A question for the guys... [Archive] - HP Deals, Computer Coupons And Bargains

gcasas

09-07-2004, 09:30 PM

you think they stop being "children" once they get past the age of 18? no way..sorry but once a child-always a child in a mothers eyes..they don't stop being your kids because they grow up-and any woman in her right mind would NEVER put a man before her own children.Simple equation: The younger the child the more time the mother has to spend with it, which subtracts from the time the mother can spend with the guy alone. Young guys want to spend time getting laid not hanging out with some other dudes kid. Be realistic.

Hopefully, a man that is interested in her will also love and want to be part of her "family"....if not-he's a selfish prat with some really really big expectations.If most single women would have taken the time to find this type of guy they would not be sigle women. They are the selfish ones, because they didn't take the time to do things right and find a good guy. Now their kid is in a starting position behind children with 2 parents. And yes, the father was selfish too. But don't forget...the mothers picked that selfish guy.
And is it really that big of a expectation to want to raise your own kids and only your kids. I believe that is everyones expectations when they start thinking about having a family.

johnnymk

09-07-2004, 09:35 PM

Please, I'm 30 and just hitting my stride with the ladies, I feel. 23 is about as low as I'll go now, but that's still well before the motherhood years. (Oh who am I kidding, I'd still have a fling with a 20 year old just for hahas).

I am not certain, but living in NYC, you probably have a very large pool of never married women in your age bracket as opposed to other areas of America.

Memo

09-07-2004, 10:09 PM

Ok ok...maybe if she was REAAAAAAAAAAALLY hot....and rich

gcasas

09-08-2004, 12:03 AM

Ok ok...maybe if she was REAAAAAAAAAAALLY hot....and richTrue dat!

eSDee

09-08-2004, 12:06 AM

I would if she made me a better man, and I could not live without her.

Merlin

09-08-2004, 04:40 AM

I don't think I would. Right now I'm now sure if I want kids at all so that type of situation would not be for me. Now if I was more of a family man then sure.

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 05:32 AM

Why does that suck? Age is a very important part of this question. When you are young you don't want to have to worry about planning time together. Kids are the biggest responsibility I can think of and someone who is just out for fun (ie younger people) don't want to deal with that and really shouldn't be (most can barely take care of themselves). Not to mention, the bill for dates could be much higher and young people don't usually make a terrible amount of money.
The question said "children", not grown-up spawn.
to a mother-children, no matter what the age will always come first (or should come first) in a mother's heart. Unless there is something seriously wrong with them. No man should ever come before a woman's child/children. EVER.

Been there, done that and it's lotsa lotsa trouble.

Way too many issues regardless of the ages of the kids. Life is complicated enough without those problems.

However, once a guy gets to be in his early to mid thirties, there aren't too many other options available, so he may have to settle for a woman with kids.
And perhaps it's the woman who is settling..ever think of that? If you've "been there" perhaps it wasn't the woman and her children who were the trouble..maybe you're just a weirdo who can't deal with the thought of having to "share" with someone's kids. Selfish. bah. Oh wait..you're the guy who hangs around karoke bars, dyes his hair and wonders why 20 year old girls speak in squeaky voices..YEH THAT EXPLAINS IT..you think you're gonna score with a post teen supermodel who will fall madly in love with you because you're you. YEH RIGHT. lol

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 05:45 AM

Simple equation: The younger the child the more time the mother has to spend with it, which subtracts from the time the mother can spend with the guy alone. Young guys want to spend time getting laid not hanging out with some other dudes kid. Be realistic.It's always about getting laid with you guys..
don't blame the child because his father is a jackass and isn't around anymore.

If most single women would have taken the time to find this type of guy they would not be sigle women. They are the selfish ones, because they didn't take the time to do things right and find a good guy. Now their kid is in a starting position behind children with 2 parents. And yes, the father was selfish too. But don't forget...the mothers picked that selfish guy.
And is it really that big of a expectation to want to raise your own kids and only your kids. I believe that is everyones expectations when they start thinking about having a family.
Oh you think? please don't even go there.. I found a great guy and I was married to him for 20 plus years and then HE decided to leave and spend the rest of his life playing golf. Mind you he was never denied the chance to play as it was, we had a fabulous life, great kids, and were best friends,...DO NOT, i REPEAT, do not assume that it's the woman who is the selfish one. His one flaw-he was cheap when it came to buying things for anyone but him self..(as everyone here knows about the plastic box)..Oh he made up for it-then he moved out.
You are talking through your ass. Seriously. I laugh when i see guys in their 40's, 50's, and older checking out young girls..I want to go up to them with their balding, pot bellied, t-shirt clad selves and say YEH RIGHT-LIKE SHE'D BE INTERESTED IN YOU. Sorry guys, but even us old girls don't want DORKS who think they are all that and a bag o' chips.

Kim

09-08-2004, 05:55 AM

I agree with Obby, I don't feel like I chose the wrong guy to marry. We had a lot of great times together. How was I to know 14 years ago that he would decide that he would have more fun being single? Not one thing in our life together made me think that this would happen. As for me being selfish, I can tell you that I am the most selfless person I know. My kids and family always come first, no matter what. If I never date again it would be ok, as long as my kids were happy. And, I guess I don't look at my kids as being "baggage".

Cantacuzene

09-08-2004, 06:09 AM

I'm far too young to date a woman with kids. And if the girl is my age and has kids already thats a big warning sign.

redcolours

09-08-2004, 06:14 AM

Would you date a woman who has children? i would.
again.

cuz i have already, in the past. she was older, and i was much younger.that was great!

if i date a woman, its cuz im interested in HER - ALL of her. not just simple romantic and/or lustful amorous intentions. her life and everything that comes with her. she cant help it if she has kids already before i met her. i dont see why it should be a big deal.
i do not look at it as dating a woman with children, i see it as dating a woman im interested with.

simply that.

plus the keyword here is DATE.
its not like youre gonna marry her right away, and assume total responsibility for the kids after the first date. thats why you date - you find out more about that person, their lives, how it will fit with yours, or how your life will fit with them. if its amicable for both parties, then move on to the next step.

its a side-topic but i think most people are just obsessed with AGE. your age or their age. it really should NOT matter.
unless of course the person is under 13 years of age (thats just wrong), or 40 years OLDER than you (imho). but even then, it still happens anyway. no one can tell anyone how to love (or how to lust). the old adage is true - love will find a way (or as i call it "sometimes there really is no accounting for taste" :hihi: )

but yeah, dating a woman with children isnt a big deal for me.

WhiskeyPapa

09-08-2004, 06:18 AM

If, God forbid, something happened to my wife, I would not date a woman with children still at home, and I probably wouldn't date until all of my children were grown and moved out.

If I were living in a parallel universe and had no wife or children, I probably still wouldn't date a woman with young children. I'd consider a woman who's kids were adults.

zenbooty

09-08-2004, 06:29 AM

I am not certain, but living in NYC, you probably have a very large pool of never married women in your age bracket as opposed to other areas of America.You could very well have a point there. And a 23 year old living in the city is a lot more worldly and experienced than a 23 year old who spen here whole lives in the 'burbs or the country, generally.

gear02

09-08-2004, 06:40 AM

I've been trying to hold out from posting here, but finally I will...

I think I would. I don't think at 24 that I'm not ready for kids. But I think it depends on whether the kid would accept me. I wouldn't want to be involved in a relationship with someone who's kid hates you. It makes for a more dysfunctional situation there.

But I don't think it immediately removes them from the list of possibilities, although I do then to think that if they have kids, then they're married and thus no longer a target ;)

johnnymk

09-08-2004, 06:42 AM

And perhaps it's the woman who is settling..ever think of that? If you've "been there" perhaps it wasn't the woman and her children who were the trouble..maybe you're just a weirdo who can't deal with the thought of having to "share" with someone's kids. Selfish. bah. Oh wait..you're the guy who hangs around karoke bars, dyes his hair and wonders why 20 year old girls speak in squeaky voices..YEH THAT EXPLAINS IT..you think you're gonna score with a post teen supermodel who will fall madly in love with you because you're you. YEH RIGHT. lol

You are so bitter!!

And you make all kind of assumptions about everything except that is relevant. And if I thought a twenty something or even a thirty something would be interested in me, I would have to take a serious reality check. It's just not gonna happen.

Nasty, nasty, nasty :wavey2:

I can't wait till you get back on to the dating circuit and find what's out there.

caribiner23

09-08-2004, 06:43 AM

Considering the demographic here at G|A, the results are going to be skewed. Most of the guys here seem to be in their early-mid 20s, and in general I don't think younger guys want to deal with kids at that point in their lives.

I'm 43, and during my time 'at large' I have dated women with kids-- it's never been an issue with me, as long as the lady knows that my top priorities are my kids, and I would never expect her to put me in front of her own.

I'm also heavily involved in my kids' school district on a volunteer basis, which means that takes up a significant amount of my time during the school year. The lady I'm dating would need to understand that as well.

This approach has been successful for me.

All that said, the time she and I would have together to develop and have a relationship would be focused there.

gcasas

09-08-2004, 07:35 AM

It's always about getting laid with you guys.. Duh! For young guys it is! Why can't you except that?

don't blame the child because his father is a jackass and isn't around anymore. Don't expect some other guy to share your responsibility just because you picked the wrong guy. It is possible that you will find that great guy who wants to, but be realistic, it is not likely. That is just life.

Oh you think? please don't even go there.. I found a great guy and I was married to him for 20 plus years and then HE decided to leave and spend the rest of his life playing golf. Mind you he was never denied the chance to play as it was, we had a fabulous life, great kids, and were best friends,...DO NOT, i REPEAT, do not assume that it's the woman who is the selfish one. His one flaw-he was cheap when it came to buying things for anyone but him self..(as everyone here knows about the plastic box)..Oh he made up for it-then he moved out.So you had absolutely no part in his leaving and you saw no red flags ever? I would like to hear what he has to say about how he threw away being able to play golf and have sex with his "best friend".
Even if it is true, that is very rare. Most single women are not single after 20 years of perfect marriage. You should have been more specific in the thread title. You ask a general question and you'll get a general answer.

You are talking through your ass. Seriously. I laugh when i see guys in their 40's, 50's, and older checking out young girls..I want to go up to them with their balding, pot bellied, t-shirt clad selves and say YEH RIGHT-LIKE SHE'D BE INTERESTED IN YOU. Sorry guys, but even us old girls don't want DORKS who think they are all that and a bag o' chips.Unless they have money right? How many rich, old, balding, pot bellied, t-shirt clad dorks do people see every day with young hot chicks. Countless! Oh and those guys don't want chicks like you either. Money makes most women ignore red flags, just like good looks make most men ignore red flags. For most guys it is mostly about sex. Guys are guys, it has been that way for thousands of years, why would it change for you? Are you that special that all guys should forget about their natural cravings?
If relationships are all about love and being best freinds then why is the divorce rate above 50%. And don't say guys are dogs and cheat, because women are cheating just as much now.

I agree with Obby, I don't feel like I chose the wrong guy to marry. We had a lot of great times together. How was I to know 14 years ago that he would decide that he would have more fun being single? Not one thing in our life together made me think that this would happen. As for me being selfish, I can tell you that I am the most selfless person I know. My kids and family always come first, no matter what. If I never date again it would be ok, as long as my kids were happy. And, I guess I don't look at my kids as being "baggage". You never saw any red flags? That is really hard to beleive. You guys must not have been as close as you thought, because there was obviously a problem. I am not trying to bash you girls and I never said the kids are baggage.
When you were younger would you have wanted to take care of someone elses kid? I really doubt it. It is a full time job and most young people do not want it and are not ready for it. That is the point.

Jenny

09-08-2004, 07:44 AM

I am not trying to bash you girls...

Does anyone else get the feeling he's kind of a sexist? That along with the other comments. :disa:

zenbooty

09-08-2004, 07:50 AM

Does anyone else get the feeling he's kind of a sexist? That along with the other comments. :disa:No, just young and inexperienced. His comments are not without some merit, although his worldview seems a bit harsh and unsentimental. I find that's getting more common with young people today.

Anyway, he seemed no more sexist than Obby has been lately.

Kim

09-08-2004, 08:07 AM

So gcasas, you think the man you are now will be the exact same man you are at 35? You don't think a person or a couple can change?

I realize that most here are younger than me, so I totally understand that most wouldn't want to date a lady with kids. I should have been more specific and stated that I don't necesarily want to be married again, I just want someone to have fun with.

DarkFury

09-08-2004, 08:21 AM

I wouldn't have a problem with that... as long as a) she doesn't have a tribe (i.e. 3+ kids) and is lookin' at me to become their "daddy", and b) she accepts that I have my own child. :D

Honestly, for me, 2 kids is a plenty. 3 is a stretch... beyond that, it's time to get fixed. :D

welfareloser

09-08-2004, 08:27 AM

If most single women would have taken the time to find this type of guy they would not be sigle women. They are the selfish ones, because they didn't take the time to do things right and find a good guy. Now their kid is in a starting position behind children with 2 parents. And yes, the father was selfish too. But don't forget...the mothers picked that selfish guy..

yeah, you deserve to get blasted for this idiocy again...

i "took the time" to choose the smartest guy in my high school class, the guy that EVERYONE'S mother wanted their daughter to marry, the guy that EVERYONE said hi to, the guy that had a bright future. he wasn't "popular," he wasn't a jerk, everybody liked him because he was so sweet and likable. we dated for 5 years before marrying, which is a lot more responsible than most people are, we discussed having children extensively and made sure we were emotionally and financially ready for it, three years into our marriage... and that didn't stop him from turning into an abusive alcoholic that i had to save myself and my son from. get real. have you never placed your trust in someone and gotten burned? if you say no, you're lying, so don't even bother answering. yeah, you could call some people in some situations stupid for setting themselves up for it, but to make a blanket statement that women who are divorced with kids f***ed up is ridiculous. and as for your stupid little disclaimer... "yeah, the guy was selfish too, BUT" does nothing to soften the stupidity of your stupidness. it is trying to cover your 200-lb hairy butt of an opinion with a baby wipe - NOT working.

