# Things men should do/accomplish before even considering getting married/committed relationship......?



## oldshirt

This is kind of spinning off from a post I made on another thread but wanted to have some more input and your thoughts on this topic. 

I saw an interesting panel discussion on youtube awhile back where a group of men were discussing the relationship, sex, dating, marriage environment in current times and one of the panelists brought up something that I thought was interesting but the more I got to thinking about it, the more I thought it deserved some discussion here. 

His premise was that people often advise others on what traits and characteristics to look for in a potential partner/spouse and when they find someone that checks off those boxes to go for that person. That seems kind of typical and how many of us were brought up and even here on these forums people often say to come up with a list of critical criteria you must have as well as have deal breakers and boundaries etc etc and "Don't settle!."

I think women are often hammered with that more than men, but men certainly get that message as well. (and they probably should)

However this guy took kind of an opposite approach and listed off a series of traits and characteristics and accomplishments that the man himself should achieve in himself before even considering looking for permanent partner or considering marriage. 

His list of requirments before seeking marriage/mate was -
-Be at least 30 years old. 
-Be in great physical shape and looking the best that you can.
-Have a solid career and income of at least $100k/yr with no significant debt or financial liability. 
-Have been with at least 50 women in a variety of dating and sexual scenarios. 

His rationale was that if a guy develops himself to those criteria that he will be very solidly attractive to a wide pool of women and will have the life experience and wisdom to select a mate that will be best for him. 

And if he hasn't achieved those things or met those requirements of himself, then his selection pool will be much more limited and he will more likely than not have to settle and compromise and take whatever he can get. 

At first I kind of rolled my eyes and said, "whatever" ,,, but the more I've gotten to thinking about it, the more I see the wisdom in it. 

Should we be shifting more time and energy from teaching young men what to look for in a mate and hoping that they can pull it off, and instead be teaching them to develop themselves and become more attractive and desirable so that they are able to have a larger selection pool to choose from and that cream will rise to the top naturally so that they will be able to select that which will work best for them? 

What are your thoughts?


----------



## oldshirt

To share my own experience, this was not how I was raised or the message that I was given as a young man. 

Now I was told to go to school so I could get a good job and if I had a good job that girls would like me. I got that message loud and clear. 

But I was also given a list of criteria of what to look for in a mate and at 18 I was sent out into the world with a "good luck with that" and went out into the quagmire of trying to find someone that would give me the time of day as a scrawny nerd with Woodsy The Owl glasses. 

I also grew up in a small farming community in the midwest where most of the jocks married the cheerleaders that they knocked up in high school and science nerds in the physics club latched on to the first female that gave them the time of day at college. 

I was the outlier of my generation in that I was an actual single adult living and working and eventually dating in the world. I got kicked in the teeth a lot, had a few heartbreaks and a lot of dead ends and struggles and challenges. And even though by the time I was in my mid 20s I was dating and hooking up regularly and even spinning plates at various times, I was looked at as an oddity by the time I was in my upper 20s and not married and dealing with kids. I was accused of being a womanizer and player. I was accused of being a man-child and Peter Pan. And I even had my sexual orientation slyly questioned even though by the time I was in my upper 20s I had women coming in the front door and leaving out the backdoor so they didn't bump into each other. 

HOWEVER, looking at the criteria above, I pretty much checked off all those boxes mentioned above even though it was quite unwittingly and not according to plan or social convention. 

By the time I was 30, I was not making 100k, however in that time (almost 30 years ago) and place (midwest farming area) I was pretty close and I had no debt or liability whatsoever. And I had pretty much checked off all of those other criteria. 

When I was 30 years old, my challenges were keeping all the plates spinning and when the time was coming that I was kind of wanting to settle down and have a home and family, my challenge was in trying to decide which one to pick out of the pool of qualified candidates. 

10 years earlier, getting an attractive girl my age to say hi back to me was a major accomplishment. 

At 30, I had attractive, educated, sane, sober, sexy women knocking on my door for attention in the middle of the night and were approaching me about a life together. 

In retrospect, I think the recommendations above are quite valid.


----------



## hubbyintrubby

Well, it's easier to make goals to meet for yourself than it is to find that "perfect person" that would check a list of boxes. So yeah, that's a great idea! Look within.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

I think this search for a magic recipe is very attractive but there is no one-size fits all solution here. It is tempting to be reductive here, but that means you may end up trying to be something you simply aren't. There is a lot to be said for being comfortable and confident in your own skin. So I would generally agree that settling down too early is probably a bad idea but I would argue that setting goals and objectives that have genuine value to you are going to be better around than chasing the big payday and the six-pack because that is what people tell you is important.


----------



## Benbutton

Funny, the pre requisites listed above still don't work out for many. However, I would agree with you 110% that working to improve yourself is a much better accomplishment than checking boxes. Keep in mind though, personality similarities and communication will take you farther in relationships than most anything else, those should be very important boxes to check off.


----------



## ConanHub

No one list would fit everyone.

I agree with the idea that a man should be more focused on his goals and development than pursuing women.

A lot of women find men like that more attractive anyway.


----------



## Tasorundo

As you build your portfolio of 50 women, do you inform them you will never marry them, but are looking for outfit your bed post notches so you can marry a different girl someday?


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> This is kind of spinning off from a post I made on another thread but wanted to have some more input and your thoughts on this topic.
> 
> I saw an interesting panel discussion on youtube awhile back where a group of men were discussing the relationship, sex, dating, marriage environment in current times and one of the panelists brought up something that I thought was interesting but the more I got to thinking about it, the more I thought it deserved some discussion here.
> 
> His premise was that people often advise others on what traits and characteristics to look for in a potential partner/spouse and when they find someone that checks off those boxes to go for that person. That seems kind of typical and how many of us were brought up and even here on these forums people often say to come up with a list of critical criteria you must have as well as have deal breakers and boundaries etc etc and "Don't settle!."
> 
> I think women are often hammered with that more than men, but men certainly get that message as well. (and they probably should)
> 
> However this guy took kind of an opposite approach and listed off a series of traits and characteristics and accomplishments that the man himself should achieve in himself before even considering looking for permanent partner or considering marriage.
> 
> His list of requirments before seeking marriage/mate was -
> -Be at least 30 years old.
> -Be in great physical shape and looking the best that you can.
> -Have a solid career and income of at least $100k/yr with no significant debt or financial liability.
> -Have been with at least 50 women in a variety of dating and sexual scenarios.
> 
> His rationale was that if a guy develops himself to those criteria that he will be very solidly attractive to a wide pool of women and will have the life experience and wisdom to select a mate that will be best for him.
> 
> And if he hasn't achieved those things or met those requirements of himself, then his selection pool will be much more limited and he will more likely than not have to settle and compromise and take whatever he can get.
> 
> At first I kind of rolled my eyes and said, "whatever" ,,, but the more I've gotten to thinking about it, the more I see the wisdom in it.
> 
> Should we be shifting more time and energy from teaching young men what to look for in a mate and hoping that they can pull it off, and instead be teaching them to develop themselves and become more attractive and desirable so that they are able to have a larger selection pool to choose from and that cream will rise to the top naturally so that they will be able to select that which will work best for them?
> 
> What are your thoughts?


Being the best person we can be is always a good thing, but the qualities he quotes wouldn't in anyway be what makes a good man, husband or father.

Surely things like being a man of good character, having integrity, decency, honesty and knowing to treat others with respect are far more important.
None of the points quoted would matter to me, and the multiple sexual partners would put me off entirely.


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> No one list would fit everyone.
> 
> I agree with the idea that a man should be more focused on his goals and development than pursuing women.
> 
> A lot of women find men like that more attractive anyway.


Point being - When a man achieves a certain level of physical fitness, financial success, social status and social and interpersonal skills, he does not need to pursue women. 

They will come to him.


----------



## Al_Bundy

Men should chase excellence, the women will come. What's sad is most people would get cut from that list just based on being in shape, the one thing we all have total control over.

However we shouldn't just tell young men to go chase excellence and everything will work out. The old, just be a good, hard working guy advice will just get a man eventually raped in divorce court today.


----------



## Harold Demure

I suppose I am an old romantic but I believe that you know when you meet “the one” which I did when I was 16 and my wife was 14. She felt the same and we knew we were going to be forever. 

I don’t think I consciously had a list and I do think that approach takes a lot of the magic out of everything, making it more of a process than an affair of the heart. I wanted a partner who had similar interests and values to me and my wife told me she wanted someone who was tall, had big hands and wide shoulders.

I agree that you should try to make the best of yourself but my experience, and that of a lot of my friends, is that women tend to mould men into what they want them to be, and that is not a bad thing. Certainly made me a better person.

As I said above, we met very young and have been together 50 years this December. Never felt that we were missing out and have shared experiences together through life. Friends when we were 16 - 18 always boasted about the numbers of girlfriends they had but they certainly didn’t have the sex life that we had, made all the more fulfilling because it was based on love and not just rampant hormones.

We had children young (24 and 22) and it was a struggle at first but we reaped the reward in later life as our children grew up and left home when we were in our early 50’s, leaving us freer to enjoy a more extravagant lifestyle and have energy for baby grandchildren.

I do think we appreciate that we have been very lucky. It has been hard at times but we learnt to compromise and that it was always me that had to say sorry 😆. I suppose the biggest thing is that we always put the other one first and we put real effort into making sure life never gets boring.

Would I change anything? Yes, I would have looked after my teeth better and gone to the gym earlier


----------



## Livvie

Ew. Having been with 50 women would be a hard pass from me. I'd be the opposite of impressed.

Not all guys can make 100k by 30 and that's okay. It really depends on where you live.


----------



## oldshirt

Benbutton said:


> Funny, the pre requisites listed above still don't work out for many. However, I would agree with you 110% that working to improve yourself is a much better accomplishment than checking boxes. Keep in mind though, personality similarities and communication will take you farther in relationships than most anything else, those should be very important boxes to check off.


Personality similarities and communication are important but the point here is if a man meets those benchmarks, he will be in a better position to select someone that better matches his personality and communication abilities.

A 30 year old that has reached that level of financial success and has that dating history, “should” have the social and interpersonal skills that a guy could get a suitable partner if he wanted one.


----------



## Al_Bundy

Harold Demure said:


> I suppose I am an old romantic but I believe that you know when you meet “the one” which I did when I was 16 and my wife was 14. She felt the same and we knew we were going to be forever.
> 
> I don’t think I consciously had a list and I do think that approach takes a lot of the magic out of everything, making it more of a process than an affair of the heart. I wanted a partner who had similar interests and values to me and my wife told me she wanted someone who was tall, had big hands and wide shoulders.
> 
> I agree that you should try to make the best of yourself but my experience, and that of a lot of my friends, is that women tend to mould men into what they want them to be, and that is not a bad thing. Certainly made me a better person.
> 
> As I said above, we met very young and have been together 50 years this December. Never felt that we were missing out and have shared experiences together through life. Friends when we were 16 - 18 always boasted about the numbers of girlfriends they had but they certainly didn’t have the sex life that we had, made all the more fulfilling because it was based on love and not just rampant hormones.
> 
> We had children young (24 and 22) and it was a struggle at first but we reaped the reward in later life as our children grew up and left home when we were in our early 50’s, leaving us freer to enjoy a more extravagant lifestyle and have energy for baby grandchildren.
> 
> I do think we appreciate that we have been very lucky. It has been hard at times but we learnt to compromise and that it was always me that had to say sorry 😆. I suppose the biggest thing is that we always put the other one first and we put real effort into making sure life never gets boring.
> 
> Would I change anything? Yes, I would have looked after my teeth better and gone to the gym earlier


I think there was a time when what you did was the norm, my grandparents have a similar story as do many of my friends grandparents. And no that is not a dig at your age. I think a lot of people wish things were still like that.

Would you say this model or way of doing things works today? Back then if a woman was in a small town she was limited to the guys in that town. Today she can get attention from literally all over the world. Women are taught they can have it all (career, kids, perfect guy) and not have to sacrifice anything. Women back then couldn't have 12 different email addresses and aliases on different chatting apps.


----------



## Al_Bundy

With so many guys being raised without a father today, I question how many would ever reach that notch count even if they had everything else?


