you obviously quit bull#ing around and lying I will keep thinking it, and even after that most likely. That is generally the proper protocols when dealing with such. It shall stand. I think this whole thing has gone far enough and indulging females on such fronts has lead to some serious mindtrips as a whole and serious cognitive dissonance in there mental makeup, most of it negligible but still annoying none the less. So again like I said I have agreed with you the whole time, and yes it is parasitic. But all of that just depends on your vantage point on looking at the whole thing, I suppose that to is another game of cosmic semantics. So ya! For you it is what and were you should be, but to think that its the whole of it or others would see it as you do, is just stupid.

Now you should admit that there is very minimal deferential complexity between Sugar daddies and Powerful men. And then you can go away as there is nothing you can do or say in such a matter that would matter or change thing. There is little more point in arguing with you or chatting on this thread about it. Actions speak louder then words, and all you and most females actions speak louder then a hundred thousand years of words and thoughts and believes you all have on this subject.

You can predict that a percent of females or males will react in this or that fashion, but you cannot make the same predictions for specific individuals.

Yes you can. Why the hell do you say you cant? Its not hard either you dont even have to be a supergenious or have a supper computer compute the probabilities on that. Its like this...Look around you! Look at all the types of people, individual people get with. Now can you imagine any other person they would be it if you remove your perception of what you think it is they should or could be with? The answer is no, you can not imagine it.

The world and everything around you including love and romance is the way it is for a reason, in fact you said it yourself using other word. Its like the fact in this thread about the OP and the girl in question going to that one Sugar Daddy site to get some. Lets just put it this way, and like you yourself said in other posts. Lets just imagine that If that girl in the OP were rich or wealthy and had everything she ever wanted. Whom do you think she would put the time and energy and effort into moving towards?...The answer is. The same guys or same type of guys that she is now in that Sugar Daddy site, the only difference only being how she would go about it.

So yes you can predict and pretty dam accurately who females both on a mass scale, and individual scale would not only be attracted to but pretty much everything else. Its not nowhere near as an impossibility as you think it is. Far from it.

Generalizations are extremely unreliable in predicting and judging individuals, in act and even more so in motivation. Your faulty guesses about me and my behavior and history is an example of how far such ideas can lead you astray. Text

Negative! You merely see yourself in a different light, and I can list the reasons of that as well. Also I have found out that, and now doubt even you would notice this phenomenon that a great majority of the generalizations people have are pretty spot on, and not only that are there for a reason. On a day to day basis you would have many if not hundreds such generalizations the majority of which you would not even be aware of.

In fact generalization is how the brain works as to save energy in putting out to many computations and hold on to to many ever changing facts, in females being a more social societal created/evolved animal that fact would be much more so, then then in males. In fact in the majority there whole outlook and perspective on the world and everything around them is based on generalizations which they have, and the funny part is that the majority of those generalizations have not even been placed there by them, how many generalizations do you think even something as silly as the Oprah show put out, now imagine that strewn over centuries and you will get a better view of things.

Over all generalizations is a form of compressed data, not unlike a zip file in the mind. Its also a societal economic trait, a function of the brain and mind when it can not deal with many unknown factors. Now how many generalizations do you think I have been labeled under by the females and other who have read this thread?

I never said any such thing!!!! I spoke of subjects of attraction. Attraction is not love, money is not love. Love does not play any part in any part of this subject.

Love! Attractions! Money! To some they are all the same thing, even if they dont want to admit it. You admitted as much pages back, so why bother to mince words and bones about it now. Listen its getting annoying talking to you, I think I will talk to the wall and get better and a more varied conversation.

My exact words, copied and pasted: They asked for money. Love and money are not the same thing.

How can you interpret that to mean love and money are the same thing?

I dont know what is the difference between a Sugar daddy and a powerful man in charge of his own destiny. The answer is...Not much, by definition they are the same thing. In reality they are the same thing. In your mind however due to the fact that you dont want to look at some things as you would have to call into account your whole world and makeup...Well! then they are different. But in all its just another case of mental semantics and circumstances. You can interchange any of the two and there meanings on any given day. Yet the results will likely remain the same. So yes, Love and Money are the same thing to a great majority of females, they just have different way of going about to rationalize that.

Now if you were male you would off course get a different worded answer. I mean sure woman are all about love and not money. That is why you see every dude with money having a bunch of women in tow and the guy without money having none. Because women are about love not money... Does that make sense to you? You see only females have the option of thinking of the two as separate. A biological evolutionary trait in itself which reflects itself in a mental contradiction. I could explain it better to you but you seem kind of dense and I really dont feel like it.

In any case, it is not parasitism, it is interdependence and exchange.

Circumstantial differences lead to circumstantial outcomes. What I am trying to say it involves a bunch of factors, including blind luck. Be sure that if some force were to come into to your life and by magic remove certain thing or shift things around, you to and your whole world will come crashing down and pretty fast...Another somewhat like as you female I used to chat with for a bit called this and what you are experiencing. "Competence in the moment" I probably should not have went and freaked out on her...She was at least entertaining even if she was a vile evil feminist. Not like you, your boring, whats your problem? Are you trying deliberately to annoy me and bore me,with all your make believe nonsense?

Who is the “you all” refereing to here? Women and men ? Human beings? Entities that live and that love? If you are exempt from this reference, what are you exactly ???

You know what I have decided that I dont have to answer any of that. You seem to be answering very little of my questions and completely ignore others..So ya! But! By "you all" I mean "you all" And yes you are included in that.

If you are an alien, or a rock, that might explain your lack of knowledge about key thinkers and concepts of our civilization. On the other hand, you just might be a kid.

lol Me! Ok whatever, listen I dont think there would be one thing about you that would be a mystery. Stay in your box and mental constructs and things shall be OK...OK! Because that what you are, a house cat looking at the world through a stained glass window being feed everything and knowing nothing but what your are being feed. And besides I wish I was a kid, things were much funner back then.

The fact that you have that need gives this forum, this “vessel” a reason for being and a value just in it’s capacity to receive that output you have.

OK whats with you and "vessel" thing? You have repeated that word time and time again. If you read any of the above you should know by now that the whole vessel thing, well its just something that is predisposed, most females are not vessels that need to be filled. That like the whole getting man to act first before dating scenarios is just an act in the play.

But fine if you want to continue down that route. Now if you were a vessel I would say you are an insufficient vessel, and considering you just may be the best most societies put out, that says a lot. But anyways its your wording not mine. The majority of females seem to get off that stuff anyways. Vessel Shmesale.

Subjective value. If you have no desire or need for this service, then why come here? Has nothing to do with religion (or whether I am “fancy”). Demand and supply. If there is a demand for something, it gains a value.

OK! Jeez! Got it! Your another self sufficient vessel that needs to be filled. Go on about being all vessel like and such and stuff. You and the girl in the OP are so totally like empty vessels. Just waiting along for somebody to fill you, or whatever. Want to take bets on how fast at least the girl in the OP is going to be "filled" by her Sugar Daddy? Totally mysterious happenings no doubt.

OK! Mrs empty vessel. You seem to have another problem then her. You should be careful least you become another bored housewife trolling the interwebs. Its like we dont have enough of those around..Jeez. You know I can insult you till you go away. But why dont you just admit that your incorrect on a bunch of things, then go away.

Exactly my point- judging the seasons as good or bad can be done too, if you wish. But that will always remain a personal, subjective, moral judgement. All things evolve for a reason- to further life.

Nah not really. Have you asked yourself this. Just how much of your personal, subjective, moral judgement and views do you have in common or the same with other females. Somewhere around 87% I would guess. You all are so original. And now you all want to be different just like everybody else.