And is it really that big of a expectation to want to raise your own kids and only your kids. I believe that is everyones expectations when they start thinking about having a family.

yes, everybody does think of that when they think of raising a family, just like everyone imagines themselves in the perfect job when they're young, and every girl who ever picked up a barbie dreams of the storybook wedding. realistically, that's often not how it turns out, and i'm not just referring to our country in the present time. throughout human history and across the planet, blended families have been the norm, due mostly to adults' tendency to die of everything from war to famine to a broken leg to whooping cough. spouses die, you remarry and you raise the kids of your new spouse. you raise your nieces and nephews and cousins and neighbors. now we don't die soon enough, so people have time and luxury to change and outgrow each other. different reasons, same effect.

a lot of younger guys are going to steer clear like you're a leper... i think in large part because we now have such small families (2 kids is the norm) and we often live far away from our extended families, and we tend to divide our society up by age strata as never before (children are in groups of only their own age until they get out of college, old people live in old folks' homes, etc) ... and all this adds up to most people under the age of 25 having NO experience whatsoever with kids, and something unfamiliar is something uncomfortable. guys in an age group where their sisters, brothers and friends have started having kids - even if they have none themselves - suddenly stop blushing and getting indignant when a woman breastfeeds in the same room, don't wonder how the heck they're supposed to hold a baby without breaking it, and have learned how to play with a six-year-old without worrying about looking stupid....

and now, to kim... when i got divorced, i figured nobody would want a woman with an 18-month old, especially in this college town where people tend to get married closer to 30 than 20 and most people with babies are 10-15 years older than me... i didn't even look. i wasn't planning on looking. but what do you know, i had two guys who already knew me interested... neither of them had ever had kids, but they both said the same thing - "i love your kid because he's a part of you and i would love to be the guy who raises him."

so, you're not going to go out to bars and get lots of phone numbers from guys, but so what? the dates will be fewer and farther between than if you had never been married and didn't have kids, but the interest that you do get will be genuine - i think that has its advantages. most women who are divorced and/or with kids wind up remarrying someone that they got to know pretty well before they started dating, and the guy who started dating them went into it knowing what he was getting into, and WANTING exactly what he was getting into.

so, all i'm saying is, stay active, get out of the house, do something at least once a week where you get out into an extended social group... ie, not just going over to a girlfriends' house, i mean join an interest group, a club, anything that you enjoy that allows you to meet new people. now might be the perfect time to take up paintball or dungeons and dragons, just like you always wanted to :heh: just be true to yourself, and you will eventually meet someone who wants to have margaritas with you ;)

Kim

09-08-2004, 08:34 AM

Thanks WF. :)

welfareloser

09-08-2004, 08:58 AM

Honestly, for me, 2 kids is a plenty. 3 is a stretch... beyond that, it's time to get fixed. :D

words to live by ;)

and yeah, i understand what you mean by not wanting a woman who wants you to be some other kids' daddy... but then again, why rule that out in general? i'd say you ought to let it depend on the particular case... the age of the kids and the level of involvement of the biological father determine the particular dynamic of the blended family... (although, if you mean you're steering clear of women who are specifically hunting for a "daddy" because they just want a man, any man, to take care of their family... good call.)

but from what i've seen among my close friends and family, even the most effed up situations really don't take much of a toll on the new relationship. my cousin is with a woman now who has three older daughters by her ex, another cousin with a 7-yr-old daughter who lives with her mom is remarried to a woman without kids, another cousin has a baby by a guy who has kids with three other women (it's okay to laugh, i do and so does she ;) )... they've all worked out fine. the step-parents are all doing just fine being a step-parent. just like having a new baby, you learn as you go. in my case, the "daddy" job was 100% vacated, and my husband has stepped into it and is quite happy and comfortable with it; yes, there are moments when he is reminded that he isn't the biological father, but it's never been a problem.

if there are no feelings of love left between your new squeeze and his/her old squeeze, you'll find yourself perfectly capable of discussing the children with the ex, sitting in a room with him/her, answering the phone when he/she calls... sure it'll be wierd. lots of things are wierd. you get over it, and it's just not even a big deal. heck, my ex is absolutely psychotic, has poured sugar in my husband's gas tank, tries to be a pain in the butt in every way possible - it hasn't ever made prm regret marrying me. he's a pain in the butt the way the occasional storm that damages your garage or floods your basement is a pain... it's part of the price of living in a nice, cheap little town in central illinois, and we're happy to pay it. prm knew i came with an ex that is nuts, and if that's part of the price of having me in his life, he'd rather pay it than be with anyone else :shrug: heck, his ex-girlfriends have been almost as much of a pain in the butt as my ex-husband; you don't have to have been married and had kids for there to be massive baggage that REFUSES TO GET OUT OF YOUR LIFE NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU TAKE THE TRASH TO THE CURB IT JUST KEEPS CRAWLING BACK UP TO YOUR HOUSE YEARS AFTER IT FIRST GOT DUMPED AND NOT ONLY WON'T TAKE A HINT TO GO AWAY, IT WON'T EVEN TAKE OVERT ORDERS TO THAT EFFECT... *pant* *pant* guess i needed to get that off my chest. anyway. yep. :D

welfareloser

09-08-2004, 09:20 AM

Don't expect some other guy to share your responsibility just because you picked the wrong guy. It is possible that you will find that great guy who wants to, but be realistic, it is not likely. That is just life.

different people come with different baggage. sometimes crushing student debt, sometimes kids, sometimes crazy parents. nobody "expects" someone else to share those responsibilities. those are just the things we come with, and a potential mate can take it or leave it. REALISTICALLY, it is likely that someone will. THAT is just life. most people learn to accept the total package of someone they have decided they want to be with. only immature self-centered dickheads never do.

So you had absolutely no part in his leaving and you saw no red flags ever? I would like to hear what he has to say about how he threw away being able to play golf and have sex with his "best friend".

accusing someone you don't know of driving her husband away is low. nobody knows what happens except obby and her ex. we like obby here, and she is hurting. your comment is crass, rude, unproductive, and uncalled for. if you actually KNEW her, and had something constructive to say, like "maybe you shouldn't have done this," fine. but you're just being a turd. if you're bored, why don't you go find a homeless puppy, kick it, and tell it to get a job. it would be nicer.

Unless they have money right? How many rich, old, balding, pot bellied, t-shirt clad dorks do people see every day with young hot chicks. Countless! Oh and those guys don't want chicks like you either. Money makes most women ignore red flags, just like good looks make most men ignore red flags. For most guys it is mostly about sex. Guys are guys, it has been that way for thousands of years, why would it change for you? Are you that special that all guys should forget about their natural cravings?.

damn, what rock did you crawl outr from under? men like looks, women like money... yep. in general, that's the way the world works. any woman who likes sex and/or isn't impressed by money is an exception to the rule, and any man who is monogamous to a woman is really just artificially repressing his desire to have sex with any other attractive woman... you should really stop talking now while you're behind.

If relationships are all about love and being best freinds then why is the divorce rate above 50%. And don't say guys are dogs and cheat, because women are cheating just as much now.

your assumption says a lot about you. nobody here was going to say "because men are dogs and they cheat!" that's you, projecting. YOU'RE the one with the men vs. women attitude, stop pretending that there is anyone on the other side of your one-man argument.

relationships are all about love and sex. people get married because they love someone. the divorce rate is at 50% because because people reach a point where they think they'll be happier divorced than they will ever be married to that person, for millions of various reasons.

You never saw any red flags? That is really hard to beleive. You guys must not have been as close as you thought, because there was obviously a problem. .

jeez. remind me to make fun of you with smug self-importance next time you "miss" something "obvious." especially if i have no idea what i'm talking about, because then it'll really carry some weight.

honestly. yes, in a lot of cases, there are signs, at least in retrospect. heck, i can think of things that happened when i was 17 years old that were indications that my now-ex could be a mean, mean person... but only in retrospect. if i gave you a list of worrisome things that happened before we married, and asked if they were grounds not to marry him, trust me, any sane person would ahve LAUGHED at me.

and it's also entirely likely that there were no signs at all for her. people often do a very good job of covering up their true feelings because they don't want to hurt someone, because they don't want to admit to themselves that they feel a certain way, or because they don't want to deal with the fallout that will come from admitting their feelings.

again, you're being a rude twerp. your confrontational attitude about SOMEONE ELSE'S RELATIONSHIP, when you've never even spent a single MOMENT with obby and her ex together, is ridiculous.

nickel

09-08-2004, 09:25 AM

girls, gcasas is not worth your time. i went around with him too. got no where.
and yeh, he is about as sexist as they come. :rolleyes:

InfiniteNothing

09-08-2004, 09:51 AM

I've always wanted to date someone with kids. (though there haven't been alot of opertunities thus far) I imagine that the hardest part would be breakin up with them because you'd be all Tom Cruise in Jerry Maguireish. In many ways, it seems like kind of a discount because this way you don't have to deal with a pregnant woman. :wavey2:

cruelpupet

09-08-2004, 09:57 AM

Oh wait..you're the guy who hangs around karoke bars, dyes his hair

And what is wrong with Kareoke bars????

------------

Getting back to what I feel was the origional purpose of this thread...

Kim, if you are looking to "have fun" with somone in their 30's or older...then it is not as likely that they will care that you have kids.

(just dont turn into one of the women on springer :p )

Kim

09-08-2004, 10:29 AM

Nah, no chance of me becoming a Springer woman, lol.

caribiner23

09-08-2004, 10:30 AM

I've always wanted to date someone with kids. (though there haven't been alot of opertunities thus far) I imagine that the hardest part would be breakin up with them because you'd be all Tom Cruise in Jerry Maguireish. This is the toughest part of ending a relationship with someone who has kids, especially if you've grown close to the them. It's the whole mess of not being with them any more. I still hear from an ex-GF's kids via email once in a while, where they update me on their school and sports activities.

most people learn to accept the total package of someone they have decided they want to be with. only immature self-centered dickheads never do. Exactly. And the term "dickhead" knows no gender: I've seen the behavior on both sides.

Kim, there are good ones out there. Trust me.

welfareloser

09-08-2004, 01:31 PM

*hint* and chicago's a nice city... :P

tupacboy

09-08-2004, 01:34 PM

yes i would...

gcasas

09-08-2004, 01:36 PM

girls, gcasas is not worth your time. i went around with him too. got no where.
and yeh, he is about as sexist as they come. :rolleyes: Once again no examples or substance. What have I said that is sexist?
Can you people not be honest with yourself. I have said that the guy is at fault too, but a relationship invlolves 2 people and whether you want to face it or not you had something to do with the outcome. If things were so perfect why would the guy leave? Answer that question with some reasons not fellings.

No, just young and inexperienced. His comments are not without some merit, although his worldview seems a bit harsh and unsentimental. I find that's getting more common with young people today.
Anyway, he seemed no more sexist than Obby has been lately. Thank you, someone honest and realistic. I am just trying to say how things are, as opposed to some of the others who are saying how they want things to be.

So gcasas, you think the man you are now will be the exact same man you are at 35? You don't think a person or a couple can change?
Of course not, but I was talking about young guys!

DarkFury

09-08-2004, 01:50 PM

(although, if you mean you're steering clear of women who are specifically hunting for a "daddy" because they just want a man, any man, to take care of their family... good call.)

Bingo...

Beware of the jackhammer and the hat that glows... :D

In many ways, it seems like kind of a discount because this way you don't have to deal with a pregnant woman. :wavey2: Unless you let one of "your boys" slip... and then you're in it KNEE DEEP...and sinkin'. :shifty:

gcasas

09-08-2004, 02:12 PM

<>And to the rest of you... welfareloser especially…
you get mad because I make a general statement, then attack me when none of you have a clue about me. You have all had experiences with this right? Well I was talking about the people who don't. How many guys under the age of 25 do you know that want to date women with kids. Not many right? That is all I am saying along with some of the reasons for which this is true. Did you expect every guy to say yes on this forum? There are reasons for guys to say no.
As for the relationship comments I have been around as many people and break ups as any of you and these are the things I see. The divorce rate is over 50%!!! This is because most (not all) people don't take the time to do things right and don't continue to take care of their mate they way they used to. In general people don't just leave their "best friends" if things are going so "great". If you are the few rare people whose spouse decided one day to completely change for no reason what so ever, than I apologize. The rest of you, try to be realistic so the next time you are more aware. Sorry to be so harsh but maybe you should not be on a public forum if you can only handle nice things. And remember the kids are the ones who pay most dearly here, not the mother or the father. Speaking of the kids, what kind of picture about love and marriage do kids get when they see there mother/father dating different people after leaving the marriage. Shouldn’t the mother/father wait until the kid is grown up to pursue their needs? Just a thought.

guiseppewv

09-08-2004, 02:58 PM

Would you date a woman who has children?

I would but I would need the right circumstances. I do not search out single mothers when I am looking for a date. Make sense?

In order to marry her I would have to love her kids, if they are younger, as much as I love her. I could not be a step-father for kids I do not love.

guiseppewv

09-08-2004, 03:08 PM

No, just young and inexperienced. His comments are not without some merit, although his worldview seems a bit harsh and unsentimental. I find that's getting more common with young people today.

Anyway, he seemed no more sexist than Obby has been lately.

:stupid: for the most part.

He is young and inexperienced but there has been plenty of bashing by both gcasas and Obby. He is being honest about why he would not date a single mother. Maybe a little too honest but definately way too harsh.

gcasas - you are still young and you do not have the experience that some of the people above have. People make mistakes, sometimes knowingly and sometimes unknowingly, and sometimes $hit happens, so do not be so harsh to those people who are in the situation b/c its not nice and if that doesn't matter then think someday it could be you in their shoes. And, yes, you were being sexist.

I edited this after I took a gander at the rest of the thread.

gcasas

09-08-2004, 03:15 PM

He is young and inexperienced but there has been plenty of bashing by both gcasas and Obby. He is being honest about why he would not date a single mother. guiseppewv is a very rational person. We have been debating on another thread for hours with very different points, yet we can still be civilized with each other and respect each others opinions.
OK OK, so I may be young and inexperienced, but you have to be before you are old and experienced.
Some of these so called experienced people don't seem very realistic though, they really like saying the way things should be, not the way things are. That seems to be sort of a waste of their experience.

molecularfire

09-08-2004, 03:53 PM

If I got along with her kids, sure, why not. It'll save me the effort of making new kids. I don't feel that a father and a sperm donor necessarily have to be the same person. However, the problem with women with kids is that they are a packaged deal. If I don't get along with either the woman or the kids, then it most likely isn't going to work. Not that I would rule a kid out just because we didn't get along initially... sometimes it takes a kid a while to get used to the idea that someone else is vieing for their mother's attention. However, if the kid and I really don't get along, I'm not doing anybody any favors by sticking around.