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> As you build your portfolio of 50 women, do you inform them you will never marry them, but are looking for outfit your bed post notches so you can marry a different girl someday?


It’s not about notching bedposts. It’s getting off the bleachers on the Sidelines and getting onto the field and developing social and interpersonal skills and dating skills. 

People should follow their own values and moral compass in regards to actual sex and if they don’t want to have actual sex with multiple people before marriage, they do not have to. But it is still in their better interest to at least get out and meet people and interact and go on dates etc to develop their dating skills and at least experience and learn about women. 

And to honest, no one is really going to want to be marrying very many young men in their early 20s anyway. 

People in general are not marrying as young as my generation did (that’s a good thing!!) so it’s not like these young guys are going to be being pressured for marriage to begin with. 

And as a guy climbs up the civil economic ladder into to his mid-upper 20s, he can simply say he is working on developing his career and personal development and not focused on finding a mate and marrying at this point. 

It’s actually the more responsible and wise path to be on at that point. It’s not a bad thing and it’s not something dark and nefarious. 

Just because a guy is not focusing on marriage and family etc does NOT automatically mean that he is a playa’ or a womanizer.

It’s developing himself so he can make more suitable choices and be in a better position to be a better partner and more stable and supportive father.


----------



## Laurentium

Tasorundo said:


> As you build your portfolio of 50 women, do you inform them you will never marry them, but are looking for outfit your bed post notches so you can marry a different girl someday?


Indeed! I am also tempted to ask, if you meet the right woman before you get to the 50 count, are you allowed to call a halt to it and marry her?


----------



## Tasorundo

oldshirt said:


> It’s not about notching bedposts. It’s getting off the bleachers on the Sidelines and getting onto the field and developing social and interpersonal skills and dating skills.


I can understand that, but there is my problem with it:

If you are dating, to not be serious, not working on compromise, communication, teamwork, and all of the things that are required to make a successful marriage, then what is the point? Jerking off isn't good practice for having sex. Dating multiple women is not practice for building a long term relationship.

If there is nothing to lose in all of these early relationships, then you will risk nothing, and learn little.


----------



## Andy1001

Tasorundo said:


> As you build your portfolio of 50 women, do you inform them you will never marry them, but are looking for outfit your bed post notches so you can marry a different girl someday?


I don’t really see it as building a portfolio per se. it’s more like if you are the type of person who wants to play the field and date/sleep with hundreds of women then you need to get this out of your system before you even think about settling down with one person.


----------



## Tasorundo

Andy1001 said:


> I don’t really see it as building a portfolio per se. it’s more like if you are the type of person who wants to play the field and date/sleep with hundreds of women then you need to get this out of your system before you even think about settling down with one person.


That's not the way it was written though. It was written that those 50 women are learning experiences, practice, etc, so you can pick the one someday.

If you have really dated (when I say really, I mean like made a relationship) 50 women by the time you are 30, you are either a bad guy that gets dumped, or you are bad at picking women.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> Being the best person we can be is always a good thing, but the qualities he quotes wouldn't in anyway be what makes a good man, husband or father.
> 
> Surely things like being a man of good character, having integrity, decency, honesty and knowing to treat others with respect are far more important.
> None of the points quoted would matter to me, and the multiple sexual partners would put me off entirely.


See my post # 16.

I’m not talking about being a playa’ or a Pick Up Artist or womanizer or anything.

People can and should follow their own values and mores in regards to actual sex. A guy doesn’t have to screw 50 women to develop social, interpersonal and dating and relationship skills. 

But it is in his best interests to get out and meet and date and get to know a variety of women and learn about their natures as well as determine his own mate selection criteria and boundaries and deal breakers etc in order for him to even be able to recognize a good one and know when the cream as risen to the top rather than simply relying on which one is pretty and gives him a BJ one day. 

This life experience and wisdom gained in the field is actually a GOOD thing and good for his future mate and family. 

It’s not something dark and sinister.


----------



## Tasorundo

Less than 10% of Americans at age 30, make 100k, btw. 75% of them never make 100k in a year.


----------



## Tasorundo

I think the concepts are ok, just the numbers are odd to me.

Rather than being a certain age, I think everyone is different. You should be mature enough to plan, understand compromise, work with people, and have a stable life.

Rather than peak physical health, I think, again, everyone is different. I think not making choices to hurt yourself (drugs, excessive alcohol, etc) and being in reasonable shape with a healthy lifestyle should be fine.

Rather than 100k/yr (as mentioned, it is just not happening for about 100,000,000 males over 25 in the US right now). A stable career, good salary, sustainable lifestyle, little to no debt. I made a joke idea one time about a dating ap that showed credit scores, but I am not joking.

Finally, rather than 50 women, some experience with women, picking women, knowing deal breakers, having personal worth, etc.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> Point being - When a man achieves a certain level of physical fitness, financial success, social status and social and interpersonal skills, he does not need to pursue women.
> 
> They will come to him.


I believe if he is pursuing his goals and a woman perceives he is capable of getting there, she will invest in him.


----------



## Andy1001

There is no one rule that applies to everyone. 
I have one brother who married his childhood sweetheart when they were both eighteen with the blessing of both sets of parents. They are now thirty five years married and my brother told me that he never even had a date with another girl much less slept with one. 
I never had a serious relationship until I was twenty seven, in fact both my parents told me not to marry before I was thirty at least. And they were right.


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> Less than 10% of Americans at age 30, make 100k, btw. 75% of them never make 100k in a year.


so it stands to reason that if a 30 year old is making 100k, he will be swim'n in women and will be able to select from a large and high quality pool.


----------



## ConanHub

I'm going to put the kabosh on sleeping around too.

I was with around 60 and I wish the number was only 1.


----------



## Tasorundo

oldshirt said:


> so it stands to reason that if a 30 year old is making 100k, he will be swim'n in women and will be able to select from a large and high quality pool.


Sure, but lots of rich people have crappy marriages. It is no more a guarantee of having a good one than being in peak physical condition.


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> I think the concepts are ok, just the numbers are odd to me.
> 
> Rather than being a certain age, I think everyone is different. You should be mature enough to plan, understand compromise, work with people, and have a stable life.
> 
> Rather than peak physical health, I think, again, everyone is different. I think not making choices to hurt yourself (drugs, excessive alcohol, etc) and being in reasonable shape with a healthy lifestyle should be fine.
> 
> Rather than 100k/yr (as mentioned, it is just not happening for about 100,000,000 males over 25 in the US right now). A stable career, good salary, sustainable lifestyle, little to no debt. I made a joke idea one time about a dating ap that showed credit scores, but I am not joking.
> 
> Finally, rather than 50 women, some experience with women, picking women, knowing deal breakers, having personal worth, etc.


A ten year old Toyota Corolla that has had somewhat regular oil changes and maintenance and is under 200k miles SHOULD be a very reliable car and should get you to wherever you need to go so having enough money to buy a 10 year old Corolla can get you reasonably reliable transportation. 

But wouldn't you rather have the ability and options and opportunities to get whatever you wanted and not have to rely on only being limited to a 10 year old, 200k mile Corolla? 

Do you see where I am going with this? 

But lemme share a personal experience of mine. When I was 25 I was dating a gal that was a few years older than me, had a good steady job and was a solidly good person and she really dug me. I COULD have married her at that time. If I had proposed she would have said yes. She was in fact pressuring me to make a commitment and get married etc

However she was about 25 lbs overweight ( I didn't mind that much) and while not bad looking, she was kind of a plain jane and not anyone that would ever turn heads. And she was kind of demanding and argumentative and had anger management issues that would get her into trouble at work and with friends etc. She would have been the female equivalent of the 10 year old Corolla. 

However, I was still working on developing myself, still taking classes and moving up in my career etc and I did not want to be bogged down with a wife and kids and mortgage etc at that point in my life. 

We basically ended up splitting up when I would not commit. She basically dumped me. Yes I was sad and at times lonely and even horny at times without any source of relief but my own hand at times. 

Here's the rest of the story - in her early 30s she finally faced up to the fact that she was gay and has lived the lesbian lifestyle ever since. We're still friends and will chat back and forth on Facebook every now and then but I clearly dodged a bullet that would have bit me in the arse within a few years. 

As it turned out, when I was 30, I was spinning plates with a variety of women that were all prettier and sexier and nicer and easier to get along with and my wife who was traffic-stopping gorgeous and a former teen model and state pageant contestant and who had domestic and maternal hormones dripping out of her pores rose to the top at the time that I was wanting to settle down and have a stable home life and committed relationship. 

I was simply in a better position to be able to pick and choose who would be a better match for me. 

I didn't have to settle for the 10 year old Corolla (which was about to drop it's transmission) I was able to get the Lexus just a few years later.


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> Sure, but lots of rich people have crappy marriages. It is no more a guarantee of having a good one than being in peak physical condition.


Definitely no guarantees of lifelong perfection. 

But my point is if a guy achieves those benchmarks, he will have a lot more options and opportunities to choose from and will be better positioned to choose a mate of his particular liking VS if he has not achieved those benchmarks.


----------



## Tasorundo

oldshirt said:


> Definitely no guarantees of lifelong perfection.
> 
> But my point is if a guy achieves those benchmarks, he will have a lot more options and opportunities to choose from and will be better positioned to choose a mate of his particular liking VS if he has not achieved those benchmarks.


I don't disagree that he has more options, it would be silly to do so. It just has very little chance of improving his long term marriage success as that takes way more intangible things.

I got married at 19, still married at 45. Has it been perfect, of course not. However, I did meet most of those goals at 30. I am not sure when I got into better shape exactly, but that didn't stop a skiing accident and multiple heart surgeries from quickly derailing that!


----------



## oldshirt

AGoodFlogging said:


> So I would generally agree that settling down too early is probably a bad idea but I would argue that setting goals and objectives that have genuine value to you are going to be better around than chasing the big payday and the six-pack because that is what people tell you is important.


Let's not complicate things too much. This is not inventing the wheel. 

Which guy is going to have a bigger pool of quality, wife-material to choose from - a fat, 24 year old stock boy at Target that lives in his mom's basement, plays video games on his days off and is barely making payments on his school loans from when he dropped out of college and hasn't been on a real date since for 3 years?

Or the 30 year old with the six pack that is making bank with no appreciable debt and has a very active and engaging social life? 

Which one is going to have more options and opportunities and be able to choose which will be best for him?


----------



## Mr.Married

At 45 both my kids are about to finish college and I’m starting my second life. For me personally getting married at 30 sounds like a terrible idea.


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> It just has very little chance of improving his long term marriage success as that takes way more intangible things.


I disagree with that assertion. 

I agree that there are many other intangibles, but disagree that a person's long term chances of success won't be improved if he meets those benchmarks before choosing a permanent mate. 

I think with the greater options and the greater life experience and wisdom, he will be able to pick a higher quality partner that will also have a higher degree of wisdom and life skills and she will have more respect and esteem for him and more motivated to work through the hurdles and challenges that life will present. 

Are there exceptions and outliers and people that simply get lucky and beat the odds? Of course. But on the whole, over time, the higher degree of maturity and financial success and responsibilty a man has before getting into marriage, the greater his ability to adapt to and overcome life challenges and the less likely that his partner will bail when things get tough.


----------



## Tasorundo

There are a lot of fat, poor, happily married people that would disagree.


----------



## oldshirt

Harold Demure said:


> I suppose I am an old romantic but I believe that you know when you meet “the one” which I did when I was 16 and my wife was 14. She felt the same and we knew we were going to be forever.
> 
> I don’t think I consciously had a list and I do think that approach takes a lot of the magic out of everything, making it more of a process than an affair of the heart. I wanted a partner who had similar interests and values to me and my wife told me she wanted someone who was tall, had big hands and wide shoulders.
> 
> I agree that you should try to make the best of yourself but my experience, and that of a lot of my friends, is that women tend to mould men into what they want them to be, and that is not a bad thing. Certainly made me a better person.
> 
> As I said above, we met very young and have been together 50 years this December. Never felt that we were missing out and have shared experiences together through life. Friends when we were 16 - 18 always boasted about the numbers of girlfriends they had but they certainly didn’t have the sex life that we had, made all the more fulfilling because it was based on love and not just rampant hormones.
> 
> We had children young (24 and 22) and it was a struggle at first but we reaped the reward in later life as our children grew up and left home when we were in our early 50’s, leaving us freer to enjoy a more extravagant lifestyle and have energy for baby grandchildren.
> 
> I do think we appreciate that we have been very lucky. It has been hard at times but we learnt to compromise and that it was always me that had to say sorry 😆. I suppose the biggest thing is that we always put the other one first and we put real effort into making sure life never gets boring.
> 
> Would I change anything? Yes, I would have looked after my teeth better and gone to the gym earlier


I'm an old romantic too and I probably would have said exactly the same in the past. 