But yes told you we agree on a lot of things, its just a matter of semantics.

Also the fact is that yes I was right, if I wasn't you would not have any problems or issues with this whole thing. Maybe you should do as you mother thought you and only argue with the dudes that would be more susceptible to your arguments, you know, that's what husbands, and other such dudes are for. They would be totally impressed by all that you said and not think your completely just a indulged ignoramus. I mean if it wasn't for that, how else would a majority of you people be right? When you are so clearly wrong on a majority of subjects.

All things evolve for a reason after all.

reply to post by nixie_nox


Facts is facts nixie_nox, and the fact that you dont like to see those facts is also one of many facts in that conundrum. And really your arguing that a guy with money who probably did nothing but pay somebody to make him a profile on a site. In the end, you want to know what they are...They are star crossed lovers, in fact they just may be made and created for each-other, because they sure as hell have evolved along those processes. But as sure as hell there is more going on and she knows it or this would be an non issue. The main issue I suspect that the guy in question already probably has other ones coming around, ie there would be competition for her.

Now everybody know why she is there. The guys know why she is there. She even besides what she says, know why she is there. So again what is the issue? There adults, and there is little difference between this and countless other ways females go about things. Are we supposed to indulge and carry every female who does not want to carry her own weight, or even carry her own whims for that matter, and all over absolutely nothing. I think not, that # got old.

Even the mere perspective of cash has drawn her and others, and for all you and she knows that to can be fake, in fact the whole site can be a set up...Yet! I bet you she is willing to cross oceans for all that, but the same can not be said for her boyfriend. And yes she is likely to have one in tow, most of them do. In fact I have not seen a female over the age of 14 who did not have one two or was in a transition period between one boyfriend or another.

Facts is facts nixie_nox, and the fact that you dont like to see those facts, is also one of the many other facts in that conundrum.

galadofwarthethird
reply to post by Bluesma

 

Well, if one eliminates all the childish name calling and blather, we can dig up some sort of answer to the topic! Unfortunately, it contradicts your statements which took us in that direction- which were that it was the male who was attracted to the female, and she is simply taking advantage of him in a parasitic way. Now you agree with my view instead?

I always agreed with your view. You just seem to have a hard time grasping things, maybe you should re read the previous banter. And is it is quite parasitical, but all of that is just depended on a variety of factors including how ignorant the people in question are of some things. And generally like you said the female is attracted to a male purely on social complex issues and survivability in that ecosystem ie society, beyond that it is merely up to them to put definitions to the things there doing and are going to do. You remove that, not only does the whole thing falter but falls short by lightyears, for instance what is the difference from a woman being attracted to money as apposed to a woman being attracted to wealth or any of the other things you said?

Its all just mincing words, and not only have. And like I said females evolved under that paradigm but the majority would not be able to function or be any other way, so yes you may call it willpower, others call it Sugar Daddies, it all just depends merely on situational circumstances, but the outcome of the people in question will remain pretty much the same and so it would in who and what there attracted to. Now who for centuries have been attracted to whom?

Like I said its a chicken and egg thing, its a preset predestined social complex, in some people for instance you and many other females it is practically written in your genes, so ya its quite possible to know who most females will fall in love with, once you know all the machinations of the thing they like to call love, and the thing they like to call love is merely an extension of a survival and adaptability process, also a social complex, the ladder climbing kind for many. Hence things are spiced up...But it all depends on just what you call a thing, its all basically semantics on a metal projection planetary scale. Of which you and most females would not be aware of, and if you were you would go all doe eyed on the subject. In all its just semantics.

But listen here Bluesma, I suppose I must be more nice to you people and quit calling you mean words. But technically that is what I see you as, and I mean! if you want! I can avoid all that and not call you that. Yet till you obviously quit bull#ing around and lying I will keep thinking it, and even after that most likely. That is generally the proper protocols when dealing with such. It shall stand. I think this whole thing has gone far enough and indulging females on such fronts has lead to some serious mindtrips as a whole and serious cognitive dissonance in there mental makeup, most of it negligible but still annoying none the less. So again like I said I have agreed with you the whole time, and yes it is parasitic. But all of that just depends on your vantage point on looking at the whole thing, I suppose that to is another game of cosmic semantics. So ya! For you it is what and were you should be, but to think that its the whole of it or others would see it as you do, is just stupid.

Now you should admit that there is very minimal deferential complexity between Sugar daddies and Powerful men. And then you can go away as there is nothing you can do or say in such a matter that would matter or change thing. There is little more point in arguing with you or chatting on this thread about it. Actions speak louder then words, and all you and most females actions speak louder then a hundred thousand years of words and thoughts and believes you all have on this subject.

You can predict that a percent of females or males will react in this or that fashion, but you cannot make the same predictions for specific individuals.

Yes you can. Why the hell do you say you cant? Its not hard either you dont even have to be a supergenious or have a supper computer compute the probabilities on that. Its like this...Look around you! Look at all the types of people, individual people get with. Now can you imagine any other person they would be it if you remove your perception of what you think it is they should or could be with? The answer is no, you can not imagine it.

The world and everything around you including love and romance is the way it is for a reason, in fact you said it yourself using other word. Its like the fact in this thread about the OP and the girl in question going to that one Sugar Daddy site to get some. Lets just put it this way, and like you yourself said in other posts. Lets just imagine that If that girl in the OP were rich or wealthy and had everything she ever wanted. Whom do you think she would put the time and energy and effort into moving towards?...The answer is. The same guys or same type of guys that she is now in that Sugar Daddy site, the only difference only being how she would go about it.

So yes you can predict and pretty dam accurately who females both on a mass scale, and individual scale would not only be attracted to but pretty much everything else. Its not nowhere near as an impossibility as you think it is. Far from it.

Generalizations are extremely unreliable in predicting and judging individuals, in act and even more so in motivation. Your faulty guesses about me and my behavior and history is an example of how far such ideas can lead you astray. Text

Negative! You merely see yourself in a different light, and I can list the reasons of that as well. Also I have found out that, and now doubt even you would notice this phenomenon that a great majority of the generalizations people have are pretty spot on, and not only that are there for a reason. On a day to day basis you would have many if not hundreds such generalizations the majority of which you would not even be aware of.

In fact generalization is how the brain works as to save energy in putting out to many computations and hold on to to many ever changing facts, in females being a more social societal created/evolved animal that fact would be much more so, then then in males. In fact in the majority there whole outlook and perspective on the world and everything around them is based on generalizations which they have, and the funny part is that the majority of those generalizations have not even been placed there by them, how many generalizations do you think even something as silly as the Oprah show put out, now imagine that strewn over centuries and you will get a better view of things.

Over all generalizations is a form of compressed data, not unlike a zip file in the mind. Its also a societal economic trait, a function of the brain and mind when it can not deal with many unknown factors. Now how many generalizations do you think I have been labeled under by the females and other who have read this thread?

I never said any such thing!!!! I spoke of subjects of attraction. Attraction is not love, money is not love. Love does not play any part in any part of this subject.

Love! Attractions! Money! To some they are all the same thing, even if they dont want to admit it. You admitted as much pages back, so why bother to mince words and bones about it now. Listen its getting annoying talking to you, I think I will talk to the wall and get better and a more varied conversation.

My exact words, copied and pasted: They asked for money. Love and money are not the same thing.

How can you interpret that to mean love and money are the same thing?