BrewMaster

09-08-2004, 03:56 PM

Some of these so called experienced people don't seem very realistic though, they really like saying the way things should be, not the way things are. That seems to be sort of a waste of their experience.

i would love to flame you, but i'll keep it civil. you admit to being young and inexperienced, so who are you to tell people about "the way things are?" you shoot your own credibility by admitting to be young and inexperienced, so cut these folks some slack. these are real people you are insulting with your know-it-all behavior. chill out. think before you type.

back to the topic at hand: if my fiance was a single mom when i met her, i most certainly would have dated her and proposed to her. she is the most amazing woman I have ever met and I am honored to be her man. some of you may remember threads i put up back in the day about our first date or asking for ideas for our 1 year anniversary date. well, it's been 4 years and now we're engaged. no kids, but she is too great to pass up so if she had kids, i'd still be in.

and if i were single and welfareloser was single, well, you know I'd date her! Kids and all! It's all about he quality of the person. She's quality. (And she brews some good beer, which I am a sucker for.)

InfiniteNothing

09-08-2004, 04:11 PM

Some of these so called experienced people don't seem very realistic though, they really like saying the way things should be, not the way things are. That seems to be sort of a waste of their experience.These tangents are crazy. Be honest, are you an illegal drug user (I won't turn this around on you I promise. I just had inkling) PM me if you'd like.

gcasas

09-08-2004, 04:12 PM

i would love to flame you, but i'll keep it civil. you admit to being young and inexperienced, so who are you to tell people about "the way things are?" you shoot your own credibility by admitting to be young and inexperienced, so cut these folks some slack. these are real people you are insulting with your know-it-all behavior. chill out. think before you type. Who here knows everything? No one right? I am just giving my opinion based on things I have seen and experienced, like everyone else. What else can I do here? The fact remains that most young guys don't date single women, you can't deny that. Otherwise it wouldn't be an issue for debate. And if you go back in this thread you will see that the lack of slack was started with some of the women. I have only been responding to questions, points, and attacks directed towards me.

back to the topic at hand: if my fiance was a single mom when i met her, i most certainly would have dated her and proposed to her. she is the most amazing woman I have ever met and I am honored to be her man. some of you may remember threads i put up back in the day about our first date or asking for ideas for our 1 year anniversary date. well, it's been 4 years and now we're engaged. no kids, but she is too great to pass up so if she had kids, i'd still be in.
and if i were single and welfareloser was single, well, you know I'd date her! Kids and all! It's all about he quality of the person. She's quality. (And she brews some good beer, which I am a sucker for.) My point is that you may not have got to know her as well as you did, since most of her attention would have gone to the kid and not you. Plus there would have been many times where stress levels would be higher and some of the problems you worked out may have gone another direction. Of course if you meet the person of your dreams you will do anything for her. The problem is accessibility, which is diminished with the presence of kids.
The more time you have with a person, the better idea you get of them, right? So it is easier and less time consuming to date someone with more free time.

whitak24

09-08-2004, 04:42 PM

to answer the question.....at this point in my life, i don't want kids, period. so i would be very hesitant to date someone with kids. but if i was friends with someone who had a child/children, and liked them a lot, and was pretty sure they were someone i was serious about having a relationship with, then i would not dismiss it simply because of the kids.

so dating, probably not, but making the transition from really good friends to "something more", possibly, depending on the situation.

cheapie

09-08-2004, 05:25 PM

obby....i gotta disagree with you in only one aspect. i think a husband and wife should love and value each other more than they love and cherish their kids. that's prolly just because of my religious background.

and kids? if i were single i would not really hesitate to hook up w/a woman with kids, as long as i felt they gave me a shot at becoming friends and caring for them. the optimal situation would be if the dad was totally out of the picture :shrug:

and kim and obby, once you get back out there and start having guys staring and flirting w/you, you'll feel wanted again and not worry about the kids thing. maybe you'll even have a guy try to stick his tongue down your throat in the first date obby. ahahahaha...jk girl. jk.

zenbooty

09-08-2004, 05:42 PM

obby....i gotta disagree with you in only one aspect. i think a husband and wife should love and value each other more than they love and cherish their kids. that's prolly just because of my religious background.Nah, this ain't true. There've been studies showing that most husbands would sacrifice their children for their wives, while most wives would sacrifice their husbands for their children.

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 07:44 PM

You are so bitter!!

And you make all kind of assumptions about everything except that is relevant. And if I thought a twenty something or even a thirty something would be interested in me, I would have to take a serious reality check. It's just not gonna happen.

Nasty, nasty, nasty :wavey2:

I can't wait till you get back on to the dating circuit and find what's out there.I'm not bitter-just brutally honest and unfortunately you don't want to hear it..as far as me being on the dating ciruit..I am enjoying the peace and solitude of my newly single life-I have no intention of being on any circuit. I have more important things to think about like my kids, my jobs, and my faith and could care less about who is looking for a roll in the proverbial hay. I'm not some desperate divorcee who is DESPERATE for a man in my life. I'm doing fine on my own...and no worries Johnny, I've been asked out by 3 different gentlemen-all very respectable, hard working, and mature men-who aren't bitter that they themselves are single-they don't hang out in bars, troll the malls or try to hook up with their 22 year old bank tellers. I've gotten along splendidly with each of them and I have no reason to be on a "circuit" since I have no problem getting a "date" if I need one. Sorry-you're the bitter one here. Not me.

to gcasASS: You are a f*cktard. Please stop talking. You have no clue what it's like to be in a relationship that has absolutely no warning signs of a default until your partner goes through a midlife crisis and feels the need to change his life around because he has F*CKTARD friends (who sound like you) who convince him that golf is much more important than continuing on with a perfectly good relationship. Plain and simple. Men never grow up-no I correct myself. SOME MEN never grow up-and remain selfish their whole lives no matter what the situation. Not that I have anything to explain to you because ..oh wait..YOU'RE A F*CKTARD.Stop talking-seriously.

Cheapie: scenario #1. If you're wife and children were on a sinking boat on a lake and you could only save two-would you save your wife and one boy? or both boys? or what? ...If you ask your wife..I guarentee you she'd say she'd save the boys-and more so-give her life for her children to live. That's what it's all about once you have kids-Before you have children-spouses put each other on pedestals. Once there are babies-it's about protecting them, worshipping them, and watching them grow up into mature, respectful adults..adults take a backseat on everything after that till the day they die.

johnnymk

09-08-2004, 08:00 PM

they don't hang out in bars, troll the malls or try to hook up with their 22 year old bank tellers. I've gotten along splendidly with each of them and I have no reason to be on a "circuit" since I have no problem getting a "date" if I need one. Sorry-you're the bitter one here. Not me.

Oh and now they are 22 and bank tellers.

It appears that you constantly make up little scenarios in your mind on how people live regardless of the facts.

You watch way too many soap operas.

Did I tell you I also chew gum? OMG, that would be the last straw in your book.

InfiniteNothing

09-08-2004, 08:03 PM

Oh go sleep with eachother already. We know you love eachother.... geez I guess after a certain age you become a kndergardener again.

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 08:05 PM

Oh and now they are 22 and bank tellers.

It appears that you constantly make up little scenarios in your mind on how people live regardless of the facts.

You watch way too many soap operas.

Did I tell you I also chew gum? OMG, that would be the last straw in your book.

LOL who has time for soap opera's. And hey if I was going to make up a scenario it would hardly be about YOU and 22 year olds when Mel Gibson is only about 3000 miles from my door-DUH. Stop being a pitiful old drama queen and go find yourself a date.

Oh go sleep with eachother already. We know you love eachother.... geez I guess after a certain age you become a kndergardener again.
I'd rather eat ground glass-but thanks for thinking of me. :puke:

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 08:14 PM

Duh! For young guys it is! Why can't you except that?
Don't expect some other guy to share your responsibility just because you picked the wrong guy. It is possible that you will find that great guy who wants to, but be realistic, it is not likely. That is just life.
So you had absolutely no part in his leaving and you saw no red flags ever? I would like to hear what he has to say about how he threw away being able to play golf and have sex with his "best friend".
Let's see-you're an idiot.

Even if it is true, that is very rare. Most single women are not single after 20 years of perfect marriage. You should have been more specific in the thread title. Uh..I didn't start the thread. Stop talking.

You ask a general question and you'll get a general answer.
Unless they have money right? How many rich, old, balding, pot bellied, t-shirt clad dorks do people see every day with young hot chicks. Countless! Oh and those guys don't want chicks like you either. Money makes most women ignore red flags, just like good looks make most men ignore red flags. For most guys it is mostly about sex. Guys are guys, it has been that way for thousands of years, why would it change for you? Are you that special that all guys should forget about their natural cravings?
If relationships are all about love and being best freinds then why is the divorce rate above 50%. And don't say guys are dogs and cheat, because women are cheating just as much now.
Lessee..I have my own money-so I don't need a man with money..hmm..
and might I remind you I never said I was special-those are your words. A person is special to another person in whatever way they are attracted to them....but then again you wouldn't understand that because obviously you have no experience...and once again-PLEASE JUST STOP TALKING.

Don't worry Kim, there is someone out there for everyone-when it's the right time, you'll find just what your'e looking for. ;)

LPMiller

09-08-2004, 08:27 PM

obby....i gotta disagree with you in only one aspect. i think a husband and wife should love and value each other more than they love and cherish their kids. that's prolly just because of my religious background..

That doesn't make sense. I love my wife more than life itself, but my kids top that. And she feels the same way. If it comes to choosing between each other and the kids, the kids win. They are the greater responsibility.

There is an awful lot of raw, primitive sexism in this thread, and it's disturbing. By men and women both. Ah well.

I of course would date a woman with kids. Because how she treats those kids is a damn good indicator of what kind of woman she is, and i got kids of my own to look out for. But even as a younger man, that never would have been an issue with me. Dating a person doesn't make you suddenly responsible for other peoples kids, which I think is why a lot of people fear it. Or they fear kids would be a downer on their good times. Fair enough.

I'd date Kim in a heartbeat, sight unseen. Unless she really does look like a skinny asian dude from Star Trek, then....no. No I don't think so.

InfiniteNothing

09-08-2004, 08:28 PM

I'd rather eat ground glass-but thanks for thinking of me. :puke:

C'mon look how you two always bicker. It's like a cute old couple.

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 08:31 PM

C'mon look how you two always bicker. It's like a cute old couple.
Please. Take some pills. You're hallucinating. If I had to be any part of a "cute old couple" with HIM i'd put an axe through my own head.

Kim

09-08-2004, 08:31 PM

Oh my gosh, that is so sweet LPM, and thanks for the giggle. I sure don't look like a skiiny Asian dude.

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 08:33 PM

Oh my gosh, that is so sweet LPM, and thanks for the giggle. I sure don't look like a skiiny Asian dude.
LOL I wondered if you looked like a skinny asian dude myself..phew thanks for clarifying. How did the mud bog go?

Kim

09-08-2004, 08:35 PM

We had a blast, but we got pretty muddy. I watered the rose garden a bit and we made a puddle and drove our jeeps and hotwheels thru the mud and over the other obstacles we set up.

oblongmelon

09-08-2004, 08:40 PM

We had a blast, but we got pretty muddy. I watered the rose garden a bit and we made a puddle and drove our jeeps and hotwheels thru the mud and over the other obstacles we set up.:cry: I miss my kids being small..we built them THE BEST tree house when they were small..many an adventure took place up there..along with many peanut butter and jelly and chocolate milk snacks.

Sesshomaru

09-08-2004, 08:44 PM

I think a lot of young guys won't do it because they know what they want at this point in their lives - sex. If the girl was single, a guy doesn't have a problem with dating her, getting it on, and going on to the next girl (girls do that too). But you just don't do that to a single parent, period. I think that's why alot of the guys are posting that they won't date those women, whether they are conscious of the reason or not.

To me, that shows that sex is not the only thing on our minds, and that it deserves something better than a "men suck!"

molecularfire

09-08-2004, 09:07 PM

Although... if she already has kids... at least that means that she had to have put out at some point in time...

BrewMaster

09-08-2004, 09:55 PM

The fact remains that most young guys don't date single women, you can't deny that.

WTF? I didn't even have to mess with your quote to make you sound stupid. I'm not going to answer your analysis of my hypothetical situation of dating my fiancee had she had kids. You're not worth the time.

gcasas, put aside this thread topic for a second. you think too highly of yourself. it's called arrogance. it's not a matter of being right or wrong, you just want to be heard and you don't back down. i used to be just like you. the guy who always had an answer for people no matter what the subject is. you'll get humbled somehow. i don't know how, but somehow you will. i did. otherwise you'll spend the rest of your life being an arrogant prick whom no one likes. and you know what the saddest part is? you'll sit there thinking that people like you and respect you. nothing is more sad than self-deception. so for your own good, i hope you taste some humble pie real quick.

cheapie

09-09-2004, 04:10 AM

Nah, this ain't true. There've been studies showing that most husbands would sacrifice their children for their wives, while most wives would sacrifice their husbands for their children.

i didn't say it's always the case. i just said that a bond between a wife and husband should be stronger.

Merlin

09-09-2004, 04:17 AM

Cheapie: scenario #1. If you're wife and children were on a sinking boat on a lake and you could only save two-would you save your wife and one boy? or both boys? or what?

Easy, save the wife. With her you can always have more kids.

nickel

09-09-2004, 04:58 AM

I'd date Kim in a heartbeat, sight unseen. Unless she really does look like a skinny asian dude from Star Trek, then....no. No I don't think so.
that's one of the few things worth reading in this thread.
good call LP.

johnnymk

09-09-2004, 05:27 AM

Irrational, emotional women...one more reason why I decided not to get married. I know that they aren't all that way, but most are.

Every time I ended a long term relationship, I felt this heavy burden being lifted off of my chest. I got tired of dealing with the pettiness, the double standards, the selfishness, the accusations and so on.