In the time and place I grew up, people did marry their high school or at least their college sweethearts and some of those marriages have been quite long and successful. 

But society and culture was geared for that back then and supported it and people embraced those values. 

It is a different world today. 

50 years ago a young man with college and career aspirations that wasn't a drunk or a criminal that the neighbors and church and community members liked, could get the nice girl. 

50 years ago a girls options were the boys within a few miles of her that her parents would allow her to see. The nice boy down the street stood a chance. 

Today, if an 18-25 year old girl posts a few bikini pictures online, she will have hundreds of men from all across the globe making her offers every single day. She may have oil shieks offering to fly her to Bahrain to spend the weekend partying it up on his yacht or in one of his casinos. The nice boy down the street isn't a face in the crowd to her. 

To compete in today's market place, A guy almost has to have those benchmarks to even be in the game. 

I managed to bumble through it and simply happened to achieve those things by happenstance and it payed off. 

Young men today are going to have to actually be mindful and purposeful in their own personal development if they don't want to settle for a woman with 3 kids from different baby daddys, spikey blue hair and 75lbs overweight.


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> There are a lot of fat, poor, happily married people that would disagree.


But how much better could they have done and how much better options would they have had if they were fit and had bank?


----------



## oldshirt

Laurentium said:


> Indeed! I am also tempted to ask, if you meet the right woman before you get to the 50 count, are you allowed to call a halt to it and marry her?


That question embraces the mentality of scarcity and buys into the notion that there are only a few eligible women in the world and that if you can't hook one the moment you get a nibble that you will die alone being eaten by your cats. 

It embraces the mentality that there is only "one." This ain't Highlander. There are others out there. Several billion in fact. 

The point being here is that you do not have to hook the first pretty girl that makes your junk hard enough to crack walnuts if you are able to develop yourself to where decent women will innately want to be with you and you are in a position to choose from a pool of eligible candidates. 

A guy that meets those benchmarks does not have to snatch up first pretty girl that smells nice. He can lay his foundation on his life and then when he is ready for marriage/home/family, he will have a pool of eligible choices.


----------



## oldshirt

Tasorundo said:


> That's not the way it was written though. It was written that those 50 women are learning experiences, practice, etc, so you can pick the one someday.
> 
> If you have really dated (when I say really, I mean like made a relationship) 50 women by the time you are 30, you are either a bad guy that gets dumped, or you are bad at picking women.


Again I disagree and think you are picturing PUAs and playa's and womanizers etc in your mind's eye. 

If a guy has his first date to the soda shop at sixteen and continues to meet and talk to girls and interact with them on an interpersonal level and goes on dates and hits it off with some of them sexually (depending on his and their own values and mores and beliefs etc) 50 girls can average out to about 3.5 girls per year that he has done anything from met for coffee to casual dating to a drunken hook up at a frat party to FWB etc etc. 

It's simply living life and focusing on developing yourself and not committing to a permanent relationship at that time. 

That is not something dysfunctional or sinister or bad.


----------



## oldshirt

Mr.Married said:


> At 45 both my kids are about to finish college and I’m starting my second life. For me personally getting married at 30 sounds like a terrible idea.


terrible in what way? Please explain.


----------



## Diana7

Harold Demure said:


> I suppose I am an old romantic but I believe that you know when you meet “the one” which I did when I was 16 and my wife was 14. She felt the same and we knew we were going to be forever.
> 
> I don’t think I consciously had a list and I do think that approach takes a lot of the magic out of everything, making it more of a process than an affair of the heart. I wanted a partner who had similar interests and values to me and my wife told me she wanted someone who was tall, had big hands and wide shoulders.
> 
> I agree that you should try to make the best of yourself but my experience, and that of a lot of my friends, is that women tend to mould men into what they want them to be, and that is not a bad thing. Certainly made me a better person.
> 
> As I said above, we met very young and have been together 50 years this December. Never felt that we were missing out and have shared experiences together through life. Friends when we were 16 - 18 always boasted about the numbers of girlfriends they had but they certainly didn’t have the sex life that we had, made all the more fulfilling because it was based on love and not just rampant hormones.
> 
> We had children young (24 and 22) and it was a struggle at first but we reaped the reward in later life as our children grew up and left home when we were in our early 50’s, leaving us freer to enjoy a more extravagant lifestyle and have energy for baby grandchildren.
> 
> I do think we appreciate that we have been very lucky. It has been hard at times but we learnt to compromise and that it was always me that had to say sorry 😆. I suppose the biggest thing is that we always put the other one first and we put real effort into making sure life never gets boring.
> 
> Would I change anything? Yes, I would have looked after my teeth better and gone to the gym earlier


Many of the happiest marriages I know are ones where they married and had children very young. Still going strong 40-50 years later.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Well, it's depressing to me as a woman that it makes it sound like a man can just go out and earn 100K a year. Women can't do that. Very few men can do that. I think that part is totally bogus unless the man will only be happy with a trophy wife he has to purchase.

The rest of it makes sense to me. Get the carousing out of the way. Find out if you get tired of variety and shallow relationships and start wanting stability or not. Many do not, but some do. Some get tired of a strictly physical pursuit. Some need the constant validation and never do. 

When I was house hunting, I started off with one set of criteria. I hunted for 2 years. I gave up. As I was hunting, my criteria changed constantly. I thought this was good, but actually it's not going to work for me. Then I worked in model homes and noticed how impractical the mcmansions were. You had to carry the laundry all the way down the stairs through the kitchen and then almost to the garage to the utility room. At that time I lived in a 2-bedroom rent house that had the laundry room right off the bedroom, between the bedroom and the bathroom. It was SO convenient. 

Point is, the more you experience, the more you refine your tastes and recognize your needs. I don't know, maybe someone green has no expectations and if they're a happy-go-lucky person, maybe they'll be content no matter what, but......


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> See my post # 16.
> 
> I’m not talking about being a playa’ or a Pick Up Artist or womanizer or anything.
> 
> People can and should follow their own values and mores in regards to actual sex. A guy doesn’t have to screw 50 women to develop social, interpersonal and dating and relationship skills.
> 
> But it is in his best interests to get out and meet and date and get to know a variety of women and learn about their natures as well as determine his own mate selection criteria and boundaries and deal breakers etc in order for him to even be able to recognize a good one and know when the cream as risen to the top rather than simply relying on which one is pretty and gives him a BJ one day.
> 
> This life experience and wisdom gained in the field is actually a GOOD thing and good for his future mate and family.
> 
> It’s not something dark and sinister.


My husband had one girlfriend before his first wife, no sex, then met and married his first wife, then after 23 years she met another man and divorced him, then he met and married me 16 years ago and I cant see how things would have been any better for him or between us if he had had multiple partners, or sex with many women. I like that he didnt.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

oldshirt said:


> Let's not complicate things too much. This is not inventing the wheel.
> 
> Which guy is going to have a bigger pool of quality, wife-material to choose from - a fat, 24 year old stock boy at Target that lives in his mom's basement, plays video games on his days off and is barely making payments on his school loans from when he dropped out of college and hasn't been on a real date since for 3 years?
> 
> Or the 30 year old with the six pack that is making bank with no appreciable debt and has a very active and engaging social life?
> 
> Which one is going to have more options and opportunities and be able to choose which will be best for him?


We are talking about real life here so I'm afraid it is complicated.

You have picked two contrasting examples to prove your point. I and many men are neither of the two people you have described. This is a false dilemma. Women do not have to chose between only these two options. Life is much, much more complicated than that.

Like I said, making money and hitting the gym are not the only games in town.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> My husband had one girlfriend before his first wife, no sex, then met and married his first wife, then after 23 years she met another man and divorced him, then he met and married me 16 years ago and I cant see how things would have been any better for him or between us if he had had multiple partners, or sex with many women. I like that he didnt.


OK but we need to keep in mind that this was a panel discussion about young men TODAY and this is in the men's section here about what can give men the best chances of being able to choose what works best for them. 

We can have a similar discussion in the women's section about women. 

But as far as your situation who knows. Who knows how things would have turned out if things had been different. We are talking about 39 years ago after all. It was a different world with a different set of cultural values and mores back then. 

In today's world with Instagram and Tinder and other social media platforms and the way the economy is today, many of those old world practices and standards and mores, simply aren't as applicable. 

39 years ago, it was very common in my area for people to marry their high school or at least college sweethearts. It was common, it was expected, it was accepted and it was supported by society as a whole. There really wasn't anything shocking about a young man marrying his high school sweetheart and his only real competition was other young men from his community who may have been a little better looking or a little more athletic or came from a family that could hook him up with a job that paid $1/hr more (minimum wage was $2.25 when I graduated high school so $1/hr was a big difference) 

Today, an 18 year old girl with firm abz can post a bikini picture and she will have men from literally other countries making her offers. Now a lot of them may be all talk but my point is, the 18 year old boy that grew up down the street is no longer competing against the boy on the next street over or even the college boy that graduated a year or two earlier that comes back to town every few weekends. He is now competing against grown men with 6 and 7 or even 8-figure incomes that will offer to fly her to South Beach or the Bahamas to spend a week on their yacht. With her inbox being flooded with stuff like that, she ain't got time to even learn the nice boy down the street's name let alone actually interact with him in any kind of meaningful manner. 

A lot of it is smoke and mirrors by disgusting old men trying to score some young poon but the point is valid - a young man today simply needs to ripen on the vine and develop himself to greater degree today before he should be even considering entering into a committed, legally binding relationship. 

You and I grew up in a different world with a different set of rules and conditions. 

It probably wasn't the wisest thing that guys my age were marrying in their early-mid 20s back then and it's come back to bite many of them in the arse but a few have made it through fine. 

But to encourage a young man in his early 20s today to try to find a wife?????? No way Jose'!!!! That's suicide. 

I bumbled through and with some luck and some things I unintentionally did right, I came out OK. But today, young men are going to have to be a lot more purposeful and mindful if they don't want their lives to end up as a smoking hole in the ground.


----------



## oldshirt

AGoodFlogging said:


> We are talking about real life here so I'm afraid it is complicated.
> 
> You have picked two contrasting examples to prove your point. I and many men are neither of the two people you have described. This is a false dilemma. Women do not have to chose between only these two options. Life is much, much more complicated than that.
> 
> Like I said, making money and hitting the gym are not the only games in town.


Not the only games in town but being fit and looking good, being financially stable and solvent and having social and interpersonal skills and social status are what brings wife/mother-material women to the table. 

There are other nuances and factors that can play into two people clicking for good, But those are key factors that are going to get a guy positioned to where he has the greatest number of viable options to choose from.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> Many of the happiest marriages I know are ones where they married and had children very young. Still going strong 40-50 years later.


See my post #45. 

The couple you mentioned got together 40-50 years ago. 

Different game with different conditions and different social and economic factors today.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

oldshirt said:


> Not the only games in town but being fit and looking good, being financially stable and solvent and having social and interpersonal skills and social status are what brings wife/mother-material women to the table.
> 
> There are other nuances and factors that can play into two people clicking for good, But those are key factors that are going to get a guy positioned to where he has the greatest number of viable options to choose from.


There are a huge number of variables at play that you are dismissing here that have real importance such as shared values, intellect, talent, potential, etc. 

It's a very American/Anglo-Saxon and pretty old fashioned viewpoint that men need to be professionally accomplished and financially independent to be marriage material or have lots of options with decent women. Slightly reminiscent of some of the male characters from Jane Austen novels to be honest.