I dont know what is the difference between a Sugar daddy and a powerful man in charge of his own destiny. The answer is...Not much, by definition they are the same thing. In reality they are the same thing. In your mind however due to the fact that you dont want to look at some things as you would have to call into account your whole world and makeup...Well! then they are different. But in all its just another case of mental semantics and circumstances. You can interchange any of the two and there meanings on any given day. Yet the results will likely remain the same. So yes, Love and Money are the same thing to a great majority of females, they just have different way of going about to rationalize that.

Now if you were male you would off course get a different worded answer. I mean sure woman are all about love and not money. That is why you see every dude with money having a bunch of women in tow and the guy without money having none. Because women are about love not money...

Does that make sense to you? You see only females have the option of thinking of the two as separate. A biological evolutionary trait in itself which reflects itself in a mental contradiction. I could explain it better to you but you seem kind of dense and I really dont feel like it.

In any case, it is not parasitism, it is interdependence and exchange.

Circumstantial differences lead to circumstantial outcomes. What I am trying to say it involves a bunch of factors, including blind luck. Be sure that if some force were to come into to your life and by magic remove certain thing or shift things around, you to and your whole world will come crashing down and pretty fast...Another somewhat like as you female I used to chat with for a bit called this and what you are experiencing. "Competence in the moment" I probably should not have went and freaked out on her...She was at least entertaining even if she was a vile evil feminist. Not like you, your boring, whats your problem? Are you trying deliberately to annoy me and bore me,with all your make believe nonsense?

Who is the “you all” refereing to here? Women and men ? Human beings? Entities that live and that love? If you are exempt from this reference, what are you exactly ???

You know what I have decided that I dont have to answer any of that. You seem to be answering very little of my questions and completely ignore others..So ya! But! By "you all" I mean "you all" And yes you are included in that.

If you are an alien, or a rock, that might explain your lack of knowledge about key thinkers and concepts of our civilization. On the other hand, you just might be a kid.

lol Me! Ok whatever, listen I dont think there would be one thing about you that would be a mystery. Stay in your box and mental constructs and things shall be OK...OK!

Because that what you are, a house cat looking at the world through a stained glass window being feed everything and knowing nothing but what your are being feed. And besides I wish I was a kid, things were much funner back then.

The fact that you have that need gives this forum, this “vessel” a reason for being and a value just in it’s capacity to receive that output you have.

OK whats with you and "vessel" thing? You have repeated that word time and time again. If you read any of the above you should know by now that the whole vessel thing, well its just something that is predisposed, most females are not vessels that need to be filled. That like the whole getting man to act first before dating scenarios is just an act in the play.

But fine if you want to continue down that route. Now if you were a vessel I would say you are an insufficient vessel, and considering you just may be the best most societies put out, that says a lot. But anyways its your wording not mine. The majority of females seem to get off that stuff anyways. Vessel Shmesale.

Subjective value. If you have no desire or need for this service, then why come here? Has nothing to do with religion (or whether I am “fancy”). Demand and supply. If there is a demand for something, it gains a value.

OK! Jeez! Got it! Your another self sufficient vessel that needs to be filled. Go on about being all vessel like and such and stuff. You and the girl in the OP are so totally like empty vessels. Just waiting along for somebody to fill you, or whatever. Want to take bets on how fast at least the girl in the OP is going to be "filled" by her Sugar Daddy? Totally mysterious happenings no doubt.

OK! Mrs empty vessel. You seem to have another problem then her. You should be careful least you become another bored housewife trolling the interwebs. Its like we dont have enough of those around..Jeez. You know I can insult you till you go away. But why dont you just admit that your incorrect on a bunch of things, then go away.

Exactly my point- judging the seasons as good or bad can be done too, if you wish. But that will always remain a personal, subjective, moral judgement. All things evolve for a reason- to further life.

Nah not really. Have you asked yourself this. Just how much of your personal, subjective, moral judgement and views do you have in common or the same with other females. Somewhere around 87% I would guess. You all are so original. And now you all want to be different just like everybody else.

But yes told you we agree on a lot of things, its just a matter of semantics.

Also the fact is that yes I was right, if I wasn't you would not have any problems or issues with this whole thing. Maybe you should do as you mother thought you and only argue with the dudes that would be more susceptible to your arguments, you know, that's what husbands, and other such dudes are for. They would be totally impressed by all that you said and not think your completely just a indulged ignoramus. I mean if it wasn't for that, how else would a majority of you people be right? When you are so clearly wrong on a majority of subjects.

All things evolve for a reason after all.

reply to post by Bluesma

And generally like you said the female is attracted to a male purely on social complex issues and survivability in that ecosystem ie society…
what is the difference from a woman being attracted to money as apposed to a woman being attracted to wealth or any of the other things you said?

Once again you claim I said things I didn’t- I didn’t say females are attracted to males purely on social complex issues.
I said it is one of many elements that is sometimes included as a factor in the overall attraction. I went to much lengths to make the point that an individual being attracted to another is a sum of many different variables- some of them can be extremely personal and individual.



The difference between being attracted to money,
And being attracted to a man who has gained money,
Is that money is an object- it is not a living entity, it has no personality, it has no character at all.
A man is a living entity, with a personality, a character… and if he has gained much money it is likely he has certain personality traits that many women find compelling.

I suppose I must be more nice to you people and quit calling you mean words. But technically that is what I see you as, and I mean!

“You people” is who???

If that girl in the OP were rich or wealthy and had everything she ever wanted. Whom do you think she would put the time and energy and effort into moving towards?...The answer is. The same guys or same type of guys that she is now in that Sugar Daddy site, the only difference only being how she would go about it.

Like I said, taking the group of females who do this, applying this state, one can come up with probabilities for a percentage, but not predict the individual. But there would be higher probabilities that a larger percentage of women who do this, if in that situation, would not be going to the same men. If one looks at the young women born into money, they go out with good looking boys, with or without money. Having security, not needing a man of strong will and character, they can focus more on physical aspects of beauty.

Love! Attractions! Money! To some they are all the same thing, even if they dont want to admit it. You admitted as much pages back, so why bother to mince words and bones about it now.

It may be the same to some, it may be the same to you, but it is not the same to me, and I have been clear about that.

The danger in mixing up these concepts is misreading others intentions. A woman attracted to you is not necessarily in love with you. Giving a woman money is not giving a woman love.

Making such mistakes can cause a lot of disappointment and hurt… probably make someone a bitter sexist grudge holder.

OK whats with you and "vessel" thing? You have repeated that word time and time again. If you read any of the above you should know by now that the whole vessel thing, well its just something that is predisposed, most females are not vessels that need to be filled. That like the whole getting man to act first before dating scenarios is just an act in the play.

But fine if you want to continue down that route. Now if you were a vessel I would say you are an insufficient vessel, and considering you just may be the best most societies put out, that says a lot.

Here you begin to confirm what I am saying- in being a vessel for you, we obviously are not talking about sex, because that cannot be done here. What it is you wish I would be better at "taking in" for you? Your thoughts, ideas, convinction..will? To do what you say, agree with you? Swallow it all?

Here we get to the other types of demands that exist out there, and that many men are attracted to- a woman who will swallow his (in this case, at least) bull#.

Just because she isn’t having sex with a man, that doesn’t mean he isn’t getting pleasure out of telling her what to do, when where and wearing what…that she is wide eyed an agreeing with all he says, being “enlightened” by his wisdom.

I will not be as sexist as you have been and claim all men are unavoidably looking for or attracted to that specific sort of reception, many other factors are involved in individual attraction… but many find this desireable. As apparently you know intimately.