You have to be a trooper today to maintain a relationship with some women. I don't envy men who are married to contentious women. They must be constantly drained.

Believe me, being single is not all that bad. :)

oblongmelon

09-09-2004, 05:48 AM

nickel

09-09-2004, 06:42 AM

obby :(
play nice. johnny was careful to say "they aren't all that way", and "some women".

so he didn't lump us all together.

gcasas

09-09-2004, 07:45 AM

WTF? I didn't even have to mess with your quote to make you sound stupid. I'm not going to answer your analysis of my hypothetical situation of dating my fiancee had she had kids. You're not worth the time. No answer, why be on the site then?

gcasas, put aside this thread topic for a second. you think too highly of yourself. it's called arrogance. it's not a matter of being right or wrong, you just want to be heard and you don't back down. i used to be just like you. the guy who always had an answer for people no matter what the subject is. you'll get humbled somehow. i don't know how, but somehow you will. i did. otherwise you'll spend the rest of your life being an arrogant prick whom no one likes. and you know what the saddest part is? you'll sit there thinking that people like you and respect you. nothing is more sad than self-deception. so for your own good, i hope you taste some humble pie real quick. OK, wise one. I am just writing what I see in life, like all of you, and I don't have an answer for everything, just a small amount of threads which I have had a little expereience with. I don't care if any of you like me, I have real friends not in the virtual world. We are able discuss things like this without taking everything so personal. No one here has the answer to everything. aI thought people come here to hear different opinions and perspectives. I, unlike many here, am very careful not to attack anyone or call them names (unless provoked), and you can read the threads and see that. Many of the people here just don't like what I say. If they don't want me to go on, stop responding to me. How will you be able to deal with real life if you can't even handle a virtual "arragont" guy?

BrewMaster

09-09-2004, 07:48 AM

:boxing:

BrewMaster

09-09-2004, 07:54 AM

If they don't want me to go on, stop responding to me. How will you be able to deal with real life if you can't even handle a virtual "arragont" guy?

First of all, if you just read my post where I spelled ARROGANT correctly, why must you turn around and spell it incorrectly? that just bugs.

Second, I know you don't care if people like you here. That's fine. My point about you being an arrogant prick who has an answer for everything goes into real life not justi nternet forums. I'm sure you're going to come back at me with all of these reasons why you speak your mind and you post fairly and all of the other garbage you've already spouted. Which lets us all know quite clearly that you just don't get it. So go on little one, keep making yourself look stupid so we can all keep lauging at you.

gcasas

09-09-2004, 08:04 AM

to gcasASS: You are a f*cktard. Please stop talking. You have no clue what it's like to be in a relationship that has absolutely no warning signs of a default until your partner goes through a midlife crisis and feels the need to change his life around because he has F*CKTARD friends (who sound like you) who convince him that golf is much more important than continuing on with a perfectly good relationship. Plain and simple. Men never grow up-no I correct myself. SOME MEN never grow up-and remain selfish their whole lives no matter what the situation. Not that I have anything to explain to you because ..oh wait..YOU'RE A F*CKTARD.Stop talking-seriously. Nice general statements, how are your threads better than mine?
I will try to make this as general as possible so as not to offend you anymore. Guys like to feel like they are men, and who better to do that than the wife. I think that is evident by the happy long lasting relationships that I have seen. When they don't get that they go and look for it. There are men that are "selfish there whole lives" and are better friends with the guys than with their woman. A woman should be able to see that pretty easily and stay away from them and not have a child with them.
Anyways, this thread is not about that or you so I will stop with the relationship stuff. But I will not stop talking, since this still is America and this site is public. If you can't handle it then you are free to leave.

I know you don't care if people like you here. That's fine. My point about you being an arrogant prick who has an answer for everything goes into real life not just internet forums. I'm sure you're going to come back at me with all of these reasons why you speak your mind and you post fairly and all of the other garbage you've already spouted. Which lets us all know quite clearly that you just don't get it. So go on little one, keep making yourself look stupid so we can all keep lauging at you. What don't I get? What are you laughing at? Are we all supposed to be best friends here? If so, then I'll try to just post happy posting so you can stay in nice virtual community.

BrewMaster

09-09-2004, 08:23 AM

I win.

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/lilly/hmm3grin2orange.gif

gcasas

09-09-2004, 08:27 AM

I win.

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/lilly/hmm3grin2orange.gif Good for you. Who is being arrogant now?

faither

09-09-2004, 09:59 AM

Would you date a woman who has children?

First two yuk, yuk answers...

1. Sure, cause you know they put out.

2. I think my wife would get pissed if I did.

In all honesty, though, it's not unusual anymore and happens much more frequently than in the past. I've had family and friends marry someone else who already has kids, and that's well past the date threshold. I'm sure you won't have any problems. Hang in there.

dsuds

09-09-2004, 10:12 AM

As an outsider looking in, I see a couple of points that I feel need to be stressed.

1. I think there is the assumption here that a single parent (single mom in this case), is going to be trying to "hook-up" in the same manner as a non-parent single. In my world, this just doesn't happen. You're much more likely to see these single parents at a health club (or church social) than a night club, especially if the children are younger. IMO the odds are much better for someone in those surroundings to meet a person to have a relationship with. Unfortunately there are still "Leisure Suit Larrys" and "gold digging Ivanas" trolling/slithering everywhere there are singles.

2. When you are in love with someone, you don't see their faults. More realistically, you overlook those faults. This is especially true early on in a relationship, and will continue, depending on the depth of the feelings for the other person. This MAY HAVE been the case with obby. It is also possible that her ex was repressing a feeling of being trapped and finally just bolted for the door. Only she and her ex know for sure.

If the kids are grown, what difference would it make in the dating scene? This one I truly don't understand. Yes if the child is sick or needs some type of assistance, mom or dad will still drop everything to go help. How is that different from having a parent who is ill? I don't see that it is any different at all.

Would I date a lady with children? Yes. But I agree with DF, I wouldn't date a woman looking for their kids next Daddy.

guiseppewv

09-09-2004, 11:06 AM

Although... if she already has kids... at least that means that she had to have put out at some point in time...

<smacks myself on the forehead> :disa:

Merlin

09-09-2004, 12:03 PM

Really time for this thread to die.

welfareloser

09-09-2004, 01:25 PM

No answer, why be on the site then?
OK, wise one. I am just writing what I see in life, like all of you, and I don't have an answer for everything, just a small amount of threads which I have had a little expereience with.

ummm, yeah. you've written about "how men are" and "how women are" and you've managed to take some very, very simplified (ie, SIMPLETON) generalizations and stated them so poorly, as though they were fact.

I don't care if any of you like me, I have real friends not in the virtual world.

good. go bother them.

We are able discuss things like this without taking everything so personal.

you're dishing it out personalLY. that's why everyone's taking it that way. EVERYONE. let me share something very very true with you... if you think you're surrounded by unreasonable people, you're the one that's unreasonable. notice how everyone's bashing you, EVERYONE'S taking it "personal" ... and nobody wants you to talk? aachem's razor. look it up.

I, unlike many here, am very careful not to attack anyone or call them names (unless provoked), and you can read the threads and see that.

:heh:

wow, you're stupid.

you attacked obby and kim with dehumanizing generalizations. if you can't see that, ... yeah. stop talking.

Many of the people here just don't like what I say.

:heh: :heh:

okay, i get it... you think you're the guy with the uncomfortable truths... and you're telling us for our own good! and we don't like it, because your stunning truths are so truthful that they hurt! :heh:

yeah. you're just an ass. i made a well-reasoned argument against your stupid spouting earlier, and you chose not to respond to it (would have required some thinking, not your strong point...) so i won't bother again. i'll jsut reiterate that there is a reason that EVERYONE is calling you an idiot and NOBODY is supporting you... and trust me, you can continue to try to delude yourself into thinking that there are elaborate reasons for it, but the simplest explanation is the right one.

If they don't want me to go on, stop responding to me. How will you be able to deal with real life if you can't even handle a virtual "arragont" guy?

okay, mr logic, we've tried it... you don't go away. of course we can't make you go away. but a lot of people really, really want you to go away, and nobody wants you to stay... it'd be awfully nice of you to go. if you stay, you're a f*cktard. simple as that.

in real life, there are a million ways to not have to listen to an arrogant stupid f*cktard, but on the internet, they can barge into otherwise healthy discussions. case in point. and what do you mean we can't "handle" you? we are handling you. we responded reasonably to your idiocy, you persisted, and now we're asking you to stop. do you do this in real life too? people tell you they don't like you and they'd be happier if you went away, but you persist in stinking up their personal space with your verbal flatulence?

gcasas

09-09-2004, 01:37 PM

nag nag nag Daaaang...No wonder your husband started drinking.
OK, I give in. Since "everyone" (not really, just as many people have supported me) hates me I will make this my last post here.
Good luck to all of you single moms, you will need it.
:wavey2:

guiseppewv

09-09-2004, 01:40 PM

Really time for this thread to die.

:stupid:

This thread has really been thread-jacked. Sorry Kim.

Jenny

09-09-2004, 02:38 PM

Daaaang...No wonder your husband left you.
..
Good luck to all of you single moms, you will need it.
:wavey2:

Oh man, if we didn't think you were a complete jackass already, that would put it over the top. I'm reporting that post to GAM and maybe you'll get a special title. Geez, what a jerk.

BrewMaster

09-09-2004, 03:02 PM

can we get a padlock on this bad boy? it needs to get locked up.

johnnymk

09-09-2004, 04:13 PM

verbal flatulence...I love that and will use that in the future in my personal life LOL

welfareloser

09-09-2004, 04:25 PM

so long as i get credit and royalties ;)

the f*cktard made an even more excellent point than usual - with the help of the police, i kicked out an abusive alcoholic. so just keep feeling smug; you've earned it with your superior listening skills and thoughtful comments... while everyone else is just cringing in embarrassment for you and hoping to god that you really do go away.

and jen, can't you just ban him and delete the account???? why give him a special title?

and dsuds has a good point - people looking for one type of hook-up go to one scene, and people looking for other types are at other scenes... and rarely the twain shall meet. so don't go looking for a sweet fun guy at a bdsm dungeon, and it'll all be fine ;)

dsuds - now you need an avatar and a snazzy location so i have a visual image to attach to your personality to make things easier on my poor widdle bwain...

zenbooty

09-09-2004, 04:44 PM

so don't go looking for a sweet fun guy at a bdsm dungeon, and it'll all be fine ;):( You trying to sabotage me, WF?

:P

Mike_N_Ike

09-09-2004, 05:04 PM

Daaaang...No wonder your husband started drinking.
OK, I give in. Since "everyone" (not really, just as many people have supported me) hates me I will make this my last post here.
Good luck to all of you single moms, you will need it.
:wavey2:
Comments like that aren't going to earn you a lot of respect around here bro.

As for this being your last post...
:wavey2:

You'll be missed :rolleyes:

nickel

09-09-2004, 05:32 PM

Comments like that aren't going to earn you a lot of respect around here bro.

As for this being your last post...
:wavey2:

You'll be missed :rolleyes:
wonder if the door will hit him on the a$$ on his way out. :dead:

Ladogaboy

09-09-2004, 05:41 PM

Honestly, I'd have to say no. :sad:

If it were just dating, then I would probably say yes. I have no problem casually dating a woman with kids, but for me, I've never really been into dating. So many of my friends are women as it is that "dating" is more of just hanging out and having a good time. If I were serious about someone, I would want to be in a relationship, not dating. And, at this point in my life, I am no where near financially stable enough to be in a relationship where I would feel obligated to support kids. Not to mention the fact that I don't know where I will be or what I will be doing a month from now... let alone a year into the future. I know for a fact that, even though I am only 25, I am mature enough and responsible enough to support children, but the fact remains that I wouldn't want to at this moment. I guess it wouldn't stop me if I met "Ms. Right," but it's not something that I can see myself doing at this point.

welfareloser

09-09-2004, 05:57 PM

wonder if the door will hit him on the a$$ on his way out. :dead:

unfortunately, no... he's still posting in OT :rolleyes:

:( You trying to sabotage me, WF?

:P

you'd like that, wouldn't you? :naughty: oooooh, yeah baby... sabotage me... sabotage me HARDER... YES!!! YESSSSS!!!!

:D

zenbooty

09-09-2004, 07:06 PM

you'd like that, wouldn't you? :naughty: oooooh, yeah baby... sabotage me... sabotage me HARDER... YES!!! YESSSSS!!!!

:DIt hurts so good, doesn't it? ;)

You can be the M to my S anyday, baby. :lick: :king:

DankNstickY

09-09-2004, 09:38 PM

wtf... who banned him? i liked his thinking...

zenbooty

09-09-2004, 10:00 PM

wtf... who banned him? i liked his thinking...That's gonna win you some friends :heh: .

eSDee

09-09-2004, 10:45 PM

He was alright. He just didn't belong in Softer Side :shrug:

ShawnLee

09-10-2004, 12:04 AM

I bid thee goodbye Mssr. gcasas. I wonder if we'll talk about you in a future thread asking, "Remember this guy or that guy?"

Anyhow, back to the original point of Kim's thread...

I would be open to it, but honestly would still be hesitant about it. I would especially have to consider the situation. I mean, was there something there that was problematic about the mother to date, and if so, is it done or would I still deal with it if I were dating? Is she a widow from some tragedy and otherwise alright to start another relationship? Would the kids be accepting of someone new? These are all things to consider in starting a relationship, and more to the case of the kids, whose welfare is much more important than any relationship I might have with the mother.

DankNstickY

09-10-2004, 12:25 AM

That's gonna win you some friends :heh: .

haha... thats exactly what i was thinking. i tried to word it in a way that wouldnt totally piss off gam/she-gam and have them ban me...

like esdee said... i dont think its something that belongs on this board at all, just because of the people that are here, and how easy they take offense to something like that

LPMiller

09-10-2004, 04:43 AM

what, you mean the sexism, the knuckle dragging, or fact that he requires a club on the back of the head and some hair pulling to get a date?

Jcranmer

09-10-2004, 05:50 AM

wtf... who banned him? i liked his thinking...:stupid: Well ok maybe not really, but even though his last comment was VERY childish and personal, there was a heck of a lot more insults going around in this thread other then just his.