I met my wife in grad school (as you guys call it). I had plenty of options (attractive, intelligent, decent women) there even as a heavily indebted, not particularly in shape PhD student who guys like Richard Cooper and his ilk would openly sneer at. I met none of your criteria, but neither was I a college drop out who lived with my mom.


----------



## oldshirt

DownByTheRiver said:


> Well, it's depressing to me as a woman that it makes it sound like a man can just go out and earn 100K a year. Women can't do that. Very few men can do that. I think that part is totally bogus unless the man will only be happy with a trophy wife he has to purchase.


I am not necessarily disagreeing with you on this one. And like many here, I too kind of rolled my eyes and shook my head a bit when I first started hearing those numbers being spouted out. 

Is 100k really some kind of magic number or is it just something that is easy to throw out there that grabs people's attention?

Is a normal, decent woman really going to pick the 100k guy over the 95k guy without factoring in all the other traits and characteristics and assets??? probably not. 

Geographics and demographics play a large part of it too. 

Where I am from, there are some lawyers that don't make 100k and some doctors that don't make much more than that and some accountants and engineers that hope to make that soon. 

And there are places in Cali and New York and South Florida that 100k won't get you a comfortable apartment and a Toyota under 5 years old. 

And is a 29 year old guy really going to drop the ball if he doesn't wait until 30 and is interacting with 42 women over the course of your life good enough or does a guy really need to get out and meet up with 8 more before he can make a good decision??

None of these things should be looked at as absolutes or taken too literally. 

But the more I got to thinking about it, the more I do think the general concepts are valid in today's world.


----------



## oldshirt

AGoodFlogging said:


> There are a huge number of variables at play that you are dismissing here that have real importance such as shared values, intellect, talent, potential, etc.
> 
> It's a very American/Anglo-Saxon and pretty old fashioned viewpoint that men need to be professionally accomplished and financially independent to be marriage material or have lots of options with decent women. Slightly reminiscent of some of the male characters from Jane Austen novels to be honest.
> 
> I met my wife in grad school (as you guys call it). I had plenty of options (attractive, intelligent, decent women) there even as a heavily indebted, not particularly in shape PhD student who guys like Richard Cooper and his ilk would openly sneer at. I met none of your criteria, but neither was I a college drop out who lived with my mom.


As I said in the post immediately above, we can't take any of those numbers too literally or as absolutes. I didn't meet the numbers criteria either although I was 29 1/2 when I very first got with my wife. 

But while I wasn't making anywhere near 100k in actual dollars, this was over 25 years ago in midwest farm country and my income at that time and place was probably very close to if not the equivalent is today in more economically developed areas of the country. 

.......in other words, I was gainfully employed and financially responsible and no debt. 

Should any of this be taken as gospel and as absolute - Of course not. 

But is having some benchmarks and general concepts in place a best practice model? I think so. 

I don't know if 80k is a good enough number to shoot for or 92 or 98.6k is the ideal launch point - but I do know that the more financially secure and greater financial potential a man has, the more doors that will open for him. 

I don't know that a guy has to reach his 30th birthday or he will be mature and life-experienced enough at 28 years and 4 months, but I do know that no 22 year old should even consider it unless he is staring down down the barrel a hillbilly's shotgun. 

And guys that don't have actual 6 packs and rippling biceps have been getting pretty chicks for countless generations, but everything else being equal, a woman with options will always opt for the fitter and better looking option........ And I will even say that as women become more and more financially independent and even starting to surpass men in educational arenas that the role of male beauty and asthetics are going to be playing bigger and bigger roles going into the future. 

In my grandfathers day, as long as a guy wasn't the Elephant Man as long as he was somewhat sober and had an income, he was golden. 

In my 16 year old son's world, male looks and fitness is going to play a much more crucial role. 

I'm not great looking and was never considered "hot" but 25 years ago it didn't matter as much to women of my generation. In my daughter's cohort, it's going to play a big role in her selection.


----------



## heartsbeating

oldshirt said:


> However this guy took kind of an opposite approach and listed off a series of traits and characteristics and accomplishments that the man himself should achieve in himself before even considering looking for permanent partner or considering marriage.
> 
> His list of requirments before seeking marriage/mate was -
> -Be at least 30 years old.
> -Be in great physical shape and looking the best that you can.
> -Have a solid career and income of at least $100k/yr with no significant debt or financial liability.
> -Have been with at least 50 women in a variety of dating and sexual scenarios.
> 
> His rationale was that if a guy develops himself to those criteria that he will be very solidly attractive to a wide pool of women and will have the life experience and wisdom to select a mate that will be best for him.
> 
> And if he hasn't achieved those things or met those requirements of himself, then his selection pool will be much more limited and he will more likely than not have to settle and compromise and take whatever he can get.
> 
> At first I kind of rolled my eyes and said, "whatever" ,,, but the more I've gotten to thinking about it, the more I see the wisdom in it.
> 
> Should we be shifting more time and energy from teaching young men what to look for in a mate and hoping that they can pull it off, and instead be teaching them to develop themselves and become more attractive and desirable so that they are able to have a larger selection pool to choose from and that cream will rise to the top naturally so that they will be able to select that which will work best for them?
> 
> What are your thoughts?


The premise that I agree with (for either gender, really) is that one who develops themselves will have a more well-rounded experience of the world and know ones place in that world which then develops a more solid sense of priorities and relationships from there. My critique of the list, however, is the personal development and interpersonal skills required to get to that place (and which is never 'done' as it's a continued life journey, hopefully) are not mentioned anywhere in this 'should' list. And which has a tinge of irony given that someone who really knows themselves are unlikely to be looking at a quick check-list of shoulds in the first place.

So to pick it apart (yes, as a women in the Clubhouse):

- Age does not necessarily equate to maturity or emotional intelligence.

- Taking care of ones health could be the focus and this can help with mind-body well-being, which in turn can influence how we deal with life scenarios, yet what about specifically taking care of mental health and all that can entail?

- As mentioned in the thread, socio-cultural and socio-economic context is important. As for careers, we're also in an age of zero hour contracts and where transferable skills and adaptability are perhaps more valuable than in the past. So this can be misleading in terms of developing life skills. Also someone can have opportunity based on the backs of parents/connections that supports them to get there. I'm not knocking those scenarios as it doesn't necessarily mean the person hasn't learned things themselves, however, just because someone gets to a certain role or title or salary doesn't necessarily mean they have developed the interpersonal skills that are often beneficial; such as leadership, integrity and such. One negative observation of this playing out was an executive whereby that was his first role (started in his 20s and was earning a lot more than $100k). It was widely known this opportunity opened to him through family connections. When that aspect was added in with the fact that he was clueless about leadership and lacked interpersonal skills, he didn't receive the respect of his team - and not that that had any consequence for him. Of course there are other scenarios of family businesses and such that have instilled great qualities and learning through direct experience. So perhaps it depends on how 'success' is measured in this regard, and how a person develops or interacts with those opportunities.

- Whether one has dated and sexually experienced 1, 10, 50, or 150 people again would not equate to me that someone necessarily has developed solid and healthy interpersonal skills, or is necessarily a good lover.

What I think would be more interesting is how one navigated family of origin dynamics. How one has been involved in the community. How is resilience developed, dealing with conflict, learning to be less agreeable (if that applies), learning to lead oneself, developing integrity, being accountable and learning responsibility, involved with something greater than themselves (as in community / others which also helps to build these skills). It's through relationships with others that we learn about ourselves. Often that includes having positive role models and mentors (doesn't need to be family). And learning is more effective if we're willing to consider aspects of self in order to establish authenticity and congruence.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Whether the man being fit and good looking matters that much depends more on if he requires a great looking woman or someone within his own range.


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> I also grew up in a small farming community in the midwest where most of the jocks married the cheerleaders that they knocked up in high school and science nerds in the physics club latched on to the first female that gave them the time of day at college.


@oldshirt I think your comment about pretty much describes what I see as the core of the issue with how men select a partner. The hot cheerleader is always considered the standard for what a man should hope to attain. I argue that the physics nerd gals may have in fact made much better partners than the cheerleader. 

I am trying to raise my son to be wise when selecting his future mate. Look beyond the superficial.


----------



## Al_Bundy

I have to agree with the OP, if you are the best version of yourself and don't F up your life along the way you will have better options, in all areas of life. It's a good base to start from, he's not saying it's a sure-fire cure. He's talking about being a top 10% earner, it's not that hard as long as you don't shoot yourself in the foot when you're younger. Yeah it takes work but and you will have to go places and take jobs others may not want, so what.

Most guys get thrown off track easily or get bogged down with a wife and kids. What I mean by that is a single guy can take a job anywhere, move around the country or even the world to get that next promotion. He doesn't have to worry about little Billy's school friends or that his wife doesn't want to move somewhere cold, or whatever. 

Newsflash, six figures isn't what it used to be especially if you live in a major city.

And some of you need to remember you literally met your SO in a different century.


----------



## Lila

DownByTheRiver said:


> Whether the man being fit and good looking matters that much depends more on if he requires a great looking woman or someone within his own range.


THIS!!!!!

Every post from the OP boils down to "be the best man so you can marry a trophy wife". Instead it should be the best AUTHENTIC person you can be. Figure out your core values and find the best woman who shares those values. 

If your authentic self is a physical fit man who values money, then by all means work towards finding that beautiful woman who treasures your money.


----------



## heartsbeating

Lila said:


> THIS!!!!!
> 
> Every post from the OP boils down to "be the best man so you can marry a trophy wife". Instead it should be the best AUTHENTIC person you can be. Figure out your core values and find the best woman who shares those values.
> 
> If your authentic self is a physical fit man who values money, then by all means work towards finding that beautiful woman who treasures your money.


Amen.

It's not 'be the best man you can be to live a more fulfilling and congruent life' ...rather it comes across as 'you'll have your pick of women if you do these things'. Inadvertently the focus is actually still on women, rather than developing oneself simply for that purpose alone.


----------



## Andy1001

oldshirt said:


> As I said in the post immediately above, we can't take any of those numbers too literally or as absolutes. I didn't meet the numbers criteria either although I was 29 1/2 when I very first got with my wife.
> 
> But while I wasn't making anywhere near 100k in actual dollars, this was over 25 years ago in midwest farm country and my income at that time and place was probably very close to if not the equivalent is today in more economically developed areas of the country.
> 
> .......in other words, I was gainfully employed and financially responsible and no debt.
> 
> Should any of this be taken as gospel and as absolute - Of course not.
> 
> But is having some benchmarks and general concepts in place a best practice model? I think so.
> 
> I don't know if 80k is a good enough number to shoot for or 92 or 98.6k is the ideal launch point - but I do know that the more financially secure and greater financial potential a man has, the more doors that will open for him.
> 
> I don't know that a guy has to reach his 30th birthday or he will be mature and life-experienced enough at 28 years and 4 months, but I do know that no 22 year old should even consider it unless he is staring down down the barrel a hillbilly's shotgun.
> 
> And guys that don't have actual 6 packs and rippling biceps have been getting pretty chicks for countless generations, but everything else being equal, a woman with options will always opt for the fitter and better looking option........ And I will even say that as women become more and more financially independent and even starting to surpass men in educational arenas that the role of male beauty and asthetics are going to be playing bigger and bigger roles going into the future.
> 
> In my grandfathers day, as long as a guy wasn't the Elephant Man as long as he was somewhat sober and had an income, he was golden.
> 
> In my 16 year old son's world, male looks and fitness is going to play a much more crucial role.
> 
> I'm not great looking and was never considered "hot" but 25 years ago it didn't matter as much to women of my generation. In my daughter's cohort, it's going to play a big role in her selection.





Lila said:


> THIS!!!!!
> 
> Every post from the OP boils down to "be the best man so you can marry a trophy wife". Instead it should be the best AUTHENTIC person you can be. Figure out your core values and find the best woman who shares those values.
> 
> If your authentic self is a physical fit man who values money, then by all means work towards finding that beautiful woman who treasures your money.


My wife is the kindest most empathetic person I have ever met and I honestly believe she is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen.
Trophy wife? She’s the super bowl of wives.