Never claimed I’d be your deep throat for your bull#, so you weren’t deceived.
And if you have trouble finding a woman that will, it is definitely because what you have to share isn’t wise, or even mature.

reply to post by Bluesma


Listen I could argue with you on this for some time. But obviously your going to, but splice it anyways you want the results will be the same. And all that you are saying is pretty much all that I have said only using different words, in the end that to is just semantics and the results are the same. Just admit that there is little to no discernible difference between money wealth or power, and as such for some, ie including you there is no difference between love and money. You may call it whatever you want but ultimately it's just words expressing the same thing. I mean! Its kind of obvious, even if you dont want to admit it.

“You people” is who???

I suppose talking like a 5 yr old is just not enough. OK. You is derivative and indictment of "YOU" as in you Bluesma, and people is a general statement meaning like minded or a group of people that are alike, it can mean females like you or males like you, a few people or whole groups...OK! Get it now?

Like I said, taking the group of females who do this, applying this state, one can come up with probabilities for a percentage, but not predict the individual.

Listen! Like I said before...Off course you can and yes even predict it on a individual level. It would take some effort and knowledge and knowing the individual in question, and a bunch of other factors included, and more energy then its worth, and yes even a little entanglement into that wavelength. In fact I really dont care to know, but its not impossible.

But there would be higher probabilities that a larger percentage of women who do this, if in that situation, would not be going to the same men.

Depends on what you would call "same men" But no once again you are wrong. A high percentage of women do get entangled with the same sort of men over and over again. The only difference would be the many variables and circumstances leading to either that being a good thing or bad thing. Literally its just depends.

If one looks at the young women born into money, they go out with good looking boys, with or without money. Having security, not needing a man of strong will and character, they can focus more on physical aspects of beauty.

Negative again on that aspect. If you look most rich women or girls, are generally attracted and go with those in there general social hierarchy regardless of looks, what I am saying is generally rich people go out with rich people famous people generally go out with famous or successful people etc etc. Its like this, look at actors even younger actors who do they go out with? Look at generational ie old money young women, who do they go out with or marry? # look at Brittney Spears who did she go out with, last I heard it was some sort of successful lawyer or such, or any other starlet...Don't ask me how I know that #, sometimes the lines at the supermarket are freaking long and well you know, magazines right there....Don't quote me on that #, because for all I know the magazine was old and she probably moved on to somebody else now.

It all follows the course of biology, younger girls at that time in there life, when the hormones kick in would be looking for stability, ie money, wealth, power, social standing you name it and it will all be the same thing under another name. And when they get a little older they would be looking for that, and a bit more incentives, and so on etc. The only deviation from that would be that in the aspect that older women generally go after good looking generally younger men. But that only after they have had there fill of the other types, and there more free and inclined to do as they would, after the divorce and after there set, up as you said---> "Having security, not needing a man of strong will and character, they can focus more on physical aspects of beauty" But generally like I said, its just a social aspect, and each group stays within there group, and as a wise rich man once said. Poor girls are looking for rich men, and rich girls are looking for richer men.

But you know whatever. I do believe once again you are wrong on that part. What a surprise.

It may be the same to some, it may be the same to you, but it is not the same to me, and I have been clear about that.

Um I have yet to say anything involving me. I was talking more so about you and such, and no you have not been clear about anything.

The danger in mixing up these concepts is misreading others intentions. A woman attracted to you is not necessarily in love with you. Giving a woman money is not giving a woman love.

A woman attracted to a man is not necessarily in love. A woman who get money and other benefits from that man is more likely to eventually be in love with that man. So! Again! Why do you say in once sentence one thing then in the next contradict yourself...I could list all the contradictory things you posted before and compare it with the above post. But it would be pointless.

Making such mistakes can cause a lot of disappointment and hurt… probably make someone a bitter sexist grudge holder.

No it wouldn't. If anything most feminists probably got little attention or incentives from men, and instead of putting a little effort into it, they turned all feminist and stuff. In fact most feminists I seen or witnessed are just clueless, and dont really have any major problems other then there own envies. And even that in most of them are a breed of something I like to call the fakers, there just there because it affords them a lever they hold over certain types of males. Its all kind of pointless, just another game in the human mating ritual and how certain types find eachother.

Here you begin to confirm what I am saying- in being a vessel for you, we obviously are not talking about sex, because that cannot be done here. What it is you wish I would be better at "taking in" for you? Your thoughts, ideas, convinction..will? To do what you say, agree with you? Swallow it all?

I dont know what your talking about with the whole "vessel" thing. I assumed it was some typical female fetish thing you and what seems other have. That or you read something somewhere and now for some reason you think you know what its all about.

Sorry its not my fault you suck at explaining simple things. I mean what the hell does that # even mean? It just sounds idiotic. What the hell do vessels have to do with anything. How are women vessels? Or are you just saying a general thing like the new agers go on about? You know I have thought about it and came to some conclusions about 50 or so different ones, I however chose to believe the more hilarious ones. OK! So here is my theory on this whole females being vessels thing.

As you know you could be right and human females in the way they operate it is pretty much as you say vessel like. That is they wait around for a man to do the things they want to, you see this phenomenon everywhere from basic dating to arguments to anything. Now what if you are right and females are some sort of vessels to be filled. OK what exactly is a vessel? Well obviously its a container, generally an empty container. So by your believes and logic females are these empty containers just waiting to be filled, like some sort of vessel. As such the next logical step would be why is this so. As we know only inanimate objects would really be considered vessels. I mean you can fill a flower pot with water and flowers thereby it becomes a vessel for the flowers, you could even fill your hard drive with data there by it becomes a vessel for that data, etc, etc.

But all of that is inanimate objects, so what else constitute an animate being to being a vessel? I mean you can fill a human up with thoughts, or a variety of other such things, and you can also fill them up with cheese or other such things. So seeing as cheese is eventually excreted as poop, I do not think that would be considered as vessel by you, maybe memetics and data and experiences can be considered as filling a human vessel, the over all cumulative being possibly called a soul filling a vessel. But then again that still makes no sense in the context you use it. It is here were it becomes quite obvious that due to human female nature what you mean by vessel they need something to latch on to, and to thereby do what it is they were going to do.

And as we know what are some of the other creatures of nature that do that. A door latches on, a cabinet can be latched, a cat can latch on to the couch or a mouse, but also a leach can latch on to your skin. And I have surmised that what you mean about vessels and what females being vessels means is that there some sort of leach, or possibly a cat, in fact it is bizarrely spooky the way they go on about things. Like some creature that lays in waiting, bidding its time to strike, but to first do that it must get the trust and essence of its victim, almost I dare say like a vampire, after all a vampire must first be invited in before it can do its thing and feed. And its also true I have heard that vampires have no soul, so it could be that they are vessels looking for a soul. Like some sort of soulless zombie vampire thing. As such I have concluded that when you say and talk about this whole vessel thing, and that females are vessels. I presume that you mean they are these soulless things which must first attach themselfs to something or somebody with a soul and then begin feeding, like some sort of zombie or vampire...OH scary stuff.

OK so now that we got the definition and meaning of "vessel" out of the way. Lets move on.

Here we get to the other types of demands that exist out there, and that many men are attracted to- a woman who will swallow his (in this case, at least) bull#.

WoW I can only say that you know men. You must be some sort of genius or something. But really stop with the sexual innuendo, I cold do that stuff to. I just am to grown up to stoop to that level. Also! You dont know me. Of that there is no doubt.

Just because she isn’t having sex with a man, that doesn’t mean he isn’t getting pleasure out of telling her what to do, when where and wearing what…that she is wide eyed an agreeing with all he says, being “enlightened” by his wisdom.