Anyway to put this thead back on track.

I have dated a couple of women with kids, and even married the last one. :)

InfiniteNothing

09-10-2004, 07:19 AM

what, you mean the sexism, the knuckle dragging, or fact that he requires a club on the back of the head and some hair pulling to get a date?

But he clearly wasn't the only one. I mean, this is an opinion forum. People generally don't write "I think" before everything they write. It seems like a time out to say "that was out of order" and "no rampant flaming aloud" was the better solution since the rules of conduct here are somewhat gray...IMO

guiseppewv

09-10-2004, 08:23 AM

He was alright. He just didn't belong in Softer Side :shrug:

:stupid:

I agree. I am not sure that he did anything that necessitated a banning. He was rude, callous, stubborn, opinionated, and he took part in the derailment of this thread but there are a few people on this forum that have been like that and they have not been banned.

But he clearly wasn't the only one. I mean, this is an opinion forum. People generally don't write "I think" before everything they write. It seems like a time out to say "that was out of order" and "no rampant flaming aloud" was the better solution since the rules of conduct here are somewhat gray...IMO

:stupid: I have to agree. A "timeout" would have been a better solution and then rethink the ban depending on his future actions.

Leon

09-10-2004, 08:32 AM

Oh my gosh, that is so sweet LPM, and thanks for the giggle. I sure don't look like a skiiny Asian dude.

What's wrong with skinny asian dudes? :shifty:

johnnymk

09-10-2004, 08:52 AM

:stupid:

I agree. I am not sure that he did anything that necessitated a banning. He was rude, callous, stubborn, opinionated, and he took part in the derailment of this thread but there are a few people on this forum that have been like that and they have not been banned.

:stupid: I have to agree. A "timeout" would have been a better solution and then rethink the ban depending on his future actions.

:stupid: He was just rude, callous, stubborn, opinionated within a shorter period of time that most members. If the same reasons applied to various members here, quite a few would be banned.

nickel

09-10-2004, 08:53 AM

But he clearly wasn't the only one. I mean, this is an opinion forum. People generally don't write "I think" before everything they write. It seems like a time out to say "that was out of order" and "no rampant flaming aloud" was the better solution since the rules of conduct here are somewhat gray...IMO
maybe some standards need to be re-set around here? :shrug:

cheapie

09-10-2004, 08:59 AM

Cheapie: scenario #1. If you're wife and children were on a sinking boat on a lake and you could only save two-would you save your wife and one boy? or both boys? or what? ...If you ask your wife..I guarentee you she'd say she'd save the boys-and more so-give her life for her children to live. That's what it's all about once you have kids-Before you have children-spouses put each other on pedestals. Once there are babies-it's about protecting them, worshipping them, and watching them grow up into mature, respectful adults..adults take a backseat on everything after that till the day they die.

i'm not a big fan of hypothetical situations like this. if only 3 of us could survice then i'd kill myself.

we love our kids but consider them to be additions to our family, not the center of it. we train them to act as such and believe that our first responsibility is to God, each other, and then our kids. we have talked about it several times and i'm sure she feels this way also.

johnnymk

09-10-2004, 09:17 AM

i'm not a big fan of hypothetical situations like this. if only 3 of us could survice then i'd kill myself.

we love our kids but consider them to be additions to our family, not the center of it. we train them to act as such and believe that our first responsibility is to God, each other, and then our kids. we have talked about it several times and i'm sure she feels this way also.

Plus your line of thinking is scripturally based.

I have heard the line from some women: Love me, love my kids or else. If a man wants to get involved with a woman who has this attitude, good luck. He will always feel like an accessory in that relationship.

nickel

09-10-2004, 09:23 AM

Plus your line of thinking is scripturally based.

I have heard the line from some women: Love me, love my kids or else. If a man wants to get involved with a woman who has this attitude, good luck. He will always feel like an accessory in that relationship.
i'm thinking if you truly loved her you would love her kids.
but if she puts it in a bitchy ultimatum kinda way then it's time to exit stage left.

johnnymk

09-10-2004, 09:35 AM

i'm thinking if you truly loved her you would love her kids.
but if she puts it in a bitchy ultimatum kinda way then it's time to exit stage left.

Yes, but what if the kids were monsters? Obviously, you can't disown the kids or cart them off to the Sudan, but what does one do when they tell you "You're not my father"?

Loving the mother but putting up with the kids (if he has the patience) is a more likely scenario.

InfiniteNothing

09-10-2004, 10:07 AM

BrewMaster

09-10-2004, 10:59 AM

growing up I remember my dad always telling me how much he and my mom loved me and my sister. they even said that they loved us more than each other because we came from them and are part of them. it's a trip, but it's true. there was never any contention in our family about it and my parents showed it with their actions. they often went without things they wanted and even needed so my sister and I could have something. i don't doubt that my parents love me more than each other and I will raise my kids the same way whenever I have some.

cheapie

09-10-2004, 11:05 AM

don't get me wrong. there are definite times when i LIKE my kids more.

Kim

09-10-2004, 11:11 AM

Johnny, I would think that I would know early enough in a relationship if the guy didn't dig my kids. For sure before I would fall in love with him. I guess I don't see that scenario happening, and if it does, what kind of mother would put her relationship before her children?

Kim

09-10-2004, 11:22 AM

What's wrong with skinny asian dudes? :shifty:

Hehe, if I was a guy, I'd love to be a skinny Asian dude. :angel:

cheapie

09-10-2004, 11:24 AM

Hehe, I'd love to do a skinny Asian dude. :angel:

uh...kim?

ski

09-10-2004, 11:41 AM

maybe some standards need to be re-set around here? :shrug:
In one thread or another, some of us have been arrogant and rude to each other... and even more of us can admit we've done some name calling. Yet somehow, these all go unnoticed and unpunished. It takes a guy to get involved with a thread that gets out of hand (it's not the first time it's happened), and he gets banned instead of given a timeout to cool off. Do I think what he said was a harsh personal attack? Yes. But banning was a little brash of the moderators.

Members are expected to conduct yourselves as gentlemen and ladies here. That means showing courtesy to other members and avoiding excessive cursing and personal attacks like namecalling and flaming. In addition, please extend a welcoming hand to newbies-they may not be familiar with how the forum operates. Those unable to do so and who contribute to an unfriendly atmosphere will be given a timeout.

Go ahead and say that I've been "bashing" the GAMs lately, but in reality, I am reading the rules of the forum and seeing an inconsistency.

zenbooty

09-10-2004, 11:56 AM

maybe some standards need to be re-set around here? :shrug:Should Obby be banned for her personal atacks on johnnymk?

cheapie

09-10-2004, 12:09 PM

In one thread or another, some of us have been arrogant and rude to each other... and even more of us can admit we've done some name calling. Yet somehow, these all go unnoticed and unpunished. It takes a guy to get involved with a thread that gets out of hand (it's not the first time it's happened), and he gets banned instead of given a timeout to cool off. Do I think what he said was a harsh personal attack? Yes. But banning was a little brash of the moderators.

Go ahead and say that I've been "bashing" the GAMs lately, but in reality, I am reading the rules of the forum and seeing an inconsistency.

i think it was a pattern of behavior. he treated everyone like ****. of course, most of it happened while i was away/had a busted computer.

InfiniteNothing

09-10-2004, 12:19 PM

Should Obby be banned for her personal atacks on johnnymk?Oh come on, those are just cute. Can't you tell they really love eachother. They'd be lonely on the forums without eachother.

sbp

09-10-2004, 12:24 PM

i think it was a pattern of behavior. he treated everyone like ****. of course, most of it happened while i was away/had a busted computer.Indeed, peeps who register just to consistently flame aren't worth the time of day.

Showtime

09-10-2004, 12:26 PM

I fear commitment and attachment. When it's over... people stay together sometimes because of the kid(s). Kind of like marriages.

-j

Jcranmer

09-10-2004, 12:56 PM

i think it was a pattern of behavior. he treated everyone like ****. of course, most of it happened while i was away/had a busted computer.
I know I am not on here all that much, but frankly I have not noticed any behavior issues from him other then in this thread. Of course I don't read everything and pretty much stay out of the political forum completly, so if it's been going on in there I would have missed it.

Oh well it's done and over with, I don't think GAM(s) is going to lift a BAN anyway, no matter if there are some that disagree with it. :)

oblongmelon

09-10-2004, 01:15 PM

Should Obby be banned for her personal atacks on johnnymk?
:eek3: What? like Johnny has never made any comments to me..
Oh please. Like that slam he made about my husband (ex) a while back wasn't a personal attack?...what's good for the gander isn't good for the goose -is that what you are saying here?

Johnny is a big ol boy and can take care of himself..notice he always has some kind of witty response and I HATE TO SAY THIS but I appreciate that fact that he stands up for himself. Granted I may not agree with archaic male chauvenistic attitude, but hey he's entitled to his opinion just as I am. If the Gams start banning people for "personal" attacks then there would be no more forum.. with the exception of perhaps froggy, 'Wird, and Kim. (ok a few others too but not too many)...That dude they just banned was totally out of line from day one on the forums. plain and simple.

Showtime

09-10-2004, 01:21 PM

Me me Me!

:bonk:

-j

oblongmelon

09-10-2004, 01:28 PM

Oh come on, those are just cute. Can't you tell they really love eachother. They'd be lonely on the forums without eachother.
that axe is looking better and better everyday.

cheapie

09-10-2004, 01:31 PM

:eek3: What? like Johnny has never made any comments to me..
Oh please. Like that slam he made about my husband (ex) a while back wasn't a personal attack?...what's good for the gander isn't good for the goose -is that what you are saying here?

Johnny is a big ol boy and can take care of himself..notice he always has some kind of witty response and I HATE TO SAY THIS but I appreciate that fact that he stands up for himself. Granted I may not agree with archaic male chauvenistic attitude, but hey he's entitled to his opinion just as I am. If the Gams start banning people for "personal" attacks then there would be no more forum.. with the exception of perhaps froggy, 'Wird, and Kim. (ok a few others too but not too many)...That dude they just banned was totally out of line from day one on the forums. plain and simple.

well said.

SecretIkon

09-10-2004, 01:51 PM

Would you date a woman who has children?

I wouldn't mind dating a woman who has children, thats just me.

InfiniteNothing

09-10-2004, 02:02 PM

I wouldn't mind dating a woman who has children, thats just me.
Hi Phil, Did you real through the whole post... ;)... just though you should know what you're getting into before you're addicted

SecretIkon

09-10-2004, 02:07 PM

Hi Phil, Did you real through the whole post... ;)... just though you should know what you're getting into before you're addicted

nopes sorries...just read throw the first few post and posted. My fault if anyone is going on in this thread.

InfiniteNothing

09-10-2004, 02:10 PM

nopes sorries...just read throw the first few post and posted. My fault if anyone is going on in this thread.I meant you're getting into the G|A? addiction... you're taking up a role in a beautiful soap opera (Okay, we're not that bad) This thread is a good read through.

SecretIkon

09-10-2004, 02:12 PM

I meant you're getting into the G|A? addiction... you're taking up a role in a beautiful soap opera (Okay, we're not that bad)

:gle: Okay.

johnnymk

09-10-2004, 02:16 PM

[QUOTE=oblongmelon]:

Johnny is a big ol boy and can take care of himself..notice he always has some kind of witty response and I HATE TO SAY THIS but I appreciate that fact that he stands up for himself. Granted I may not agree with archaic male chauvenistic attitude, but hey he's entitled to his opinion just as I am. IfQUOTE]

Please, if you are going to use one of my favorite words, it's spelled "chauvinistic" :wavey2:

Showtime

09-10-2004, 02:22 PM

The ole dog bites back!

-j

DarkFury

09-10-2004, 02:36 PM

Yes, but what if the kids were monsters? Obviously, you can't disown the kids or cart them off to the Sudan, but what does one do when they tell you "You're not my father"?

Bebe's Kids!!!!! :eek:

Showtime

09-10-2004, 03:04 PM

Mom: "Now kids, what do you say when you meet a nice man?"
Kids: "Are you my Daddy?"

-j

oblongmelon

09-10-2004, 07:12 PM

chrissy

09-10-2004, 07:49 PM

I meant you're getting into the G|A? addiction... you're taking up a role in a beautiful soap opera (Okay, we're not that bad) This thread is a good read through.

Are you kidding?? We could read this like a classic add-on thread.

It's been a while since a story thread was done... :wavey2:

LPMiller

09-11-2004, 05:22 AM

cheapie

09-11-2004, 07:41 AM

ski

09-11-2004, 07:44 AM

He's already tried rejoining under a different name; people who do that after a banning are well on their way to justifying the banning.
I remember in the earlier forum version, there was IP logging... I don't know if you still do that or not, and if you did ban his IP, if he's on a public LAN or something. anyway...

On another note, I think it would be neat to catalog epic threads such as this one (and the other current one in S/NSS titled "GAM Mistake" - where 4 out of 6 pages have nothing to do with the original post :heh: )

redcolours

09-11-2004, 02:04 PM

you know, GotApex always reserves the right to ignore the rules and just boot someone that they don't like. It's not that big a deal. Sometimes, someone just really rubs you the wrong way, and it's best to eject them now then later. Or, due to years of mod experience, you can see a train wreck in progress and you take steps to stop it. Or, you just are at your limit for useless cocktards for the month, and need to make the cut to stay under quota. Whatever. If you don't think that any of you would make a decision as a mod like that, you're lying.

He's already tried rejoining under a different name; people who do that after a banning are well on their way to justifying the banning.
this goes back to pennypinch's banning.

we all have to remember that this is NOT a paid-membership forum. Heck its not even truly public (since we still have to register to voice our opinions). Think of it as someone else's house (apex and Leon's). really were all guests (as registered members), and we make use of the facilities (deals, questions, free expression of opinion). But if someone takes a hot smoking dump on the couch where we're all sitting and talking, what would you do to that person? Or think of it as a party in the same house, and someone comes in and starts bothering your friends. That person's been told to stop, but keeps going on and on. What would you do if it was your house and the people were your friends?
you kick that person out. plain and simple.
hell, i know friends who would beat the snot out of that person for ridiculing a friend's misfortune.
true, his ideas were that of a neanderthal, and hearkens back to the days of primitive behavior, and that he didnt fling curse words to be directly profane, and that he was merely enforcing it by continually stuffing his mouth with both feet, but the bottomline is he demeaned a dear friend.
we're all free to express our opinions, but this is still someone else's house. he is now free to express his opinions elsewhere.

johnnymk

09-11-2004, 02:31 PM

But if someone takes a hot smoking dump on the couch where we're all sitting and talking, what would you do to that person? .