----------



## heartsbeating

Andy1001 said:


> There is no one rule that applies to everyone.
> I have one brother who married his childhood sweetheart when they were both eighteen with the blessing of both sets of parents. They are now thirty five years married and my brother told me that he never even had a date with another girl much less slept with one.
> I never had a serious relationship until I was twenty seven, in fact both my parents told me not to marry before I was thirty at least. And they were right.


Agreed, no one rule applies.

Batman and I met at 18. Together 26 years now. We weren't looking to be in a relationship or to get serious, yet we dug each other and fell in love. We also had a pretty strong sense of what we were about ourselves at that age. That's not to say we haven't had bumps in the road, yet we have learned to navigate ourselves and with each other throughout those life experiences. He didn't have much in the way of role models growing up; left home at 16 and was renting a flat, working a job and attending high school. We have supported one another with different paths and aspirations. Traveled together, lived overseas, bought (and sold) property in our 20s which helped to set us up. Certain characteristics within him though, personal development, and seeking out mentors has facilitated his life journey - which from my perspective at least - has resilience at the core. And sure, he was earning over $100k by the time he was 30 and without formal education/degree, and without climbing the corporate ladder (as this is not something he's interested in). This is balanced and driven by his own motivations and priorities (and of which I'm a part of). I have focused on him, given this is the Clubhouse. He's also maintained we're a team effort in what we achieve.


----------



## Al_Bundy

If you want to build a business, climb the corporate ladder, be fit, etc.... you have to be congruent and authentic (can't leave out that buzzword). You have to be focused on who you are what you want because there a TON of distractions! There's also a lot of sacrificing the now for the future. And yes, it is nice to be able the kind of women you find physically attractive, what's wrong with that? 

It is interesting how this thread has gotten under some people's skin.


----------



## heartsbeating

Al_Bundy said:


> If you want to build a business, climb the corporate ladder, be fit, etc.... you have to be congruent and authentic (can't leave out that buzzword). You have to be focused on who you are what you want because there a TON of distractions! There's also a lot of sacrificing the now for the future. And yes, it is nice to be able the kind of women you find physically attractive, what's wrong with that?
> 
> It is interesting how this thread has gotten under some people's skin.


It's a shame that being 'authentic' has become a buzzword. How else can that be described though?

Personally, I can't say this thread has gotten under my skin. I just felt the criteria was simplistic and decided to jump in.


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> OK but we need to keep in mind that this was a panel discussion about young men TODAY and this is in the men's section here about what can give men the best chances of being able to choose what works best for them.
> 
> We can have a similar discussion in the women's section about women.
> 
> But as far as your situation who knows. Who knows how things would have turned out if things had been different. We are talking about 39 years ago after all. It was a different world with a different set of cultural values and mores back then.
> 
> In today's world with Instagram and Tinder and other social media platforms and the way the economy is today, many of those old world practices and standards and mores, simply aren't as applicable.
> 
> 39 years ago, it was very common in my area for people to marry their high school or at least college sweethearts. It was common, it was expected, it was accepted and it was supported by society as a whole. There really wasn't anything shocking about a young man marrying his high school sweetheart and his only real competition was other young men from his community who may have been a little better looking or a little more athletic or came from a family that could hook him up with a job that paid $1/hr more (minimum wage was $2.25 when I graduated high school so $1/hr was a big difference)
> 
> Today, an 18 year old girl with firm abz can post a bikini picture and she will have men from literally other countries making her offers. Now a lot of them may be all talk but my point is, the 18 year old boy that grew up down the street is no longer competing against the boy on the next street over or even the college boy that graduated a year or two earlier that comes back to town every few weekends. He is now competing against grown men with 6 and 7 or even 8-figure incomes that will offer to fly her to South Beach or the Bahamas to spend a week on their yacht. With her inbox being flooded with stuff like that, she ain't got time to even learn the nice boy down the street's name let alone actually interact with him in any kind of meaningful manner.
> 
> A lot of it is smoke and mirrors by disgusting old men trying to score some young poon but the point is valid - a young man today simply needs to ripen on the vine and develop himself to greater degree today before he should be even considering entering into a committed, legally binding relationship.
> 
> You and I grew up in a different world with a different set of rules and conditions.
> 
> It probably wasn't the wisest thing that guys my age were marrying in their early-mid 20s back then and it's come back to bite many of them in the arse but a few have made it through fine.
> 
> But to encourage a young man in his early 20s today to try to find a wife?????? No way Jose'!!!! That's suicide.
> 
> I bumbled through and with some luck and some things I unintentionally did right, I came out OK. But today, young men are going to have to be a lot more purposeful and mindful if they don't want their lives to end up as a smoking hole in the ground.


I have nieces and nephews marrying in their mid 20's and these are very well educated young people with good jobs.


----------



## Livvie

oldshirt said:


> That question embraces the mentality of scarcity and buys into the notion that there are only a few eligible women in the world and that if you can't hook one the moment you get a nibble that you will die alone being eaten by your cats.
> 
> It embraces the mentality that there is only "one." This ain't Highlander. There are others out there. Several billion in fact.
> 
> The point being here is that you do not have to hook the first pretty girl that makes your junk hard enough to crack walnuts if you are able to develop yourself to where decent women will innately want to be with you and you are in a position to choose from a pool of eligible candidates.
> 
> A guy that meets those benchmarks does not have to snatch up first pretty girl that smells nice. He can lay his foundation on his life and then when he is ready for marriage/home/family, he will have a pool of eligible choices.


I think it's funny you referenced Highlander.

I love that show!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Torninhalf

I think the premise is nothing new. The sexy, well off, worldly man gets more women thus giving him a larger selection to choose a mate from.


----------



## heartsbeating

Al_Bundy said:


> If you want to build a business, climb the corporate ladder, be fit, etc.... you have to be congruent and authentic (can't leave out that buzzword). You have to be focused on who you are what you want because there a TON of distractions! There's also a lot of sacrificing the now for the future. And yes, it is nice to be able the kind of women you find physically attractive, what's wrong with that?
> 
> It is interesting how this thread has gotten under some people's skin.


Actually I think the corporate ladder can be climbed without congruence and authenticity.


----------



## Lila

Andy1001 said:


> My wife is the kindest most empathetic person I have ever met and I honestly believe she is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen.
> Trophy wife? She’s the super bowl of wives.


@Andy1001 I think the world of you and truly believe you made a love match with a wonderful woman who shares your values. I think you two would have been a match with or without your 100k+ salary. What I'm going to say next is not my personal belief. It is what most of these be physically fit and rich articles are targeting. Your wife was a single mother of a young child when you met. That would probably remove her from serious marriage contention for "quality woman" if the author of the article had any say. That's why I say stay authentic and choose your values.


----------



## Al_Bundy

heartsbeating said:


> It's a shame that being 'authentic' has become a buzzword. How else can that be described though?
> 
> Personally, I can't say this thread has gotten under my skin. I just felt the criteria was simplistic and decided to jump in.


Marketers ruin everything, especially buzzwords.

Tom Leykis often told guys to hold off on serious relationships till at least 25, preferably 30 and chase their dream, whatever that was and become the best they could in their chosen field. He didn't put an income number on it because the idea was if you at the top of your field you'll do fine financially.

In ancient times young boys would hang these things on their bedroom walls called "posters". These posters would usually be one of three things, their favorite band, cars and women. I don't have any posters on my walls now, but I still like all three.


----------



## ConanHub

I like "authentic".


----------



## DudeInProgress

AGoodFlogging said:


> I think this search for a magic recipe is very attractive but there is no one-size fits all solution here. It is tempting to be reductive here, but that means you may end up trying to be something you simply aren't. There is a lot to be said for being comfortable and confident in your own skin. So I would generally agree that settling down too early is probably a bad idea but I would argue that setting goals and objectives that have genuine value to you are going to be better around than chasing the big payday and the six-pack because that is what people tell you is important.


These are all key areas of being an effective man who is generally attractive to women, and is most likely situated to gain and keep her respect. You can argue over the numbers/levels as that can vary a bit from person to person, scenario to scenario - but this is directionally correct.


----------



## heartsbeating

oldshirt said:


> But how much better could they have done and how much better options would they have had if they were fit and had bank?


This is an assumption of what 'better' means.


----------



## Andy1001

heartsbeating said:


> Actually I think the corporate ladder can be climbed without congruence and authenticity.


It’s far harder to climb the corporate ladder WITH congruence and authenticity than without. If you don’t care about anyone else then you’re halfway there.


----------



## heartsbeating

Andy1001 said:


> It’s far harder to climb the corporate ladder WITH congruence and authenticity than without. If you don’t care about anyone else then you’re halfway there.


Exactly what I was thinking - just didn't articulate it as well as you have


----------



## heartsbeating

Andy1001 said:


> It’s far harder to climb the corporate ladder WITH congruence and authenticity than without. If you don’t care about anyone else then you’re halfway there.


And then for some there can be those moments where identity crisis hits because of this, and mental break-downs occur.


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> @Andy1001 I think the world of you and truly believe you made a love match with a wonderful woman who shares your values. I think you two would have been a match with or without your 100k+ salary. What I'm going to say next is not my personal belief. It is what most of these be physically fit and rich articles are targeting. Your wife was a single mother of a young child when you met. That would probably remove her from serious marriage contention for "quality woman" if the author of the article had any say. That's why I say stay authentic and choose your values.


It's good to have options and opportunities and this is about men positioning themselves to have the best possible options. 

There's nothing inherently wrong with a man marrying a single mother. But all other things being equal (which they never are) 99.999% of guys that have the option will choose the one that does not have other men's kids.


----------



## Andy1001

heartsbeating said:


> And then for some there can be those moments where identity crisis hits because of this, and mental break-downs occur.


It’s like when someone sees a billionaire supporting some charitable cause or other and people say “why doesn’t he just give a few million and pay for whatever”.
If he was the type of person who would do that he probably wouldn’t have made billions anyway.


----------



## heartsbeating

Andy1001 said:


> It’s like when someone sees a billionaire supporting some charitable cause or other and people say “why doesn’t he just give a few million and pay for whatever”.
> If he was the type of person who would do that he probably wouldn’t have made billions anyway.


hahah... agreed.


----------



## oldshirt

heartsbeating said:


> This is an assumption of what 'better' means.


not really. It is still in the eye of the beholder. 

Whatever an individual man's idea of 'better' is, the more options and opportunities he has, the better his chances of obtaining that which he wants, regardless of what anyone else's idea of 'better' is.


----------



## oldshirt

heartsbeating said:


> Actually I think the corporate ladder can be climbed without congruence and authenticity.


It's probably best climbed without congruence or authenticity, but that is a whole other topic.


----------



## heartsbeating

oldshirt said:


> not really. It is still in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> Whatever an individual man's idea of 'better' is, the more options and opportunities he has, the better his chances of obtaining that which he wants, regardless of what anyone else's idea of 'better' is.


Okay, I read this three times (to be thorough) and was going to debate this to come full circle and yeah, I get what you mean.


----------



## oldshirt

DownByTheRiver said:


> Whether the man being fit and good looking matters that much depends more on if he requires a great looking woman or someone within his own range.


Most men are going to want someone that is good looking (to them)

And good looking women are in much higher demand and have much more competition for them so assuming a man wants a good looking woman, he will need whatever competitive edge he can.


----------



## oldshirt

heartsbeating said:


> Okay, I read this three times (to be thorough) and was going to debate this to come full circle and yeah, I get what you mean.


I'm glad you got it because I'm not sure if I can word it any better LOL


----------



## heartsbeating

oldshirt said:


> I'm glad you got it because I'm not sure if I can word it any better LOL


 all good... you sure know how to kick off a topic for consideration!


----------



## Andy1001

oldshirt said:


> It's good to have options and opportunities and this is about men positioning themselves to have the best possible options.
> 
> There's nothing inherently wrong with a man marrying a single mother. But all other things being equal (which they never are) 99.999% of guys that have the option will choose the one that does not have other men's kids.





Lila said:


> @Andy1001 I think the world of you and truly believe you made a love match with a wonderful woman who shares your values. I think you two would have been a match with or without your 100k+ salary. What I'm going to say next is not my personal belief. It is what most of these be physically fit and rich articles are targeting. Your wife was a single mother of a young child when you met. That would probably remove her from serious marriage contention for "quality woman" if the author of the article had any say. That's why I say stay authentic and choose your values.