Oh ya! How many women do you know that actually would put up with it? I mean how many have you seen, that actually do and would put up with that. The numbers are actually a whole lot more minimal then that, a whole lot. But hey whatever floats you and there boats.

I will not be as sexist as you have been and claim all men are unavoidably looking for or attracted to that specific sort of reception, many other factors are involved in individual attraction… but many find this desireable. As apparently you know intimately.

I dont know what the hell all that you said above means. But once again like the whole "vessel" thing I can and will deduce some sort of answer from all that junk you just said. Besides not all men are looking for whatever it is you said or mean, I think only about 90% would be. Leaving a whole 10% not looking for it.... See that's not all.

Never claimed I’d be your deep throat for your bull#, so you weren’t deceived. And if you have trouble finding a woman that will, it is definitely because what you have to share isn’t wise, or even mature.

Listen...I dont know what the hell your talking about.

But speaking of bull#. Just admit it, your bull#ing, now I will ask again. I really dont want to be spending more time on this or chating with you then I have to.

"Just admit that there is little to no discernible difference between money wealth or power, and as such for some, ie including you and others so yes there is no difference, and there would be no difference other then semantics between love and money depending of factors. You may call it whatever you want, but ultimately it's just words expressing the same thing"

Just say it, and admit it, its pretty obvious. I mean most dudes live it day to day and know it, most women just seem to not want to admit it as it would mess with there viewpoint of themselfs. But yes there is little to no discernible difference between money, wealth, power, willpower, character or whatever else you called it. After all you said it not me, I merely just reworded it a bit. Funny that no? How quickly it all falls apart at the slightest of changingwinds, like a house of cards...

This thread inspires me to bring back this gem: www.snopes.com...

The ad:
What am I doing wrong?

Okay, I'm tired of beating around the bush. I'm a beautiful (spectacularly beautiful) 25 year old girl. I'm articulate and classy. I'm not from New York. I'm looking to get married to a guy who makes at least half a million a year. I know how that sounds, but keep in mind that a million a year is middle class in New York City, so I don't think I'm overreaching at all.

Are there any guys who make 500K or more on this board? Any wives? Could you send me some tips? I dated a business man who makes average around 200 - 250. But that's where I seem to hit a roadblock. 250,000 won't get me to central park west. I know a woman in my yoga class who was married to an investment banker and lives in Tribeca, and she's not as pretty as I am, nor is she a great genius. So what is she doing right? How do I get to her level?

Here are my questions specifically:

- Where do you single rich men hang out? Give me specifics — bars, restaurants, gyms

- What are you looking for in a mate? Be honest guys, you won't hurt my feelings

- Is there an age range I should be targeting (I'm 25)?

- Why are some of the women living lavish lifestyles on the upper east side so plain? I've seen really 'plain jane' boring types who have nothing to offer married to incredibly wealthy guys. I've seen drop dead gorgeous girls in singles bars in the east village. What's the story there?

- Jobs I should look out for? Everyone knows - lawyer, investment banker, doctor. How much do those guys really make? And where do they hang out? Where do the hedge fund guys hang out?

- How you decide marriage vs. just a girlfriend? I am looking for MARRIAGE ONLY

Please hold your insults — I'm putting myself out there in an honest way. Most beautiful women are superficial; at least I'm being up front about it. I wouldn't be searching for these kind of guys if I wasn't able to match them — in looks, culture, sophistication, and keeping a nice home and hearth.

it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

PostingID: 432279810
Read more at www.snopes.com...

The response:
Dear Pers-431649184:

I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament.

Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your bill; that is I make more than $500K per year. That said here's how I see it.

Your offer, from the prospective of a guy like me, is plain and simple a crappy business deal. Here's why. Cutting through all the B.S., what you suggest is a simple trade: you bring your looks to the party and I bring my money. Fine, simple. But here's the rub, your looks will fade and my money will likely continue into perpetuity... in fact, it is very likely that my income increases but it is an absolute certainty that you won't be getting any more beautiful!

So, in economic terms you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning asset. Not only are you a depreciating asset, your depreciation accelerates! Let me explain, you're 25 now and will likely stay pretty hot for the next 5 years, but less so each year. Then the fade begins in earnest. By 35 stick a fork in you!

So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy and hold... hence the rub... marriage. It doesn't make good business sense to "buy you" (which is what you're asking) so I'd rather lease. In case you think I'm being cruel, I would say the following. If my money were to go away, so would you, so when your beauty fades I need an out. It's as simple as that. So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage.

Separately, I was taught early in my career about efficient markets. So, I wonder why a girl as "articulate, classy and spectacularly beautiful" as you has been unable to find your sugar daddy. I find it hard to believe that if you are as gorgeous as you say you are that the $500K hasn't found you, if not only for a tryout.

By the way, you could always find a way to make your own money and then we wouldn't need to have this difficult conversation.

With all that said, I must say you're going about it the right way. Classic "pump and dump."

I hope this is helpful, and if you want to enter into some sort of lease, let me know.
Read more at www.snopes.com...

reply to post by NavyDoc

Old indeed, I remember it from a few threads and sites, like dragging dinosaur bones out.

But hey at the very least she is honest about things. The other cases like the one in the OP its probably going to be getting even more nasty as she is likely to be dragging some poor fool into the whole thing and the guy will probably be in love or whatever, and not only that she is deceiving herself. May as well cut with the bull and just go for one, or the other, but you know how the story goes. I mean even from the quote in the OP you could tell the whole thing is likely to go sour and have reverberations.

Now that chick looking for mister 7 digits in what you linked, well the likely thing is she will find somebody if not mister 7diggets then mister over 250k. And really she will probably take the guys advice which was actually pretty good advice, and find out why the more as she called them >the plain jane ones get the high rollers over the more good looking one. Seems rich men like to be more then a little convinced of there investments, who knows eh they may even be looking for love as well.

And hey! believe you me, for that kind of money she is quite capable of changing and being and going anywhere she needs to be including changing her whole vibration to be that love that there looking for, and the funny thing is that would likely last longer in said relationship then anything else, or at least as the money is there and since money tends to make money its highly likely it will. And the only real difference between her and the other plain jane girls is merely in the way she approaches things, and timing, oh and the places she was looking for rich men at. I mean duh! Even I know that. And besides that, its merely the imagery and vibes she was putting out. I really dont think she will have much trouble in finding somebody in the more higher echelons of society, in fact she is practically with her mentality ahead of the curb.

But everybody has got there thing I suppose. And its all love I suppose, its enough to give anybody a headache, and pathetically sad to boot, which is why everybody much prefers the veneer which is draped over such things... But a mystery it is not. Or maybe I'm just crazy, but this # is more annoying then 4th darkness, maybe even the 5th darkness. But being one who spent many a wonderful eon in the 9th darkness, I seen worse, much worse. Ah whatever, much more easier to just say its all love and move on as it does not matter in the scope of things. Not only that but its true as well that its all love, and the truth was ever a harsh and cold thing.

reply to post by galadofwarthethird


Most of that is so self contradictory, it is a waste of time to show so.

I will ignore your ranting insults.

On the question of being a "vessel" for someone-
A psychological term.

Having someone who "gets" you. That person you like to be around because they "get" you.
To get is to receive. To take in. To be a container for.

Many men value having another individual who gets them- who understands what they think, feel, need, want, intend.
(most people in general do... but here we are talking about what a specific type of exchange).

Control is one way of experiencing another "getting" you. When they obey you, you witness feedback that they heard and understood your will.

This is something a man can get in return for their money, and some enjoy it. Even if there is no sex involved.
And especially if it is someone who enjoys power.

Love isn't needed for that sort of exchange.