A hot smoking dump BWAHHHAAAA!! That is truly memorable :lmfao:

welfareloser

09-12-2004, 05:06 PM

in fact, i know someone who did that... he took a dump in some girl's bathtub because she pissed him off at a party.

it has style... i'm not sure what KIND of style, but it's definitely style...

Merlin

09-13-2004, 05:35 AM

Or think of it as a party in the same house, and someone comes in and starts bothering your friends. That person's been told to stop, but keeps going on and on. What would you do if it was your house and the people were your friends?

I agree with you that we should respect our hosts, but keep in mind that without the people on the forum there would be no site either. To continus your analogy it would be like having a party with no guests. We need them for this site to be a success just like they need us for this site to be a success.

Jcranmer

09-13-2004, 05:41 AM

you know, GotApex always reserves the right to ignore the rules and just boot someone that they don't like. It's not that big a deal. Sometimes, someone just really rubs you the wrong way, and it's best to eject them now then later.
Well said. This is something I fully understand. As long as Apex is paying the bills he (and the staff) are well within their rights to ban anyone for any reason they like.

Please don't get me wrong, I was not trying to defend the guy for verbally beating up on the ladies of G|A. Heck if he had been on a system that I run, I might have banned him myself.

I guess it just seems a little more harse punishment for here, since this place is normally run much more even handedly.

molecularfire

09-14-2004, 03:15 PM

Yes, but what if the kids were monsters? Obviously, you can't disown the kids or cart them off to the Sudan, but what does one do when they tell you "You're not my father"?

Loving the mother but putting up with the kids (if he has the patience) is a more likely scenario.
Uhhh... you're not their father. Nailing their mom only counts as being their father if it was around 9 months before they were born... and even then you would just be the sperm donor, not the father. If you haven't earned the position yet, why should you expect the benefits that come with the job?

zenbooty

09-14-2004, 03:22 PM

Uhhh... you're not their father. Nailing their mom only counts as being their father if it was around 9 months before they were born... and even then you would just be the sperm donor, not the father. If you haven't earned the position yet, why should you expect the benefits that come with the job?That's not what he's saying, IMHO. The point is if the kids hate you, its going to put quite a damper on your relationship with the mother no matter how fabulously you get on together. I wouldn't expect to be treated like a Dad, but I'm not going to be treated like an enemy occupier, either.

surfer

10-08-2004, 01:12 PM

I am dating a woman with children and have in the past.

Chicken

10-18-2004, 08:49 PM

Daaaang...No wonder your husband started drinking.
OK, I give in. Since "everyone" (not really, just as many people have supported me) hates me I will make this my last post here.
Good luck to all of you single moms, you will need it.
:wavey2:

Geez you guys ran the poor guy off just for expressing his opinion .. lol

In any case I agree with him.

I'm sure it's not the PC liberal hippie feel good thing to say/do, but let's face it .. the whole point of existence is to get your genes out there as much as possible. You can't fight generations worth of evolution. And you can't do that by wasting your resources on some other guy's kids. The reason that you and I are here today to argue this asinine point is because we are the product of successful genes, and as such it is in our nature to want to get our genes out there as well.

If some kids' father doesn't care about 'em enough to ensure their survival to reproductive age then why should I? They're just competition for my own offspring's reproductive success in the future.

You can't argue with the logic I present. The only logical reason to raise some other guy's kids is for the general survival of the species, but we are far from extinction, so we're allowed/expected to be stingy with our resources when it comes to the kids we choose to raise.

Now listen .. I'm not making any disparraging remarks about any single mothers out there. I'm sure you're all nice people and I would have no problem being friends with a single mom or even watching her kids from time to time to help her out, but I'm saying that I, personally, would not even consider someone for a long-term relationship who had kids by another man that she was still responsible for.

It's cold .. it's calculating, but it's so very very true when you get down to the nitty gritty of it all.

ski

10-18-2004, 09:23 PM

Geez you guys ran the poor guy off just for expressing his opinion .. lol

In any case I agree with him.

I'm sure it's not the PC liberal hippie feel good thing to say/do, but let's face it .. the whole point of existence is to get your genes out there as much as possible. You can't fight generations worth of evolution. And you can't do that by wasting your resources on some other guy's kids. The reason that you and I are here today to argue this asinine point is because we are the product of successful genes, and as such it is in our nature to want to get our genes out there as well.

If some kids' father doesn't care about 'em enough to ensure their survival to reproductive age then why should I? They're just competition for my own offspring's reproductive success in the future.

You can't argue with the logic I present. The only logical reason to raise some other guy's kids is for the general survival of the species, but we are far from extinction, so we're allowed/expected to be stingy with our resources when it comes to the kids we choose to raise.

Now listen .. I'm not making any disparraging remarks about any single mothers out there. I'm sure you're all nice people and I would have no problem being friends with a single mom or even watching her kids from time to time to help her out, but I'm saying that I, personally, would not even consider someone for a long-term relationship who had kids by another man that she was still responsible for.

It's cold .. it's calculating, but it's so very very true when you get down to the nitty gritty of it all.
On an existential, he's completely right.

As long as Apex is paying the bills he (and the staff) are well within their rights to ban anyone for any reason they like.

I agree with your main point, but keep in mind Apex isn't funding all of this at a loss. Google ads adorn the top of every single page. Amazon and other banner ads are at the foot of every single page. From a business standpoint, the reason this is here is for him to break even or make money, which I hope he does. This isn't to say I don't appreciate it if he's doing it at a loss.

Chicken

10-18-2004, 10:02 PM

On another point, when I said that we, as men, are allowed to be stingy with our distribution of resources (money et al) regarding the children we choose to raise .. don't think for one second that women are not stingy about something that they have control over as well.

Eggs .. women have the eggs and men want them on the instincual level. All of that "typical male" behavior that happens whenever a pretty girl is around is the culmination of generations worth of instinct. And men are willing to use their resources, whatever they may be, to get to those eggs. (Even when they're just trying to get laid) Why do you think guys act like such morons and stab their buddies in the back when a woman is around? Because he wants to get laid .. yes, but look at the intrinsic motivation behind it .. it's because he's trying to get noticed in the hopes that the woman will choose him to father her children. A woman is selective (unless she's really drunk :) ), while guys on the other hand are evolutionarily preprogrammed to do it with anything that moves and looks remotely interested. We're selective with our resources (Money), otherwise guys would just take any ol' girl out and buy her a rolex and a Ferrari .. not gonna happen .. but we will F0RK the $h!t outta anything that gives us a smile. However a woman is very spend happy .. think about the number of married men that complain about their spend happy wives that can't seem to have enough pairs of shoes. I have two sisters and dear sweet lord in heaven they buy so much crap they don't need and EVERYONE gets a gift every time they meet up .. doesn't matter if it's a birthday or Xmas or anything .. GIFTS FOR EVERYONE .. just because. I can guarantee you I'm not going to buy my fishing buddy a bottle of cologne, "...just because. I saw it in the store and, JD .. buddy, I totally thought of you .. OMG this scent is soooooooo you!!" I would be swimming back to the loading ramp if that ever happened.

So in summary:
Men .. cheap with resources ($$$), but liberal with the 'seed'
Women .. cheap with the eggs, VERY liberal with the resources ($$$)

Nothing wrong with this behavior, it just is what it is, and it is the primary reason for all conflict between men and women. I've already heard numerous examples from some of the single mothers on here that prove this concept even more.

nickel

10-19-2004, 05:07 AM

i am not a spendthrift. :eek3:

Kevster

10-19-2004, 05:09 AM

I have abstained from this topic for a while and it has been an interesting trainwreck to behold, that's for sure.

As for my personal opinion on this topic, I would date a woman who had kids. I'm very happily married to Mrs. Kevster so I will probably not have the opportunity. I really do like kids and would love to have some of my own. Unfortunately, that might not happen due to some issues I'm not going to go into right now.

LegendKiller

10-19-2004, 07:20 AM

ShawnLee

10-19-2004, 09:02 AM

Re: LK's banker-lady success story.
This is a tangent, but this is why I want to marry a successful woman. Not that I'm going to treat her badly, but if anything ever happened to me, I'd like for there to be more of a fallback option than life insurance.

DaFunkyUnit

10-19-2004, 10:36 AM

Chicken

10-19-2004, 11:04 AM

My future mother-in-law is going through a divorce right now. Her husband of 29 years (together for 32) decided that his easy going life wasn't worth it anymore, so he went and found another woman. He did most of it behind her back and it took some investigative work by steph, her brother, and I to finally get her to realize what kind of scum ball he was.

She sacrificed her career for him, stayed home with kids (which she has no regrets mind you), stayed with him through alcoholism and throat cancer from which he almost died. She treated him perfectly and did 99% of home chores for him. Her trait is often caring more about others than herself. She's a beautiful and vibrant woman who I treat like my own mom, I am ashamed for men in general when guys do this to women to have given them everything.

Its even worse when you have people like the boneheads above who think that there's always blame placed on the womans side. Sometimes men are just f'ing morons and really screw with women.

Another example is a banker friend of mine. When she was 23 she married a nice man and they were together for a number of years. They built a business and amassed more than 3mm. He asked for a divorce and moved all of the money offshore so she couldn't touch it.

Now, she is an uber-high end i-banker after putting herself through college and rising through the ranks of the bank over 20 years. She's an awesome woman, somebody to truly take an image of and say "You know what, guys can be jerks, but woman can get along without them".

Obby, in both cases I would date these women if I weren't engaged (to ones own daugher, but this is an objective opinion). They both have children but offer a wide range of great benefits, including awesome personalities and very sharp intellects.

Any guy who can look past the issue of children is a guy that is worth keeping, and there are plenty of us out there. Logical, reasonable, and caring. It is unfortunate that there are plenty of other boneheads that think they know everything.

Eventually, the guys above will run into somebody like my mother in law, or my banker friend and they will be floored by how powerful these women are and by how fun they can be.

LK

These are exceptions to the WELL established "rule". It's why they call it a BELL curve ... and not a TACO curve, because it's a nice gradual slope with the bulk being in the middle .. ergo the AVERAGE example. There will always be examples that exist outside the norm.

Regardless I already said I would have a friendship with a single mother, but never seek out a LTR with such a person. I don't doubt that they are strong, they are powerful, they are fun .. blah blah blah .. use any positive adjective here you like. I'm not disagreeing with that, what I am saying is that despite how un-PC it may be to say it, the fact of the matter remains that it's not in the best interest of a man to use his resources to raise some other guy's kids. I know that lots of guys do it all the time, but there's a reason wether it's because she's hot, or out of the guys typical league, or feels that he loves her to the point that he overlooks the fact that he's raising competition for his own offspring. Regardless of the reason, it's not grounded in logic. It's an emotional reason. As I have said before, there is no logical reason for a man to use his resources to raise some other man's offspring to reproductive age.

You don't have to like what I'm saying, in fact I really don't care if you do .. however cold it may be, you can not deny my logic. And as such you have no grounds to disparrage any man who says he doesn't want to marry a woman with kids. It doesn't make him an @$$h0le .. it's a perfectly natural, instinctual response.

P.S. Howdy MEMO .. you should come visit us at Texas Shootout more often.

Jenny

10-19-2004, 11:14 AM

The stupidest thing I have EVER heard is in that last post of Chicken's. "competition for his own offspring" What the **** is that? Hahahahahahaha.

Jeffbx

10-19-2004, 11:21 AM

...it's not in the best interest of a man to use his resources to raise some other guy's kids.

...he overlooks the fact that he's raising competition for his own offspring.

I don't understand what you mean about 'competition for his own offspring'? Is there a concern that the other women's kids will kill & eat the younger child?

LegendKiller

10-19-2004, 11:33 AM

Merlin

10-19-2004, 11:37 AM

...you can not deny my logic...

Sorry but I can. :wavey: Even in your animalistic senario where people have no higher brain functions and act on instinct alone you are forgetting one key situation. The woman is such high quality breeding material that you make sacrafices to get it. It is why we are willing to work harder to get at the prime women when lesser could be had more readily.

I don't understand what you mean about 'competition for his own offspring'? Is there a concern that the other women's kids will kill & eat the younger child?
Nobody is going to eat one another but this type of competition can be a real problem if you have to send them both to college and don't have very much money. Only really a problem if people breed beyond their resources.

Showtime

10-19-2004, 12:00 PM

DaFunkyUnit

10-19-2004, 12:32 PM

i think we all should watch the movie "Me, Myself, and Irene" and we all can learn a valuable lesson.

:)

Chicken

10-19-2004, 12:36 PM

The stupidest thing I have EVER heard is in that last post of Chicken's. "competition for his own offspring" What the **** is that? Hahahahahahaha.

Well it's typically called, "Survival of the Fittest" ... READ a book sometime you might learn something.

...books without pictures are usually more helpful

I don't understand what you mean about 'competition for his own offspring'? Is there a concern that the other women's kids will kill & eat the younger child?

Yes .. that's exactly what I'm saying .. good for you ..

Look if a guy marries a woman with kids and he takes care of those kids, those kids will grow up to reproductive age, if that man has kids from his own genes as well then he has created competition for his gene's continued existence.

Not to mention the fact that all of his resources that he's wasting on some other guy's kids could have been put to better use raising a child that shares his own genes, thus helping to ensure his genes continued existence.

Chicken

10-19-2004, 12:48 PM

Personally I think that if I were to have kids and then get married to a woman with kids I wouldn't care. It is in society's best interests that I raise a few more good capitalist kids and be a positive influence.

You take quite a cynical viewpoint on life, it is quite sad that you cannot see past your jaded feelings.

Meh.

LK

Not really .. no .. I've already commented on this .. the only logical reason for a man to raise another man's offspring would be if the species were on the brink of extinction, and we are far from that. As such we men have every right to be stingy with our resources.