Thank you, I think the world of you as well. You always come across as a kind, genuine person.
An interesting point though, when we met my now wife was earning a hundred grand a year. 
Money never really was an issue in our relationship until my mil found out how much I was making.


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> THIS!!!!!
> 
> Every post from the OP boils down to "be the best man so you can marry a trophy wife". Instead it should be the best AUTHENTIC person you can be. Figure out your core values and find the best woman who shares those values.
> 
> If your authentic self is a physical fit man who values money, then by all means work towards finding that beautiful woman who treasures your money.


Each man will have his own idea of what a good match for him is and his own selection criteria. One man's trophy is another man's nightmare and vice versa. Just like not all women like the same men. 

What this is getting at is what will optimise his options and opportunities and give him the best chance of being able to select the best match for him.


----------



## RandomDude

In my case to have prevented the divorce on my first marriage it wasn't finances or sleeping partners or whatever shallow 'achievement' I could have managed prior to marriage that I would say was important to me.

Yes, a man should some basic financial standards for himself as any adult; independent and stable income without baggage. Even without a property a couple can lay a foundation together as long as both are able to carry their weight and willing to work towards a future.

Emotional maturity however, that's something I didn't have at all until I met my now soon to be fiancee. I still don't have it fully lol. That's the most important to have prior to a committed relationship in my opinion.


----------



## ConanHub

I didn't know what I wanted until I saw her and she kissed me so hard I could taste her ovaries.💋


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> Each man will have his own idea of what a good match for him is and his own selection criteria. One man's trophy is another man's nightmare and vice versa. Just like not all women like the same men.
> 
> What this is getting at is what will optimise his options and opportunities and give him the best chance of being able to select the best match for him.


For many the best woman for them and the one they married was the first or one of the first they met and dated. Some don't need to work through countless women to know that.


----------



## jlg07

oldshirt said:


> His list of requirments before seeking marriage/mate was -
> -Be at least 30 years old.
> -Be in great physical shape and looking the best that you can.
> -Have a solid career and income of at least $100k/yr with no significant debt or financial liability.
> -Have been with at least 50 women in a variety of dating and sexual scenarios.


I would have failed 3 out of 4 of those and I've been married for almost 33 years, so YEAH I don't agree with that.
A man should be confident enough in himself, and mature enough, to handle what life will throw at him and those 4 criteria do NOT mean that at all.


----------



## jlg07

oldshirt said:


> Today, an 18 year old girl with firm abz can post a bikini picture and she will have men from literally other countries making her offers. Now a lot of them may be all talk but my point is, the 18 year old boy that grew up down the street is no longer competing against the boy on the next street over or even the college boy that graduated a year or two earlier that comes back to town every few weekends. He is now competing against grown men with 6 and 7 or even 8-figure incomes that will offer to fly her to South Beach or the Bahamas to spend a week on their yacht. With her inbox being flooded with stuff like that, she ain't got time to even learn the nice boy down the street's name let alone actually interact with him in any kind of meaningful manner.


So, there may be lots of competition for a girl who does that, but there are many men who have NO DESIRE to be with a woman who does that sort of media exposure -- LOTS of red flags with that.


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> Each man will have his own idea of what a good match for him is and his own selection criteria. One man's trophy is another man's nightmare and vice versa. Just like not all women like the same men.
> 
> What this is getting at is what will optimise his options and opportunities and give him the best chance of being able to select the best match for him.


We'll have to agree to disagree. Physical fitness and money may optimize the chances of attracting better looking women who value fit bodies and money above all else. I'm not saying that's wrong but realize when men/women place value in superficial qualities, you attract superficial people. There better be something else keeping those people attracted to each other if they hope to make it the long haul. 

It could be that I was raised in S. Florida, the capital of tren sculpted male bodies and cosmetically modified beautiful female forms. Legally or illegally, many young men make 100 k a year. For all of it's beautiful people and high earning men,fidelity is a foreign concept. Compassion, compromise, humility, emotional intelligence, and so many of the other qualities that make people good long term partners are is short supply. It's a dating cesspool. A product of it's own making. But man are the people down there beautiful!


----------



## aine

oldshirt said:


> This is kind of spinning off from a post I made on another thread but wanted to have some more input and your thoughts on this topic.
> 
> I saw an interesting panel discussion on youtube awhile back where a group of men were discussing the relationship, sex, dating, marriage environment in current times and one of the panelists brought up something that I thought was interesting but the more I got to thinking about it, the more I thought it deserved some discussion here.
> 
> His premise was that people often advise others on what traits and characteristics to look for in a potential partner/spouse and when they find someone that checks off those boxes to go for that person. That seems kind of typical and how many of us were brought up and even here on these forums people often say to come up with a list of critical criteria you must have as well as have deal breakers and boundaries etc etc and "Don't settle!."
> 
> I think women are often hammered with that more than men, but men certainly get that message as well. (and they probably should)
> 
> However this guy took kind of an opposite approach and listed off a series of traits and characteristics and accomplishments that the man himself should achieve in himself before even considering looking for permanent partner or considering marriage.
> 
> His list of requirments before seeking marriage/mate was -
> -Be at least 30 years old.
> -Be in great physical shape and looking the best that you can.
> -Have a solid career and income of at least $100k/yr with no significant debt or financial liability.
> -Have been with at least 50 women in a variety of dating and sexual scenarios.
> 
> His rationale was that if a guy develops himself to those criteria that he will be very solidly attractive to a wide pool of women and will have the life experience and wisdom to select a mate that will be best for him.
> 
> And if he hasn't achieved those things or met those requirements of himself, then his selection pool will be much more limited and he will more likely than not have to settle and compromise and take whatever he can get.
> 
> At first I kind of rolled my eyes and said, "whatever" ,,, but the more I've gotten to thinking about it, the more I see the wisdom in it.
> 
> Should we be shifting more time and energy from teaching young men what to look for in a mate and hoping that they can pull it off, and instead be teaching them to develop themselves and become more attractive and desirable so that they are able to have a larger selection pool to choose from and that cream will rise to the top naturally so that they will be able to select that which will work best for them?
> 
> What are your thoughts?



Ok, I know this is the Men's room but I hope you don't mind a few female perspectives here.

I agree that a man (or woman) should have some grounding before getting into a long term relationship.

What is wrong with the list above is that it is incomplete and very much focused on the external (money, looks, carreer, etc). That might make a man more attractive to more woman but it does not 
make him a better man by any means. Men (and women) go into marriages with all the baggage they have from the FOO. I married such a man and it has been the main source of our problems.
He didn't really have anything on the list above, but I could see his potential, outwardly he is very successful but his inner life is something else.
I loved him and that was enough for me and I would consider myself the cream.
I would far rather a man (I tell my daugher this too) who has his **** together, who knows who he is, is grounded, solid and does not need to look for external validation all the time, a man comfortable in his own skin.

your list does not guarantee that. All the money, looks, qualifications, etc in the world never can make up for a poor or ****ty character or one weighed down by baggage.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree. Physical fitness and money may optimize the chances of attracting better looking women who value fit bodies and money above all else. I'm not saying that's wrong but realize when men/women place value in superficial qualities, you attract superficial people. There better be something else keeping those people attracted to each other if they hope to make it the long haul.
> 
> It could be that I was raised in S. Florida, the capital of tren sculpted male bodies and cosmetically modified beautiful female forms. Legally or illegally, many young men make 100 k a year. For all of it's beautiful people and high earning men,fidelity is a foreign concept. Compassion, compromise, humility, emotional intelligence, and so many of the other qualities that make people good long term partners are is short supply. It's a dating cesspool. A product of it's own making. But man are the people down there beautiful!


I got a weird vibe off the folks down there when we visited my SIL for Thanksgiving a couple years ago. 100,000 doesn't go so far in Del Ray either.

It was kinda fun walking down to a very fancy breakfast at our hotel in my superman shirt and cowboy hat.🤠


----------



## Laurentium

oldshirt said:


> A guy that meets those benchmarks does not have to snatch up first pretty girl that smells nice. He can lay his foundation on his life and then when he is ready for marriage/home/family, he will have a pool of eligible choices.





oldshirt said:


> If a guy has his first date to the soda shop at sixteen and continues to meet and talk to girls and interact with them on an interpersonal level and goes on dates and hits it off with some of them sexually (depending on his and their own values and mores and beliefs etc) 50 girls can average out to about 3.5 girls per year that he has done anything from met for coffee to casual dating to a drunken hook up at a frat party to FWB etc etc.


I think you make a strong case. I can't really disagree with the age 30 part. I got married at 22, and I am sure I chose a very suitable woman; it lasted until she died, and we were married for nearly 30 years, but this was over 40 years ago (I got married in the 1970s). I asked "can he stop if he meets the right one" and I understand your answer as "until he's met 50, he's not equipped to know which one is the right one" (like DBTR said about houses). 

And your arithmetic on "it could be just 3.5 girls a year, some of which are only coffee" surprised me. Although maybe some of them need to be rather longer term, eg exclusive dating for a year, otherwise he has no experience of that.


----------



## Harold Demure

I do agree that my wife and I were lucky enough to have met when we did and we have both said we wouldn’t want to be out there again as the world has changed so much. 

I do see a lot of people who are attracted by different things that attract me. Personally, I am attracted by the personality, looks and attitudes to life. Career, physical fitness, financial stability will, of course, be nice add ons but these are secondary and I would not go for someone who prioritised those as these values would probably not lend themselves to a sustainable relationship.

Does this approach apply to a new dating world where people have a larger pool due to internet dating etc? I would like to think so but am probably being incredibly naive here. As I read my posts, however, I feel quite old fashioned.

One thing I would is that add is that I do think women can “have it all” if they want. My wife returned to work after the kids were about 3 and 4. She enjoyed living a grown up life again. It made me look at my role and I realised I had to adapt, support her in her work, made sure I fully engaged when she introduced me to her new colleagues, and made sure her married life was just as exciting as her new work life. I was always actively involved in childcare but this increased again when she went back to work and I feel grateful for just how much I was in their lives at that time.


----------



## Diana7

aine said:


> Ok, I know this is the Men's room but I hope you don't mind a few female perspectives here.
> 
> I agree that a man (or woman) should have some grounding before getting into a long term relationship.
> 
> What is wrong with the list above is that it is incomplete and very much focused on the external (money, looks, carreer, etc). That might make a man more attractive to more woman but it does not
> make him a better man by any means. Men (and women) go into marriages with all the baggage they have from the FOO. I married such a man and it has been the main source of our problems.
> He didn't really have anything on the list above, but I could see his potential, outwardly he is very successful but his inner life is something else.
> I loved him and that was enough for me and I would consider myself the cream.
> I would far rather a man (I tell my daugher this too) who has his **** together, who knows who he is, is grounded, solid and does not need to look for external validation all the time, a man comfortable in his own skin.
> 
> your list does not guarantee that. All the money, looks, qualifications, etc in the world never can make up for a poor or ****ty character or one weighed down by baggage.


Spot on. There are far more important things than those listed.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

DudeInProgress said:


> These are all key areas of being an effective man who is generally attractive to women, and is most likely situated to gain and keep her respect. You can argue over the numbers/levels as that can vary a bit from person to person, scenario to scenario - but this is directionally correct.


It is all very dull and utilitarian ("effective man" - we are not tools) and actually misses the point I was making. If we actually look at the choices made by heterosexual women in terms of their partners it is demonstrably the case that there is far more going on here than bank and looks.

My point is that it is better to be authentic and focus on maximising your talents than desperately trying to fit into a mold that you weren't made for. Some guys like and want to be £100k a year gym bros, but it would make many others miserable chasing this.

Most of the guys I know who are very obsessed with money, looks, etc. are either on second or third marriages or in the middle of a mid-life crisis with a sports car and an airhead girlfriend who gets confused for their daughter. For some guys I guess that is living the dream. For me, it sounds like a nightmare. I guess I'm not an "effective man".