...and some guys bitch and moan that no women ever "get" them, because they are all stupid ninnies. (without actually asking themselves if there might be a problem in the way they present and express themselves instead....).
Can't be you,huh? MUST be half of the human race, the entire female gender, of course! *eye roll *

reply to post by Bluesma

Most of that is so self contradictory, it is a waste of time to show so.

Considering everything you said is a contradiction it becomes obvious that your whole world would revolve and spin about keeping all that in line. Carry on as such.

On the question of being a "vessel" for someone- A psychological term. Having someone who "gets" you. That person you like to be around because they "get" you. To get is to receive. To take in. To be a container for.

OK Whatever, you could have just said all that # at the beginning. But anyways i still think you all are some sort of soulless zombie vampire vessel thing, cant imagine anybody wanting to spend more time then they had to or to be in close proximity then you would have to with somebody such as you, or your like, or what you describe. Its disgusting, but there is plenty out there for everybody so to each there own. As its always been.

Many men value having another individual who gets them- who understands what they think, feel, need, want, intend. (most people in general do... but here we are talking about what a specific type of exchange). Control is one way of experiencing another "getting" you. When they obey you, you witness feedback that they heard and understood your will.

Many men value having another individual who gets them- who understands what they think, feel, need, want, intend. (most people in general do... but here we are talking about what a specific type of exchange). Control is one way of experiencing another "getting" you. When they obey you, you witness feedback that they heard and understood your will.

Like I said everybody has there fetish. You people tend to spin on that, in one circumstance you bitch about it, and in another its exactly the thing you need and crave. And the funny thing is its all just based on circumstance that would decide what and how long it will all last.

This is something a man can get in return for their money, and some enjoy it. Even if there is no sex involved. And especially if it is someone who enjoys power. Love isn't needed for that sort of exchange.

More contradictory stuff. Off course love is needed for that, what you describe is love, some get off that. ie you and other females. Its all love, the funny thing is the very same male types you all get with and love are the very same types you would hate, its all just depended on the circumstances involved which would dictate if and when you eat each other or if it lasts. The majority and percentage of it being $$$. Love, sex, money, power, all these things are the same and its all just the spin of the wheel. Whatever gets you off, its not like its new or the most bizarre thing out there, in fact its pretty common thing to see in females. And like I said I agree with you. Besides it is the optimal setting on such a thing seeing as you all cant operate in any other way nor are capable of anything else, its as good as it gets, or is going to get.

...and some guys bitch and moan that no women ever "get" them, because they are all stupid ninnies. (without actually asking themselves if there might be a problem in the way they present and express themselves instead....). Can't be you,huh? MUST be half of the human race, the entire female gender, of course! *eye roll *

I have actually never heard a guy say that women dont get them. But I have heard plenty of women use that line.

But on a serious side, Oh ya! there is something serious going on. I think the majority of females dudes like me would be looking for or attracted to have been breed out of existence. Now all we get is these cheep #ty carbon copies morons who think there something other then what they actually are. But anyways, what dont you get when I spend half my time insulting you or people like you? In general maybe you should just take your bull and go away, you think way to much of yourself.

Now why dont you get on your little horse and scamper along, like I said before, you wouldn't want to become another bored housewife of which there seems to be permeating the Internets. No doubt since you like your husband so much and he gets you so much. I am quite sure you could find better uses of your time then spouting inconsistent and incoherent nonsense or stuff that was known back in ancient Egyptian times, maybe trying that # with your husband will get you somewhere, and who knows he may even believe it.

I really dont think there is one thing you could say that would be new or would mean anything or I and every other guy would not know about already. On the contradictory part, well I could go back and read all the things you said on this thread then compare and contrasts how it was all contradicted in another post on this thread. I think your full of # lady, now seeing as I dont think there is anything new you could tell me, or ever tell me.

I see no reason to be wasting time arguing with you about stupid #, besides convincing you about your own inconsistencies is what husbands and horny dudes are for, if you ever want to win an argument that is the number one rule for females, as I am quite sure you know and have been thought. I am sure you will find both of those types, there is no shortage of either, then maybe they can be impressed with your seriously flawed take and logic... Now! funk off, I feel like I lost a few million braincells just chatting with you over these meaningless dribbles. Or do I need to call you more mean names before you get the picture?

reply to post by nixie_nox


hah, thanks for that!
I'm actually quite respectable towards women. I think you girls are what makes the world go round.

What I dont like, are these ''paid-to-be-sluts'' who think we're so stupid to believe a man is paying them for their company with no sexual activities involved.

If its prostitution, call a spade a spade. do what you like, I dont care.

but grow the f**K up and atleast admit to yourself your a paid escort and nothing more.

Look at the article posted below, the women refuses to date a man unless he makes $500,000 a year.

Are women like this so niave that they really dont understand why men treat them like crap?

galadofwarthethird

I have actually never heard a guy say that women dont get them. But I have heard plenty of women use that line.

Here you go then-

talking with most of the female gender is already like talking to a wall or a 5yr old, and never mind that you may as well be in a different dimenshion

That's your quote on communication problems with women.

Yes, there are women who have poor communication skills too, and also do not recognize that, assuming the problem lies with everyone else. (some even will use unspecified generalizations such as "you people" too).

Grammar, spelling, punctuation, emotional balance, consistent focus, all can serve to remedy this problem and bring all 'those people " into the same dimension as yourself.

Or do I need to call you more mean names before you get the picture?

Calling people names is an obstacle to communication, not an aid. Most people figure that out around five years old.
The names and insults you have towards me, your opinion of me, simply has nothing to do with the subject of discussion.

(but you can refer to this quote too, as an example of a man complaining that a woman isn't "getting" him )

Off course love is needed for that, what you describe is love

I described exchange of power for money. That is not love for me. The women in the article make it clear that they do not consider that love either.

With your definition of love, then if you are employed, you have a love affair with your employer.

reply to post by Bluesma

Here you go then-

Well that is not gender specific, that is not even generally specific to any men, that is only me specific. It can not be construed to any general term of men. The rest of what you said is just a bland statement on communication which serves no purpose but the obvious. You may as well have said that you get wet when you jump in water. To that and what you said I would respond...DUH! Look to yourself before you look to me, because I tell you truly you would not even know were to start were I would be concerned.

Calling people names is an obstacle to communication, not an aid. Most people figure that out around five years old. The names and insults you have towards me, your opinion of me, simply has nothing to do with the subject of discussion. (but you can refer to this quote too, as an example of a man complaining that a woman isn't "getting" him )

Seems the only way some people would be able to grasp some things, there a bit thick concerning some things. It serves its purpose, and that purpose is to grb there attention.

And now that I have your attention.

Listen here, by the fact that you changed you wording and constantly contradicting what you said the first or second time, its obviously your just bull#ing or faking. In fact you seem pretty fake, in fact your not even a real frenchy, your some sort of fake frenchy. So listen here you fake frenchy quit with the constant contradicting of things you say. What are you literally 5 yrs old. I suppose its a female thing, gone on for so long there not even aware of it or capable of anything else, seeing as I dont hang out with females in daily life, or throughout my life, I suppose I just have not built up the shielding most men have when it comes to this stuff. You know just nod your head at whatever the idiot next to you is saying, its the cornerstaple of every TV show out there today, wife says something, husband nods head or sleeps in the doggy house. Pathetically inadequate.

I described exchange of power for money. That is not love for me. The women in the article make it clear that they do not consider that love either. With your definition of love, then if you are employed, you have a love affair with your employer.