I'm far from jaded .. maybe cynical a little .. but I'm just realistic. The underlying motivator for EVERYTHING in this world is SEX .. seriously .. stop and think about it. Society, competition, the pursuit of material acquisition. So what is the underlying motivator for sex? Procreation .. getting your genes out there in the hopes that you will live on thru your children's children's children .. etc .. and it's a lot harder to get there taking care of some other guys kids.

mancboy

10-19-2004, 12:54 PM

Helll Noooooo!

Chicken

10-19-2004, 01:04 PM

Sorry but I can. :wavey: Even in your animalistic senario where people have no higher brain functions and act on instinct alone you are forgetting one key situation. The woman is such high quality breeding material that you make sacrafices to get it. It is why we are willing to work harder to get at the prime women when lesser could be had more readily.

Nobody is going to eat one another but this type of competition can be a real problem if you have to send them both to college and don't have very much money. Only really a problem if people breed beyond their resources.

No .. you didn't really refute any of my logic .. I already made that comment previously.

We're selective with our resources (Money), otherwise guys would just take any ol' girl out and buy her a rolex and a Ferrari .. not gonna happen .. but we will F0RK the $h!t outta anything that gives us a smile.

I said we're selective .. meaning that if we see a girl we want we will pursue her. We WILL buy her that Rolex, we WILL buy her that Ferrari, or trip to Cancun, etc .. what I said was that we WON'T buy just any ol' girl those things.

You didn't refute my logic .. you reaffirmed it.

You speak as if we are somehow above our basal animal instincts? We're not .. they're the primary motivators for everything we do. To use psychology terms we all have an ID .. every animal in the animal kingdom. And all of our decisions are influenced by the ID. The higher brain functions supply us with our Ego, and SuperEgo .. but these moral constructs do NOT help us fulfill our genetically preprogrammed instincts. The only reason we deny anything to our ID is because of these moral constructs that society has placed upon us, otherwise we'd be raping everything that moves and killing anyone that stood in our way. It would be survival of the fittiest in the most extreme, "animal kingdom", sense. But instead we as humans get our ID, Ego, and SuperEgo to coexist peacefully by not raping and killing each other .. but to deny our instinct to procreate in order to live on thru our genes doesn't violate the Ego or SuperEgo and satisfies our ID in the process .. there's nothing wrong with wanting your genes to be carried on to the next generation.

Once again I'm speaking in averages .. so don't bust out with, "what about the holocost or rapists, or mormons" :) (I'm just kidding about that one .. my best friend is a mormon), etc etc .. none of that would fall under the deffinition of AVERAGE .. they're all extreme examples.

LegendKiller

10-19-2004, 01:05 PM

Not really .. no .. I've already commented on this .. the only logical reason for a man to raise another man's offspring would be if the species were on the brink of extinction, and we are far from that. As such we men have every right to be stingy with our resources.

I'm far from jaded .. maybe cynical a little .. but I'm just realistic. The underlying motivator for EVERYTHING in this world is SEX .. seriously .. stop and think about it. Society, competition, the pursuit of material acquisition. So what is the underlying motivator for sex? Procreation .. getting your genes out there in the hopes that you will live on thru your children's children's children .. etc .. and it's a lot harder to get there taking care of some other guys kids.

ROFL, last time I checked sex wasn't on Maslow's heirarchy.

I guess you break down what you think society wants/needs based upon what you want/need. I have known my fiance for 6 years, she would have been quite happy if I had stopped where I was after undergrad, yet I continue to go to school, continue to enlight myself, and continue to raise through the ranks.

Why? No because I desire sex from somebody else, but because I desire a better future for us. Heck, that will probably lead to less sex, yet I still do it.

I think your view of society is pretty piss-poor, much worse than any of the theories put forth when I was going to school for an undergrad in psych. Rarely did you see a whackjob produce such a stupid theory such as yours.

There are MANY reasons why people do things, not just for sex or money, there are dozens of motivators. People like you are the reason why I refused to go any further in psych. You think you have everything figured out and you apply your rules to society and come out with some whiz-bang paper.

Yet you fail to take into account dozens of other variables in life, enigmas and common place items. Much like the nature vs nuture argument that have been going on for decades. Neither side giving an inch, saying one is more important than the other.

However, both are equally important in addition to other factors. You are one to ignore those other factors.

LK

No .. you didn't really refute any of my logic .. I already made that comment previously.

I said we're selective .. meaning that if we see a girl we want we will pursue her. We WILL buy her that Rolex, we WILL buy her that Ferrari, or trip to Cancun, etc .. what I said was that we WON'T buy just any ol' girl those things.

You didn't refute my logic .. you reaffirmed it.

You speak as if we are somehow above our basal animal instincts? We're not .. they're the primary motivators for everything we do. To use psychology terms we all have an ID .. every animal in the animal kingdom. And all of our decisions are influenced by the ID. The higher brain functions supply us with our Ego, and SuperEgo .. but these moral constructs do NOT help us fulfill our genetically preprogrammed instincts. The only reason we deny anything to our ID is because of these moral constructs that society has placed upon us, otherwise we'd be raping everything that moves and killing anyone that stood in our way. It would be survival of the fittiest in the most extreme, "animal kingdom", sense. But instead we as humans get our ID, Ego, and SuperEgo to coexist peacefully by not raping and killing each other .. but to deny our instinct to procreate in order to live on thru our genes doesn't violate the Ego or SuperEgo and satisfies our ID in the process .. there's nothing wrong with wanting your genes to be carried on to the next generation.

Once again I'm speaking in averages .. so don't bust out with, "what about the holocost or rapists, or mormons" :) (I'm just kidding about that one .. my best friend is a mormon), etc etc .. none of that would fall under the deffinition of AVERAGE .. they're all extreme examples.

Ohhh noes! He's bussin out the Freudian theories.

Listen bud, go get scared by a horse, have an oedipus complex (sp) with your mom, get caught jacking off, fear your dad, wet the bed, and cry all night.

I can bust out this shizzle all day and claim it for fact. There IS NO theory that encompasses all of humanity, which is why there are theories which are then applied by practitioners, who can be personable and understand that no theory fits all and they must be custom fitted.

I weep for people who study psychology.

LK

Chicken

10-19-2004, 01:19 PM

Why diss chicken for saying whats on his mind?
Ever here this? "Your not my Daddy."
I've seen good kids resort to showing it if not outright saying it.

Your not more of a man cuz you chooes to raise another mans children. That's going on everywhere. Your not less if you choose not to. Women want to know that even though they have a kid or 2, they will still be able to find a good mate. That's not always true. A couple of my friends Mom's never remarried after their divorces. The kids had something to do with it.

A couple of years ago my friend almost went to jail because his wifes ex was vindictive. The ex had the son lie and say my friend abused him (beat). Not true, but it cost a lot of money and they lost custody for a little while. Fn loser ex doesn't even buy the kid clothes and stuff and my friend resents the kid now. Poor kid is all messed up with zero self esteem. Basically everyone cant wait for the kid to turn 18.

At best if works out like you think of them as your own and they think of you as their Dad. At worst.....

-j

So very true .. and an aspect I hadn't even commented on yet.

Back when I was in high school my best friend's father walked out on him when he was really young and she is still unmarried to this day. She's a great lady, very strong .. in body and mind, a wonderful Christian woman. She took care of him enough for both parents and he never had a bad life. He turned out great too .. he's a wonderful man who is a youth minister back home in Waco, TX.

I don't know if she didn't feel the need to get remarried or if she couldn't, but in this case it was obviously unecessary .. a new "father" might have fubared my buddy and turned him into a worthless dreg of society.

IMO .. if a man produces a child then HE needs to be responsible for that child, not some other guy. If the child's birth father is too much of a deadbeat to handle it then I'm sorry .. I hope the kid can rise above it .. but I don't see why I (or any other man) should become responsible for this guy's kid. There are way too many people in this world today that get married (or not), pop out some kids and then move on and do it again and completely leave those other kids to be the problem of some other poor sap that gets saddled with 'em. That's not how it should work .. if you have a child you take care of him/her .. if you can't do that then you don't get a 'second shot' at kids with another woman, you don't deserve to procreate IMO

Chicken

10-19-2004, 01:41 PM

ROFL, last time I checked sex wasn't on Maslow's heirarchy.

I guess you break down what you think society wants/needs based upon what you want/need. I have known my fiance for 6 years, she would have been quite happy if I had stopped where I was after undergrad, yet I continue to go to school, continue to enlight myself, and continue to raise through the ranks.

Why? No because I desire sex from somebody else, but because I desire a better future for us. Heck, that will probably lead to less sex, yet I still do it.

I think your view of society is pretty piss-poor, much worse than any of the theories put forth when I was going to school for an undergrad in psych. Rarely did you see a whackjob produce such a stupid theory such as yours.

There are MANY reasons why people do things, not just for sex or money, there are dozens of motivators. People like you are the reason why I refused to go any further in psych. You think you have everything figured out and you apply your rules to society and come out with some whiz-bang paper.

Yet you fail to take into account dozens of other variables in life, enigmas and common place items. Much like the nature vs nuture argument that have been going on for decades. Neither side giving an inch, saying one is more important than the other.

However, both are equally important in addition to other factors. You are one to ignore those other factors.

LK

Ohhh noes! He's bussin out the Freudian theories.

Listen bud, go get scared by a horse, have an oedipus complex (sp) with your mom, get caught jacking off, fear your dad, wet the bed, and cry all night.

I can bust out this shizzle all day and claim it for fact. There IS NO theory that encompasses all of humanity, which is why there are theories which are then applied by practitioners, who can be personable and understand that no theory fits all and they must be custom fitted.

I weep for people who study psychology.

LK

Actually I'm not quoting Maslow .. I'm actually quoting a professor Manning from his book. He's a professor here at Texas A&M. A very smart man who holds a phd in Vet Medicine, phd in psychology, and a masters in something else I forget. You don't have to like his points, but they are valid points, and everything in this world runs on sex/procreation .. even if you don't know it .. you say you're after a masters for a better future .. for what? .. for your FAMILY .. so your offspring will hopefully have a better life and pass their genes on as well .. right? Thanks for proving my point ..again

And personally I don't care what you think about my societal views are they make sense and that's why you're getting so angry about it.

However, both are equally important in addition to other factors. You are one to ignore those other factors.

Actually you're 100% completely wrong, and if you knew me better you'd know that .. so stop making assumptions about me please. I have, for years said that nature vs. nurture is not an argument .. they do work hand in hand. Everyone is predisposed to something or other by nature and nurture can make it go one way or the other.

Anyway .. when you talk about the dozens of variables .. et al you're referring to chaos theory, and of course you can't predict everything because as I've said before there will be members that exist outside the norms of the bell curve, so I NEVER assume to cover everyone with one blanket answer .. as I've said before I'm talking in averages, not exceptions to the rule.

You think you have everything figured out and you apply your rules to society and come out with some whiz-bang paper.

umm .. no .. in fact I've never even been a psychology major, why would I want to waste my college credits that way :) . I've just lived and read enough to know what I'm talking about .. again .. that's why you're getting so mad because what I'm saying makes sense.

I brought up the ID, Ego, & SuperEgo because I assume most people have at least heard of this if they don't already understand it. And it completely applies to the situation at hand, especially when you're talking about basal instincts.

There IS NO theory that encompasses all of humanity, which is why there are theories which are then applied by practitioners, who can be personable and understand that no theory fits all and they must be custom fitted.

No kidding .. as I've already said in this post and many before there is no blanket theory and I AM SPEAKING IN A_V_E_R_A_G_E_S .. the middle of the bell curve .. for a college educated man you don't seem to listen very well.

I weep for people who study psychology.

As I said before I've never "studied" psychology as a major, but I do think it's funny that you assumed I was a Master/pHD candidate working on a paper in Psych .. lol

Jenny

10-19-2004, 03:25 PM

Jenny

10-19-2004, 03:36 PM

On another note... I am as UN-PC liberal hippie feel good as you can get. So there goes that theory.

Also, what about bright, successful, etc men that chose not to have children? Are they being lazy or stupid for not passing along their genes?

Really, you have an incredibly skewed view of life, love and hell, overall happiness. Again, good luck. lol

Merlin

10-19-2004, 04:44 PM

Also, what about bright, successful, etc men that chose not to have children? Are they being lazy or stupid for not passing along their genes?

:wavey: But then again I am lazy. :P

ialsohaveadream

10-19-2004, 05:05 PM

As I said before I've never "studied" psychology as a major, but I do think it's funny that you assumed I was a Master/pHD candidate working on a paper in Psych .. lol

I don't think he assumed that. I think he really assumed you were a jackass, but he was putting it a bit nicer.

Anyway, I think the original intent of the thread was to get you to answer whether or not you'd date a woman with kids, not relate your theories on evolution and social darwinism.

Mmmmm, babies.... :munch:

LegendKiller

10-19-2004, 05:23 PM

Actually I'm not quoting Maslow .. I'm actually quoting a professor Manning from his book. He's a professor here at Texas A&M. A very smart man who holds a phd in Vet Medicine, phd in psychology, and a masters in something else I forget. You don't have to like his points, but they are valid points, and everything in this world runs on sex/procreation .. even if you don't know it .. you say you're after a masters for a better future .. for what? .. for your FAMILY .. so your offspring will hopefully have a better life and pass their genes on as well .. right? Thanks for proving my point ..again

And personally I don't care what you think about my societal views are they make sense and that's why you're getting so angry about it.

Actually you're 100% completely wrong, and if you knew me better you'd know that .. so stop making assumptions about me please. I have, for years said that nature vs. nurture is not an argument .. they do work hand in hand. Everyone is predisposed to something or other by nature and nurture can make it go one way or the other.

Anyway .. when you talk about the dozens of variables .. et al you're referring to chaos theory, and of course you can't predict everything because as I've said before there will be members that exist outside the norms of the bell curve, so I NEVER assume to cover everyone with one blanket answer .. as I've said before I'm talking in averages, not exceptions to the rule.

umm .. no .. in fact I've never even been a psychology major, why would I want to waste my college credits that way :) . I've just lived and read enough to know what I'm talking about .. again .. that's why you're getting so mad because what I'm saying makes sense.

I brought up the ID, Ego, & SuperEgo because I assume most people have at least heard of this if they don't already understand it. And it completely applies to the situation at hand, especially when you're talking about basal instincts.