----------



## MJJEAN

oldshirt said:


> However this guy took kind of an opposite approach and listed off a series of traits and characteristics and accomplishments that the man himself should achieve in himself before even considering looking for permanent partner or considering marriage.
> 
> His list of requirments before seeking marriage/mate was -
> -Be at least 30 years old.
> -Be in great physical shape and looking the best that you can.
> -Have a solid career and income of at least $100k/yr with no significant debt or financial liability.
> -Have been with at least 50 women in a variety of dating and sexual scenarios.



By 30 the dating pool has already shrunk. IIRC, people here marry at about age 27.
Being in shape is nice, but a lot of gals actually prefer a "dad bod"
I lol'd. Combined household income in my state is $53k a year. If guys had to wait until they made $100k the vast majority would never marry.
If we're talking everything from casual chit-chat at a coffee shop to ONS to a months/years long relationship, I agree. If we're just talking sexual partners the average is 9, so 50 would be a bit...umm...ambitious.



Tasorundo said:


> If there is nothing to lose in all of these early relationships, then you will risk nothing, and learn little.


Not true. When I was young and on the prowl I learned that some things I thought I wanted I, in fact, did not.



AGoodFlogging said:


> It's a very American/Anglo-Saxon and pretty old fashioned viewpoint that men need to be professionally accomplished and financially independent to be marriage material or have lots of options with decent women. Slightly reminiscent of some of the male characters from Jane Austen novels to be honest.


My daughters are in their 20's. They have a list of bare minimum criteria to accept a date from a man.

Gainfully employed full time in work that does NOT involve fries.
Legal drivers license with a car and valid insurance
Does not live with parents/grandparents.


----------



## Diana7

Al_Bundy said:


> If you want to build a business, climb the corporate ladder, be fit, etc.... you have to be congruent and authentic (can't leave out that buzzword). You have to be focused on who you are what you want because there a TON of distractions! There's also a lot of sacrificing the now for the future. And yes, it is nice to be able the kind of women you find physically attractive, what's wrong with that?
> 
> It is interesting how this thread has gotten under some people's skin.


I think that some of us value very different things than the superficial.


----------



## NTA

oldshirt said:


> Point being - When a man achieves a certain level of physical fitness, financial success, social status and social and interpersonal skills, he does not need to pursue women.
> 
> They will come to him.


But he will still prefer pursuing them.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> I got a weird vibe off the folks down there when we visited my SIL for Thanksgiving a couple years ago. 100,000 doesn't go so far in Del Ray either.
> 
> It was kinda fun walking down to a very fancy breakfast at our hotel in my superman shirt and cowboy hat.🤠


That vibe is your sixth sense telling you that this place is topsy turvy world where value is placed on the wrong qualities. It's like Alice when she went through the looking glass. 

As to the cost of living, you can live a comfortable life here if you don't fall into the shallow mindset. But entertainment is very expensive. 

I'm visiting family in S. Florida right now. I spent $460 last night on a mediocre meal for 4 that included:

Bottled water,
a double bourbon, 
a coke, 
crab cake appetizer (2 tiny crab cakes), 
3 stone crab claws, 
3 very small salads (one with shrimp), 
a lamb shank (no side), 
an 8 oz filet, brussel sprouts side, 
a creme brulee, 
and a double espresso

Yep, 100k doesn't go very far here. That's why beautiful women look for millionaires instead. It's a never ending rat race.


----------



## Laurentium

AGoodFlogging said:


> If we actually look at the choices made by heterosexual women in terms of their partners it is demonstrably the case that there is far more going on here than bank and looks.


My understanding of the original point of "100k, talk to 50 women, be in shape" is not so much "...so that women will be attracted" as "...so that you will have a sense of who you are and what you can do". I don't think men should worry too much about "what women look for". Women vary a lot.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

This whole list can be simplified.

For a man to be ready to possibly marry and move to that next phase in life, or be prepared to move to that phase, with best odds of success and happiness, stability, as follows.

Bear in mind I'm purposefully keeping simple. 

Where I'm stating having reach these benchmarks I'm not saying or dictating the method each may use to reach these benchmarks. 

Bearing in mind reaching these benchmarks provides a Man with the best possible tools in place to be most attractive to a larger pool of women, that's the as equal objective and perk as a man prepares for a manly confident relationship showing himself with a full tackle box to provide best odds of success and happiness if meet mrs right.

1. Have college behind you, or the training, life experience, etc to know you can have a career that you're steady in and can grow in that career or way of life that provides steady money, insurance, bank account, healthcare. Ie things you don't have to figure out how to get AFTER you meet someone. You cannot put the cart before the horse here.

2. Have your own apartment or house for at least a year, with car payments, utilities, laundry service, total independence here. With this not taking your all your monies, keep savings going.

3. Be and act independently. Be in charge of your schedule and what's important to you. Know thyself somewhat.

4. Know how the budget and finance games in trw work.

5. Have savings sufficient that you can withstand any temp setbacks.

6. Know your hobbies. They better not include gaming on line for hours at a time but involve real people and interactions with real people. 

7. Be comfortable being picky about who you let into your independent life. Be comfortable saying no to some folks who will be a drain.

8. Know to never get into a relationship and make financial choices tha create an environment that requires the finances of both just to live day to day. THAT'S THE BEGINNING OF CREATING A CO DEPENDENT RELATIONSHIP. DO NOT DO THIS.

9. Be emotionally competent in being able to stop seeing any women at any time. Never let a relationship jeopardize your independence. THIS ONLY KEEPS YOU IN A STATE WHERE MORE QUALITY WOMEN ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU.

10. Date a lot. A lot. That bears repeating. Never let a woman dictate your desired schedule of activities or limit your activities. 

This creates a positive environment where if you happen to meet a mrs right, you can approach it with true affection and no pressures will be involved in making a choice to keep her.

Always be respectful and honest when meeting women. You're independent, you don't have to keep seeing anyone you don't want to.

This allows you to make the best choice, from a good frame of mind, to form longer lasting relationships that may lead somewhere. 

Can't lose you'll be happily single until you choose to not be.


----------



## CatholicDad

I was 24 when I got married and still in college and completely poor despite that I started working when I was 15 and never stopped. Going to college completely exhausted my savings. I did have a cool, classic car- my only valuable possession. I had a knack for making good money though in the service industry- and recall many nights working and bringing home hundreds of dollars in tips/cash. I knew how to work hard and use my smile and charm and turn it into a buck.

My experience with women before meeting my wife was terrible. I was sooooo freaked out by sex that despite my numerous attempts of establishing sexual relationships with women- they always somehow ended in disappointment and embarrassment. I tried to emulate my wild, college buddies and I was successful at picking up college girls at parties or bars however when I sobered up the next day- I was often too embarrassed to see or call them again. I wasn't Catholic at the time so this wasn't a moral issue but more of a shyness/pride problem- or perhaps that I was emotionally immature. I think the point is- these awkward sexual relationships didn't make me more mature. I think I was trying to build relationships with women the wrong way- sex first, relationship second. It never worked for this emotionally awkward weirdo. My first and only truly satisfying sexual relationship was with my wife. 

In sum:

mostly unsuccessful at dating women
poor and still in college
age 24 when married

Together over 30 years now with over 5 times the number of children as the typical American family. Frankly, I'd credit the good, old Catholic Church for my blessings/luck/success. Pretty much every time I've gotten off track in life- the church (either through good priests or good friends) to reel me back. Our sex life is truly better than ever. Perimenopause has been one of the greatest gifts ever since we've never used any artificial means of birth control during marriage. We're at the point of life that we can now share as much sex as we want- so long as we can get kids out of our hair for a bit.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

MJJEAN said:


> My daughters are in their 20's. They have a list of bare minimum criteria to accept a date from a man.
> 
> Gainfully employed full time in work that does NOT involve fries.
> Legal drivers license with a car and valid insurance
> Does not live with parents/grandparents.


I spent most of my 20's being a full-time student, apart from the odd bits of work and travel in between degrees and during the summer of my undergraduate degree. Didn't stop me getting plenty of dates with great women, why? Because they were in a similar situation to me. If your daughters are all working full-time, living independently and no longer studying it is no surprise they want to date guys in a similar situation, that doesn't mean that all decent 20 year old women have the same requirements.


----------



## DudeInProgress

AGoodFlogging said:


> It is all very dull and utilitarian ("effective man" - we are not tools) and actually misses the point I was making. If we actually look at the choices made by heterosexual women in terms of their partners it is demonstrably the case that there is far more going on here than bank and looks.
> 
> My point is that it is better to be authentic and focus on maximising your talents than desperately trying to fit into a mold that you weren't made for. Some guys like and want to be £100k a year gym bros, but it would make many others miserable chasing this.
> 
> Most of the guys I know who are very obsessed with money, looks, etc. are either on second or third marriages or in the middle of a mid-life crisis with a sports car and an airhead girlfriend who gets confused for their daughter. For some guys I guess that is living the dream. For me, it sounds like a nightmare. I guess I'm not an "effective man".


I agree that authenticity is extremely important. You need to have your own life plan and your own purpose and be authentic. 
That being said, you could be an authentic loser and that won’t get you very far. You could be authentically weak or lazy or obnoxious or undisciplined etc, see where that gets you. So if it’s inauthentic for you to have at least a base level of physical fitness and some financial stability, then, yeah...

You seem really hung up on the money and looks/fitness part. The point here isn’t to fit an exact mold, it’s to be the best possible version of yourself as a man. The dimensions listed are important to most people and the ability to achieve (or progress towards) the items/benchmarks listed also build confidence., which is an extremely important quality.

You don’t need to be a “gym bro” but if you’re obese and out of shape or super scrawny, most women won’t be attracted to you. And that’s not superficial, it’s just human sexual nature. Most men and women want an attractive, fit spouse - and that’s ok. So men would be wise to set themselves up for success by being as physically fit as possible. 

As for the $100k, it’s an arbitrary number. Maybe it’s $70k for you but the point is it’s not $20k and it’s not working part-time at the Megalomart. It is ideal to have some measure of career/financial success/stability, to have more/better options and be better prepared for the responsibilities of marriage/family.


----------



## MJJEAN

AGoodFlogging said:


> I spent most of my 20's being a full-time student, apart from the odd bits of work and travel in between degrees and during the summer of my undergraduate degree. Didn't stop me getting plenty of dates with great women, why? Because they were in a similar situation to me. If your daughters are all working full-time, living independently and no longer studying it is no surprise they want to date guys in a similar situation, that doesn't mean that all decent 20 year old women have the same requirements.


It was more about the idea that requiring a fellow to have met some financial and independent living goals to be old fashioned. Between my girls and my friends daughters, former co-workers kids, family, etc. it's a concept that is alive and well in the current era. Mostly because they've seen enough women with a man-child that they now require some proof of maturity and ability to function as an adult.

And that's really what that list is about. It's about men growing and developing into someone women want to date and will take seriously as life partner candidate. 

Using your example of student. One of DH's friends was a student throughout most of his 20's. IIRC, he was somewhere around 26 or 28 when he got his PhD. I would totally have considered him ready for marriage before then and definitely by then. He worked, was a TA, did internships, got grants and scholarships, lived frugally by himself or with roommates, and graduated with savings. He showed himself to be a steady, dependable, reliable, mature man thinking of his future from his very early 20's.


----------



## Lila

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> 9. Be emotionally competent in being able to stop seeing any women at any time. Never let a relationship jeopardize your independence. THIS ONLY KEEPS YOU IN A STATE WHERE MORE QUALITY WOMEN ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU.
> 
> 10. Date a lot. A lot. That bears repeating. Never let a woman dictate your desired schedule of activities or limit your activities.
> 
> This creates a positive environment where if you happen to meet a mrs right, you can approach it with true affection and no pressures will be involved in making a choice to keep her.
> 
> Always be respectful and honest when meeting women. You're independent, you don't have to keep seeing anyone you don't want to.



I could sort of agree with 1-8 but don't understand #9 and beyond. By definition, when you enter into a committed long term relationship you are giving up your independence. If a man or woman wants to have a successful long term relationship, then the word "compromise" has to be part of their vocabulary. It's selfish behavior that ruins most relationships because the "me" becomes more important than the "we". Any man or woman worth their salt would be wise to walk away from someone with that kind of attitude. It's called commitment for a reason. Life throws us all curve balls and it's the ones who value their relationship over their independence that make it the long haul.