That's not what you said earlier. And off course the women in the article make it clear that love is money, some even said the fee involved for there love. Like the other dude said, 500,000 or the one looking for mister 7 digits, like I said you may try to mince words but you already said money, power all of that = love, the fact that you may have used other words makes no difference, after all can you have power, wealth, without money? No! In this society all the things you attributed are basically the same thing or part of an overall thing. I mean must I quote every thing you said? I dont have the time to waste on that or you. Your already more of a waste of time then I should have put in this thread.

Here just two of them.

Posted on Jan, 27 2014 @ 10:48 AM

I never said any such thing!!!! I spoke of subjects of attraction. Attraction is not love, money is not love. Love does not play any part in any part of this subject.

And then.

posted on Jan, 15 2014 @ 08:10 AM

Hell, I must admit, I find power and wealth very attractive in a man...I associate them with characteristics like will power, self discipline, force of character, possessiveness, hard working, focused..... traits that would make a good partner, protector, father of children. That may not always be reliable, but it gets me softened up subconsciously.

Like I said, you just seem to be conveniently forgetting certain things when it suits you, things such as power, wealth, and money go hand in hand. Duh! The only thing if one were to read statements you said, or in particular those two statements is that on Jan 15 a Wednesday you liked dudes with money as they had power and wealth and were attracted to them, and on Jan 27 a Monday you seem to have changed your mind and tried to reword it. The only logical thing anybody can grab from that whole thing is that on Wednesday you like one thing and on Mondays you like another. Thats fine and all, but what about the other days of the week? What floats your boat and whims then. Pfff.


And I also know plenty of rich dudes who would sell there mothers if given the chance, in fact I now a semi rich dude who visits France every year to get a more delectable taste of the women there, last time he was even talking about how he took his 16 yr old son with him for that visit. In fact the dude is married to two women I think, and definetley is no looker, the dude works for Boeing so is making some $$$, and how he got that job? Well he got jiggy with a woman that already worked there, and she quote on quote "knows" one of the higher echelons there, so ya. To say your statement of men with money and wealth are some sort of demi gods in willpower is way incorrect. Just admit it already.

So in all, your case may be the better outcomes, in fact it optimal, but in all change a few things here and there and it would be a different story, and no I am not making this up, or saying things to make you and other women feel bad. You know why, because thousands and thousands of years have proven all that I said, even today what is the major case for divorce? ie money, and if you go back to cavemen times they were not knocking women with clubs over there head and draging them away, they went voluntarily with whomever had the biggest cave, and in the dark ages same old thing, and today, still the same old thing, like i said thousands and thousands of years have proven me right, dont belive me look it up or look around. Lets just say the results on this have been in for a long time. And like I said its kind of hard to say the women in the op were not looking for money when they themselfs said so, although some in a bit different way so as to not lose there options incase mister 6 digits finds somebody else.

I will say it again, consent to what I said earlier, and we can get this over with. I understand that do to nature and natural evolution females are not capable of doing some things, this whole social aspect being one, as I said the sugar daddy no matter how you slice it and call it, but the sugar daddy and the female evolved together, you may call it willpower and what not, but if the money was gone. Now how fast would you think the females in the OP or you or most females would be making there departure from that relationship? Out the window in a heartbeat, and with plenty of philosophies on why it had to be, and telling all there girlfriends on how he was just no good. In all the bull# has gone through the roof. You all are like a walking talking contradiction.

So. Here let me link what I said earlier. Just say it, consent to this one fact and we all can move along. Like I said I agree with you, it is the only logical outcome. I just merely have not sugared it up to suit only one purpose, ie your purpose.

Consent that I am right in this, then you can go away as you wasting my time, the few minutes it took to write this up I want back. Unless you like arguing with strange dudes about absolutely nothing, I may even start thinking you have a thing for this sort of thing.

"Just admit that there is little to no discernible difference between money wealth or power, and as such for some, ie including you and others the majority of females, that there is no difference but a technical one, and there would be no difference other then semantics between love and money depending on factors most of which social. You may call it whatever you want, but ultimately it's just words expressing the same thing"

galadofwarthethird

Well that is not gender specific, that is not even generally specific to any men, that is only me specific. It can not be construed to any general term of men. The rest of what you said is just a bland statement on communication which serves no purpose but the obvious. You may as well have said that you get wet when you jump in water. To that and what you said I would respond...DUH!

You said you have never heard of a man saying that- so I showed you an example of a man saying that- you happen to be a man and said that in the same post.

Yes, I think that what I said is rather simple and obvious, and it does seem strange that you argued against it, but I was kind, I broke it down and explained instead of just calling you a name.

See, that works too! You still "got it", without the name calling having to be used.

Seems the only way some people would be able to grasp some things, there a bit thick concerning some things. It serves its purpose, and that purpose is to grb there attention.

If someone is answering you, that means they are giving you attention already. You have had my attention from the beginning, and before you fell into fits of childish name calling and insults. Those have just been wasted letters on the posts.

Listen here, by the fact that you changed you wording and constantly contradicting what you said the first or second time, its obviously your just bull#ing or faking. In fact you seem pretty fake, in fact your not even a real frenchy, your some sort of fake frenchy.

I have changed ways of explaining the same thing, because I find that if a person doesn't understand what you are saying, you might be approaching from an angle they can't relate to. It is best to try from a different one. Use different words, other examples. As you can see above, it is effective. Wording makes a difference. The concept didn't change, only the wording.

If you were more knowledgeable in philosophy and psychology, you would have grasped right away what I was refering to with the terminology of "vessel". I did not know you were lacking that knowledge. When you argued that, it became clear you had no idea what it meant, so I explained for you.

Now, I am not french. I am american. I have lived in France for many years, but was born, raised, and educated in America and remain american.

like I said you may try to mince words but you already said money, power all of that = love, the fact that you may have used other words makes no difference, after all can you have power, wealth, without money? No!

Go back and read my own history which I included- I married a man with no job, no money, no home. I supported him financially and emotionally, and aided him to find and build his own career. Yes, love can exist without money.

We'll keep trying to aid you here. From the very quotes you put up, from me:


I must admit, I find power and wealth very attractive in a man...

Attraction is not love, money is not love.


To be attracted to something and to be in love with it, are NOT THE SAME THING.
As I explained, power and wealth can be a product of a strong will, which makes it an attention grabber.
But grabbing ones attention is not worth much. It is a second look, it is superficial.

One can also observe a strong will existing in a man, without him having wealth and power yet. As I did with my husband. We were young, and it was still a potential.

To say your statement of men with money and wealth are some sort of demi gods in willpower is way incorrect.

You exaggerate with your demi-gods characterization. But your example does not show any lack of will power.
Will power is the ability to go after and do what you want.

What you want.... as opposed to "what others want you to do", or "what your society, or religion, wants you to do."

That is why it is just the first point of interest to a woman- it is not enough to find a mate who goes after what he wants,
it is finding one that has the same wants as yourself!!!!! "DUH!" as you so like to say.

The opposite of a guy with will power is one that does everything he thinks others want him to, but spends his time being a whiny, bitter, passive aggressive child because he doesn't have what he really wants. That is the ultimate turn off.

Consent that I am right in this, then you can go away as you wasting my time, the few minutes it took to write this up I want back. Unless you like arguing with strange dudes about absolutely nothing, I may even start thinking you have a thing for this sort of thing.

Yes, I find the challenge of effective communication interesting. I grew up with a retarded sibling, and work with handicapped people, emotionally traumatized people, and even animal training as a lucrative hobby on the side.

You incarnate almost all those challenges in one, LOL!
I have sympathy for people with difficulties, that just need someone to make the effort.