No kidding .. as I've already said in this post and many before there is no blanket theory and I AM SPEAKING IN A_V_E_R_A_G_E_S .. the middle of the bell curve .. for a college educated man you don't seem to listen very well.

As I said before I've never "studied" psychology as a major, but I do think it's funny that you assumed I was a Master/pHD candidate working on a paper in Psych .. lol

Well, I did "study" psychology, at the UnivofMN, one of the top 3 psych schools in the world (creators of the Minnesota Twins Studies, and the MMPI). Not to masturbate over my paper, but I studied under the best psychologists in their field.

Now that thats done, I can say that none of them sounded like the rambling bafoon that is teaching at T A&M. To even say that everything comes down to sex is utter stupidity. There are lots of things that drive people, sometimes its just inner peace or expansion of knowledge. Crackpot theories exalted as fact by people like you are why psychologists are minimized in many ways (pshrinks).

All you do by going on web boards like this and preaching some idiotic professors ramblings is you make a mockery of the study of human emotions and the inner workings of the psyche.

Please, take the stupid theories and go away with them, far away. Freudian, A&M hacks, nor Gestalt theories are applicable outside of a vacuum.

LK

nickel

10-19-2004, 06:37 PM

:wavey: But then again I am lazy. :P
i'll bet the right woman could conquer that laziness

usedillusion

10-19-2004, 11:41 PM

Originally posted by Merlin
The woman is such high quality breeding material that you make sacrafices to get it. It is why we are willing to work harder to get at the prime women when lesser could be had more readily.
I like that :D

What if a man falls in love with a woman that isn't capable of even having children? Does he drop her like a hot plate? Does she become defective or a null variable in his primative equation? Not always. If he did drop her, it wouldn't make him bad. But if he didn't, it doesn't make him stupid or irresponsible with his "resources."

If she is worth enough to him, her handicap can become the null variable. People have varying priorities that might not correspond with yours. Some prices are worth paying to some, and are damn expensive for others to bear.

Some people find a property in a great community that they'd love to have. Let's say they found out up front it had some landscape issues that would result in a higher association fee. Some people would balk and say no thanks, but those who didn't mind paying the extra for all the other benefits might go for it.

Bottom line: if one can mentally and emotionally afford the upkeep or maintainence of it, taking what comes with a piece of great territory isn't such a far fetched thing.

caribiner23

10-20-2004, 06:41 AM

Chicken is looking at the situation from an anthropological standpoint. The thoughts he's posting are the sort of thing you'll find in a book like What's Love Got To Do With It? (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385477023/qid=1098281431/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-6768389-4405750?v=glance&s=books) by Meredith Small.

Books like these use the animal world, particularly the primate world, to promote theories of why males compete fiercely for females, and how human relationships evolved into an exchange where men want regular sex and women want security and protection.

One of Small's main assertions is that males of many species do not want to be responsible for the offspring of other males, so human relationships have supposedly evolved to ensure that a female will only have sex with a single male (and thus have only his offspring) if she guarantees him regular sex in exchange for the male's "sticking around" and providing for the family.

This is all very interesting, but I like to think humans have evolved a bit higher than this.

As an adult male who has reproduced and has been faced with the potential of being responsible for another male's offspring, I can honestly say I have no issue with it.

Kevster

10-20-2004, 08:41 AM

i'll bet the right woman could conquer that laziness

Over the last 15 years that I have known Merlin, I have seen many women attempt to conquer that laziness. They all failed.

nickel

10-20-2004, 10:37 AM

Over the last 15 years that I have known Merlin, I have seen many women attempt to conquer that laziness. They all failed.
hmmm, a challenge...

Showtime

10-20-2004, 11:04 AM

What if a man falls in love with a woman that isn't capable of even having children?

Np for me. The relationship between her and I is first. Having a family and stuff a distant 2nd.

-j

BrewMaster

10-20-2004, 01:59 PM

nickel

10-20-2004, 02:37 PM

Showtime

10-20-2004, 02:42 PM

But, Dopey loves children....

;)

-j

nickel

10-20-2004, 02:50 PM

But, Dopey loves children....

;)

-j
nah, couldn't be :gle:

Kevster

10-20-2004, 03:01 PM

One thing I have learned about psychology - most of the people who study it or are in the field have psychological problems themselves.

DaFunkyUnit

10-20-2004, 03:11 PM

One thing I have learned about psychology - most of the people who study it or are in the field have psychological problems themselves.

:idea:

oh man, what a revelation!!! and its sooo true!

kevster, you're a genius!

BRILLIANT!!! :cheers: <--- (thats a guiness)

cheapie

10-20-2004, 03:14 PM

gcasas? :eek3:

doubt it. he wasn't that articulate.

ialsohaveadream

10-20-2004, 05:28 PM

LegendKiller

10-20-2004, 05:51 PM

One thing I have learned about psychology - most of the people who study it or are in the field have psychological problems themselves.

I have said this for years and have never doubted it in myself :) . I had a bipolar prof (worlds most published social psychologist), and an obsessive compulsive prof (one of the best abnormal psych profs), among others.

They were all pretty strange in their own ways, but were lots of fun.

LK

Maarchk

10-21-2004, 09:58 AM

my humber 2 bits...

the guy definitely had some opinions that were immature and pretty sexist. But it seems like plenty of people took shots at him calling him worse then what he had called them. And if anything, it seems like him and Obby traded even shots. So to ban one and not the other seems kinda off. but thats just me.

bit 2. Kids are honest beings. They wont trouble themselves over calling you not not their father. That could be prety harsh. So while it would not be too bad dating a lady with kids, it sure could be a hurtful experience.

Nija

10-21-2004, 03:09 PM

http://www.nijaizkewl.com/images/personal/fun/image009.jpg
:heh:

Chicken

10-25-2004, 12:44 PM

Hahaha You obviously don't know me at all or you wouldn't tell me to read a book, considering I have my nose in a book a good portion of the time. Fact is, you are a selfish idiot who cares about no one but himself. So I'm done. Good luck finding a woman who will love you, let alone WANT to have your babies.

Idiot.

LOL ... ok then read some books without pictures every so often ...

You don't have to like what I'm saying ... I really don't care, but you can't deny that behind the cold hard facts of it all I'm right. Selfish or not, I speak the truth ... that despite what you may delude yourself into thinking we DO NOT live in a "pink fluffy bunny" world where was all hold hands and sing, "We Are The World" in our rainbow colored attire. :rolleyes:

I'm not an idiot and really quite generous with my friends and family. My point, which you seemed to have missed entirely, is that guys can't be faulted for wanting to see their own genes passed on to the next generation. You can't just turn off what years and years of evolution tell us is in our best interest.

Chicken

10-25-2004, 12:54 PM

On another note... I am as UN-PC liberal hippie feel good as you can get. So there goes that theory.

Then you're obviously unable to look at things from a logical point of view, because what I say makes total sense.

Also, what about bright, successful, etc men that chose not to have children? Are they being lazy or stupid for not passing along their genes?

YES ...

Really, you have an incredibly skewed view of life, love and hell, overall happiness. Again, good luck. lol

It's only "skewed" by your deffinition. You don't truly know me in any case so you're incapable of making any judgement regarding my view of life. My view is based on facts, and the fact is that wasting your resources on some other guy's children makes no sense. If you're going to argue with me then please try to keep your emotions out of it.

Chicken

10-25-2004, 01:01 PM

I don't think he assumed that. I think he really assumed you were a jackass, but he was putting it a bit nicer.

Anyway, I think the original intent of the thread was to get you to answer whether or not you'd date a woman with kids, not relate your theories on evolution and social darwinism.

Mmmmm, babies.... :munch:

HAHA .. that's funny man .. but seriously .. I answered the question and explained my answer, and all you liberal hippie douches can't stand the fact that I'm stating facts that make sense but are in total opposition to your P.C. point of views

ialsohaveadream

10-25-2004, 01:07 PM

:fight: Take THAT, straw man!

Perhaps the pervasive liberal media has corrupted our minds? Please enlight us fur....wait, first I have to go grab my tinfoil hat. Be right back....

Chicken

10-25-2004, 01:08 PM

Well, I did "study" psychology, at the UnivofMN, one of the top 3 psych schools in the world (creators of the Minnesota Twins Studies, and the MMPI). Not to masturbate over my paper, but I studied under the best psychologists in their field.

Wow .. they actually rate school on that subject? So your school holds the #4702 poistion in the world in stuff that actually matters then huh?

Now that thats done, I can say that none of them sounded like the rambling bafoon that is teaching at T A&M. To even say that everything comes down to sex is utter stupidity. There are lots of things that drive people, sometimes its just inner peace or expansion of knowledge. Crackpot theories exalted as fact by people like you are why psychologists are minimized in many ways (pshrinks).

All you do by going on web boards like this and preaching some idiotic professors ramblings is you make a mockery of the study of human emotions and the inner workings of the psyche.

Please, take the stupid theories and go away with them, far away. Freudian, A&M hacks, nor Gestalt theories are applicable outside of a vacuum.

LK

Last time I checked freedom of speech still existed in this country. You don't like my opinions, fine .. but my opinions are based on facts and not without merrit so please don't reduce your arguments to emotional outbursts. I'm surprised at you people ... really ... you have yet to make a single argument that is fact based and not emotionally charged.

:fight: Take THAT, straw man!

Perhaps the pervasive liberal media has corrupted our minds? Please enlight us fur....wait, first I have to go grab my tinfoil hat. Be right back....

HA HA .. yeah I wouild say so, totally corrupted. Especially if you're using Tin Foil to make that hat. Don't you know the democrats hide tiny microchips in tin foil??? :gle:

No matter what I say, you won't agree with it .. and no matter what you say you all sound like nieve jackasses .. lol

Chicken

10-25-2004, 01:18 PM

I like that :D

What if a man falls in love with a woman that isn't capable of even having children? Does he drop her like a hot plate? Does she become defective or a null variable in his primative equation? Not always. If he did drop her, it wouldn't make him bad. But if he didn't, it doesn't make him stupid or irresponsible with his "resources."

If she is worth enough to him, her handicap can become the null variable. People have varying priorities that might not correspond with yours. Some prices are worth paying to some, and are damn expensive for others to bear.

Some people find a property in a great community that they'd love to have. Let's say they found out up front it had some landscape issues that would result in a higher association fee. Some people would balk and say no thanks, but those who didn't mind paying the extra for all the other benefits might go for it.

Bottom line: if one can mentally and emotionally afford the upkeep or maintainence of it, taking what comes with a piece of great territory isn't such a far fetched thing.

OMG .. you people make such emotionally charge arguments. NONE of what you said is grounded in fact or averages ... they're special extreme circumstances that involve making a decision based on emotion.

YES ... the old adage is true, "The Value of Something is What Someone is Willing to Pay For It". But that is an emotionally charged argument.

The "barren woman" situation: Yes .. logically speaking ditch her and get a fertile woman if you intend to carry your genes on to the next generation. However that decision will typically be dictated by emotions and not facts.

Chicken

10-25-2004, 01:28 PM

...theories of why males compete fiercely for females, and how human relationships evolved into an exchange where men want regular sex and women want security and protection.

One of Small's main assertions is that males of many species do not want to be responsible for the offspring of other males, so human relationships have supposedly evolved to ensure that a female will only have sex with a single male (and thus have only his offspring) if she guarantees him regular sex in exchange for the male's "sticking around" and providing for the family.

...exactly

This is all very interesting, but I like to think humans have evolved a bit higher than this.

Would be nice to think so, but I don't really think we have. We try to act like we have and on the outside, sometimes, we do a good job of showing a good front, but when it comes down to it I don't think we're as "evolved" in that regard as we'd like to think we are.

As an adult male who has reproduced and has been faced with the potential of being responsible for another male's offspring, I can honestly say I have no issue with it.

That's totally cool man ... someone's gotta do it, but you see where I'm coming from.

You can admit that it doesn't help you to get your genes out there while taking care of another guys kid. You can love them and take care of them and consider them your own, but when you step back and look at it analytically you can see how it not only diminishes you opportunity to get your genes out there more, it potentially hampers your own offspring from being reproductively successful in the future.

Chicken

10-25-2004, 01:34 PM

something worth noting is that all 8 of Chicken's posts so far are in this thread. who the hell registers at G|A? and goes straight to this thread and only posts here? i could be wrong, but I think he may be the re-incarnation of another banned member or a member trying to remain anonymous...

HAHA

No .. I came to this thread because someone posted it on the forums for my own website/server, and I felt obliged to comment because you all were so nasty to that one guy who made very valid points.

Check my IP and compare it to his you'll see it's different.

One thing I have learned about psychology - most of the people who study it or are in the field have psychological problems themselves.

lol .. so very true .. I'd say 99.9999999999999999999999999999% true

ialsohaveadream

10-25-2004, 01:43 PM

No matter what I say, you won't agree with it .. and no matter what you say you all sound like nieve jackasses .. lol

It's "naive", jackass. But who's counting?

Continue with your flame war/train wreck.

Chicken

10-26-2004, 09:02 AM

It's "naive", jackass. But who's counting?

Continue with your flame war/train wreck.

lol .. such anger .. where's the love you hippies preach about?

nickel

10-26-2004, 09:29 AM

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1062901997637_2003/09/08/letch_chicken.jpg

BrewMaster

10-26-2004, 03:22 PM

HAHA

No .. I came to this thread because someone posted it on the forums for my own website/server, and I felt obliged to comment because you all were so nasty to that one guy who made very valid points.

what website/server would that be? please enlighten us and give us a link.

i wasn't saying that you were gcasas, i was saying that you could be any banned G|A member or ny current G|A member looking for cover. there have been many people banned before gcasas and there will be more in the future. i could be wrong too. it was a guess, not a statement of fact.

i do however think that it is sad that you registerd at G|A to "set us all straight" or "tell us like it is." obviously people disagree with you but instead of respectfully disagreeing with others, you continue in saying how right you are and how deluded they are. (though it is worth noting that others took this same tone with you as well.) it is dangerous to take that attitude with people unless you know everything there is to know in the world. short of that you are always at risk of being proven wrong.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1062901997637_2003/09/08/letch_chicken.jpg

that pic had me rolling. :lmfao:

it's like Huggie Bear meets KFC! Awesome.