3u40r15m
If they had a Cougar Mommy site I'd sign the hell up....

edit on 15-1-2014 by 3u40r15m because: (no reason given)

Yeah..what happened with emancipation.

reply to post by Bluesma

You said you have never heard of a man saying that- so I showed you an example of a man saying that- you happen to be a man and said that in the same post. Yes, I think that what I said is rather simple and obvious, and it does seem strange that you argued against it, but I was kind, I broke it down and explained instead of just calling you a name.

Like I said. Does not apply were I am concerned. We are not talking about me here, we are talking about you and men in general of which I would not be a part of. Lets just say I am a different kind of animal.

If someone is answering you, that means they are giving you attention already. You have had my attention from the beginning, and before you fell into fits of childish name calling and insults. Those have just been wasted letters on the posts.

Your obviously bored and have nothing better to do, whats the matter not getting enough attention from Mr lately, like I said maybe you should leave off and move on form this thread, as of yet you have yet to say anything meaningful. But listen, quit telling me things I already know, and no mincing words changes nothing. The fact that you can not grasp that is your problem not mine.

I have changed ways of explaining the same thing, because I find that if a person doesn't understand what you are saying, you might be approaching from an angle they can't relate to. It is best to try from a different one. Use different words, other examples. As you can see above, it is effective. Wording makes a difference. The concept didn't change, only the wording.

DUH! Words mean nothing. Changing words around only says that you want to avoid saying something because you may fear a certain truth.

If you were more knowledgeable in philosophy and psychology, you would have grasped right away what I was refering to with the terminology of "vessel". I did not know you were lacking that knowledge. When you argued that, it became clear you had no idea what it meant, so I explained for you.

Oh I know more about that stuff then you. In fact I know more about Plato then Plato knows about Plato. None of it matter however. Besides, like I said, your the one who is using all these terminologies such as "vessel" You say one thing. But in truth I do believe you all are just these soulless zombie vampires who must first attach themselfs to something or somebody to operate. So ya> And besides that, I told you about mister $$ who likes to visit Paris every few years and sample the delicacies there. Well the dude uses the same type of wording and his mindframe is eerily similar to yours and a great majority of females...So ya. I would say you all are soul-mates, who have yet to meet. But anyways, on your terminologies and your obviously fake grasp of things and philosophies. Do you even know what the hell your talking about or did you just read something somewhere and now think your some sort of expert on it.

Go back and read my own history which I included- I married a man with no job, no money, no home. I supported him financially and emotionally, and aided him to find and build his own career. Yes, love can exist without money.

The majority of things have been and are supported by women, anything from religions to the very concept of wealth and how our society is structured is basically just based on the fact that women think and want it that way. Like I said, all women through out time have done the same as you, some like money, so they go to were men with money are even if they have to cross oceans, some like sex and so they go to were those type of men are, and some like a bit of each and so go there...ETC ETC, everybody has there thing.

I do not really understand what your getting at. I mean sure love can exist without money, I suppose but were females are involved it would just be a matter of the situation. And besides the original point of the thread were about women who want to go do the whole sugar daddy thing, and just like you crossed the ocean to go be with your husband so to will they do the same thing were that is concerned. And so has every woman in her own way since the beginning of history. So ya your point is mute and kind of pointless. And its obviously your just trying to skirt around the issues.

I must admit, I find power and wealth very attractive in a man... Attraction is not love, money is not love.

There we go again. You do realize that sentence is illogical. First you try to take something out of the equation which is practically the same thing, you cant be wealthy or very powerful as you said without money. So if you are attracted to men who are wealthy and powerful you are attracted to men with money. Do you grasp the fallacy of your statements yet? Or is that to hard for you to grasp? You say it all depends. Well i think if you keep telling yourself that you just may believe it. However you would not be able to do it. So yes like I said and yes this is known, money is a natural aphrodisiac for many women. So yes money equates to love for many women. That fact is only been proven for what the past all of history, you not only have thousands of years of biology and evolution making that fact more concrete then concrete.

Lets just put it this way, if the money were to go away from these wealthy and rich people so full of strong will. How long will the love last? Not very long at all. And that to has been proven, there may be exceptions, but you are not one of them and neither are the majority of females.

To be attracted to something and to be in love with it, are NOT THE SAME THING. As I explained, power and wealth can be a product of a strong will, which makes it an attention grabber. But grabbing ones attention is not worth much. It is a second look, it is superficial.

Like I said all of this civilization is based on female perception, our whole social ladder and social outputs are based on that. And what do you think strong will means? There are practically hundreds of thousands of ways all of that could be manifested. And yet it only manifests in one or a few ways.

One can also observe a strong will existing in a man, without him having wealth and power yet. As I did with my husband. We were young, and it was still a potential.

OH ya! Really...Well good for you. Do you want a cookie or something? But like you said it was still a potential. Potential meaning a gamble was involved, one which if a few things went a bit different you would be singing a different story.

You exaggerate with your demi-gods characterization. But your example does not show any lack of will power. Will power is the ability to go after and do what you want.

Like I said all women and men go after what they want, and its been like that for pretty much all of time. Your just under the impression that every dude you come across is there to go after the things you want them to go after. And well if men could get the ladies living in a cardboard box they would. Like I said all of this world and civilization is merely an expression and manifestation for the greater part of the female mentality and not only that but there very soul.

Look around you, and you will see yourself in everything. And no we do not live in a matriarchy, that's just something lazy women like to say and think so that they dont have to put any effort into things and always have guys doing that for them. But off course there are some backfires to all that. The world is the way it is because the combines manifestation of all of you want it like that, and how else would it be in what with all the contradictory and convoluted things people manifest.

What you want.... as opposed to "what others want you to do", or "what your society, or religion, wants you to do."

So says somebody who has never had an original thought in her head and everything that she has known was put there by others, or society, or religion or the very world around her. Now I understand we are all just products of our environment. But why is it that some think that they are different or would be exempt from that?

That is why it is just the first point of interest to a woman- it is not enough to find a mate who goes after what he wants, it is finding one that has the same wants as yourself!!!!! "DUH!" as you so like to say.

Like I said many times. I agree with you. And that is the name of the game, I could quote what I said above, you do seem to have a short memory. But I suppose I am just not explaining things all that well.

The opposite of a guy with will power is one that does everything he thinks others want him to, but spends his time being a whiny, bitter, passive aggressive child because he doesn't have what he really wants. That is the ultimate turn off.

Sounds like 99.9% of all females. I think its a known fact that do to there biology and evolution females being a subversive creature by nature. Well things explode when they meet somebody who operates the same way they do. But that to is changing, hopefully in time we will get more variation on female mentalities then that. its kind of like the Borg collective out there. or like I said a soulless zombie vampire which must first attach itself to a host to survive.

If your talking about me. What can i say. You would be under the impression that I would want to spend more time then I had to with you or your like. Stay within your lines and in your box, and things will be well enough for you. Outside of it, you do not exist the lines are not only a definition of what you are, but they are what you are.

Do you people always assume that every dude is there to please every idiot thought you have in your head. And idiot thought such as the one i quoted above? You really do believe that I care what you think...Or what would be a turn off for your kind of ilk? You think a lot of yourself dont you.

Yes, I find the challenge of effective communication interesting. I grew up with a retarded sibling, and work with handicapped people, emotionally traumatized people, and even animal training as a lucrative hobby on the side. You incarnate almost all those challenges in one, LOL! I have sympathy for people with difficulties, that just need someone to make the effort.

I take it that means you will not concede my point on that insignificant banter.

Which was my point exactly. That you are not capable of it, just like you are not capable of the other things I said.