I'll also add that insisting on ones independence over everything else is guaranteed to keep people single forever. 
Men and women need to make room for a partner if they wish to be partnered. The people who can't are labeled "emotionally unavailable".


----------



## ConanHub

I'm in agreement with previous posters that think the OP's list will offer a greater selection among a "certain kind" of women.

There will definitely be a good number of women who wouldn't mind giving the well off and fit guy a serious try (I'm not even going to acknowledge the 50 sex partner criteria) but the guy in question will mostly be pulling from a certain pool.

OLD has definitely thrown a weird curve ball in the mix and the @oldshirt is right about that but it remains to be seen how much of an impact it will have in the coming generations.

Knowing people through school and friends still works pretty good.

My youngest met his lady because she was friends with his ex.

His previous two girlfriends were met in person and had nothing to do with OLD.


----------



## Al_Bundy

Andy1001 said:


> It’s like when someone sees a billionaire supporting some charitable cause or other and people say “why doesn’t he just give a few million and pay for whatever”.
> If he was the type of person who would do that he probably wouldn’t have made billions anyway.


Funny how a guy who supports a charitable cause gets told how he should have spent his money. People love to point and sputter. It's like the corporate ladder thing, plenty of "unauthentic" don't climb the corporate ladder but it's easy to point. It's easy to forget that person probably has lived in several different states in the last few years. I also said someone could start their own business too, but you know, that's work.


----------



## Al_Bundy

Lila said:


> I could sort of agree with 1-8 but don't understand #9 and beyond. By definition, when you enter into a committed long term relationship you are giving up your independence. If a man or woman wants to have a successful long term relationship, then the word "compromise" has to be part of their vocabulary. It's selfish behavior that ruins most relationships because the "me" becomes more important than the "we". Any man or woman worth their salt would be wise to walk away from someone with that kind of attitude. It's called commitment for a reason. Life throws us all curve balls and it's the ones who value their relationship over their independence that make it the long haul.
> 
> I'll also add that insisting on ones independence over everything else is guaranteed to keep people single forever.
> Men and women need to make room for a partner if they wish to be partnered. The people who can't are labeled "emotionally unavailable".


9 and 10 have to do with not being in a scarcity mindset or needy. Thinking that a certain person HAS to be the one and start ignoring red flags. You can't be afraid to walk away. We all have that one friend where everyone they date is the love of their life after a few weeks.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Lila said:


> I could sort of agree with 1-8 but don't understand #9 and beyond. By definition, when you enter into a committed long term relationship you are giving up your independence. If a man or woman wants to have a successful long term relationship, then the word "compromise" has to be part of their vocabulary. It's selfish behavior that ruins most relationships because the "me" becomes more important than the "we". Any man or woman worth their salt would be wise to walk away from someone with that kind of attitude. It's called commitment for a reason. Life throws us all curve balls and it's the ones who value their relationship over their independence that make it the long haul.
> 
> I'll also add that insisting on ones independence over everything else is guaranteed to keep people single forever.
> Men and women need to make room for a partner if they wish to be partnered. The people who can't are labeled "emotionally unavailable".


I don't disagree with you however the remaining independent or able to be independent keeps one fully able to be a full team member in a marriage, and able to stand in the event there are any unseen crazy family members of the W come out, or the W ends up with unreported problems of her own.

So as a full teammate, when you help, it's out of choice and true desire to be supportive and doesn't generate any resentments from being in a relationship that you feel trapped and have to deal with because you have no choice.


----------



## Lila

Al_Bundy said:


> 9 and 10 have to do with not being in a scarcity mindset or needy. Thinking that a certain person HAS to be the one and start ignoring red flags. You can't be afraid to walk away. We all have that one friend where everyone they date is the love of their life after a few weeks.


That's not what @Ragnar Ragnasson wrote. 

There's a difference between keep your independence at all costs and understanding what red flags to avoid in a partner. One makes you a relationship avoidant person who at the first sign of a disagreement or relationship strife walks away (we all know that it's unrealistic to assume any long term relationship is going to be roses and sunshine 24/7 for the rest of your life), and the other makes you aware of the qualities you seek in a long term partner; one that you know will want to fight as hard as you do for the relationship.


----------



## Lila

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> I don't disagree with you however the remaining independent or able to be independent keeps one fully able to be a full team member in a marriage, and able to stand in the event there are any unseen crazy family members of the W come out, or the W ends up with unreported problems of her own.
> 
> So as a full teammate, when you help, it's out of choice and true desire to be supportive and doesn't generate any resentments from being in a relationship that you feel trapped and have to deal with because you have no choice.


I still don't see the connection between what you wrote here and your #9 and #10 up above. 

I don't think encouraging independent lifestyles is conducive to creating a long term relationship. Telling a man and a woman to maintain their independence is at best a casual relationship. He's got his life, she's got hers, and they occasionally get together for a good time. Nothing wrong with that but not exactly what I would call a committed relationship in which to raise a family and grow old.


----------



## ConanHub

Mrs. Conan and I absolutely need each other and are not independent of each other.

I can see not putting people on a pedestal when dating but I'm not putting up with someone who isn't invested enough, after getting to know me, to be hurt if we split because that is what I will be investing.

Unless being a playa is the aim but then be prepared if a female playa is playing too.


----------



## Al_Bundy

Lila said:


> I still don't see the connection between what you wrote here and your #9 and #10 up above.
> 
> I don't think encouraging independent lifestyles is conducive to creating a long term relationship. Telling a man and a woman to maintain their independence is at best a casual relationship. He's got his life, she's got hers, and they occasionally get together for a good time. Nothing wrong with that but not exactly what I would call a committed relationship in which to raise a family and grow old.


Don't most relationships start out as casual? I agree what you're saying if your goal is to have a family but I just interpret it as don't be a branch swinger and don't settle for the first ok thing that comes down the pike.


----------



## leftfield

I see a lot of good ideas on helping a man mature and set personal goal for himself, but I have not really seen anything in this thread that I would suggest is good advice for men in today's dating world. 

In today's world more than half of all adults are single. There is an ever growing percentage of people who do not see marriage in their future. The percent of marriages that end in divorce is still relatively high. What about the growing voice of people that want marriage to be short term, where you have to agree to get married every 4 or 5 years, otherwise the marriage just ends. The numbers are indicating that marriage is becoming a wealthy institution. Overall, the idea of marriage is facing a slew of challenges and many people are rejecting it outright. It is rather difficult to suggest to young men what they should do to pursue marriage or even if pursuing marriage is worthwhile.

I could see many of the young people I work with reply to this thread with: OK Boomer.


----------



## Lila

Al_Bundy said:


> Don't most relationships start out as casual? I agree what you're saying if your goal is to have a family but I just interpret it as don't be a branch swinger and don't settle for the first ok thing that comes down the pike.


You're right in that most relationships start off as casual and few ever progress beyond that point. Maybe I'm not understanding the point of the thread. I thought the OP was too discuss what men should be doing to provide them with the best option for a long term partner? 

if the point of the thread is to discuss tactics to provide men with the best, limitless supply of casual dating opportunities, then yes, by all means, keep interactions at the superficial level. Vulnerability and interdependence should not be words in their vocabulary.

Just my personal opinion as a woman who mentors young women. Men who live their lives in a superficial and independent manner (sometimes playas, sometimes lifelong bachelors) rarely if ever settle down. If the man is the type to be playing the field, then I say let him go. Don't waste your time. *Life is not a romantic comedy and you're not the female lead*.


----------



## pastasauce79

All I can say is I have no idea what my kids are going to be able to accomplish before they decide to live with someone or getting married. 

I have told them not to do what I did and get married young. I have told them to do what I did and wait to have children, be responsible with money, avoid unnecessary debt, avoid crazy people, and move around to find better opportunities. 

We don't make 100k a year but we are happy. I hope my kids get to make good money. I hope they don't date too much because I'd worry about STDs and pregnancy. 

My only wish for them is to be happy! God, it seems this is so complicated now a days!


----------



## Mr. Nail

.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

DudeInProgress said:


> I agree that authenticity is extremely important. You need to have your own life plan and your own purpose and be authentic.
> That being said, you could be an authentic loser and that won’t get you very far. You could be authentically weak or lazy or obnoxious or undisciplined etc, see where that gets you. So if it’s inauthentic for you to have at least a base level of physical fitness and some financial stability, then, yeah...


For many people it is inauthentic to focus on those traits to the exclusion of others, yes. Why pick negative counter examples? What about the artist or thinker? Should they spend time chasing money and physical fitness instead of focussing on their talent? Of course not.



> You seem really hung up on the money and looks/fitness part. The point here isn’t to fit an exact mold, it’s to be the best possible version of yourself as a man. The dimensions listed are important to most people and the ability to achieve (or progress towards) the items/benchmarks listed also build confidence., which is an extremely important quality.


I'm hung up on it because it is so utterly clichéd and pretty red-pillish. If money and physique are not so important in that way of thinking then why are you arguing against my point that it is much more complex than that and people should seek authentic success for themselves. Happiness is the true success here.



> You don’t need to be a “gym bro” but if you’re obese and out of shape or super scrawny, most women won’t be attracted to you. And that’s not superficial, it’s just human sexual nature. Most men and women want an attractive, fit spouse - and that’s ok. So men would be wise to set themselves up for success by being as physically fit as possible.


You don't need to be a "gym bro" but you do need to be "as physically fit as possible". Sorry they sound like the same thing to me. No, you don't need to be a physically fit a possible, you just need to take reasonable care of yourself. Being physically fit as possible requires a huge time commitment that you can't spend elsewhere on other facets of your life.



> As for the $100k, it’s an arbitrary number. Maybe it’s $70k for you but the point is it’s not $20k and it’s not working part-time at the Megalomart. It is ideal to have some measure of career/financial success/stability, to have more/better options and be better prepared for the responsibilities of marriage/family.


It is but one definition of success. Just one. It is a lazy shorthand for something much more complex. It entirely depends on what you want married life to look like (if indeed you want to be married at all).

This all goes back to the point I made in my first post. There is no magic formula. Money and fitness are not the answer for all nor most men on their own. Despite the pretence otherwise from many on this thread, the idea that they are is very ingrained in masculine psyche (and seeps through the pores of many posts on this thread) and there are lots of commentators, vloggers and self-help book writers that are making good money of continuing to push that concept of masculinity.


----------



## AGoodFlogging

MJJEAN said:


> Using your example of student. One of DH's friends was a student throughout most of his 20's. IIRC, he was somewhere around 26 or 28 when he got his PhD. I would totally have considered him ready for marriage before then and definitely by then. He worked, was a TA, did internships, got grants and scholarships, lived frugally by himself or with roommates, and graduated with savings. He showed himself to be a steady, dependable, reliable, mature man thinking of his future from his very early 20's.





MJJEAN said:


> It was more about the idea that requiring a fellow to have met some financial and independent living goals to be old fashioned. Between my girls and my friends daughters, former co-workers kids, family, etc. it's a concept that is alive and well in the current era. Mostly because they've seen enough women with a man-child that they now require some proof of maturity and ability to function as an adult.
> 
> And that's really what that list is about. It's about men growing and developing into someone women want to date and will take seriously as life partner candidate.
> 
> Using your example of student. One of DH's friends was a student throughout most of his 20's. IIRC, he was somewhere around 26 or 28 when he got his PhD. I would totally have considered him ready for marriage before then and definitely by then. He worked, was a TA, did internships, got grants and scholarships, lived frugally by himself or with roommates, and graduated with savings. He showed himself to be a steady, dependable, reliable, mature man thinking of his future from his very early 20's.


I absolutely don't disagree, but there are many ways men can display they are worth the effort and many ways women assess that.

The reality is that the idea that the man has to be older, earning good money, etc before he is of interest is old fashioned. Wanting a guy who isn't a waster is hardly the same thing.


----------



## Andy1001

Mr. Nail said:


> If I was 30, and was pulling down 100k/year, and had successfully dated 50 women in 15 years . . . . .There is no way in Hell I would give up that life stile to get married. An neither would the rest of the 3%.


Been there. Done that. It got old.


----------



## Al_Bundy

Lila said:


> You're right in that most relationships start off as casual and few ever progress beyond that point. Maybe I'm not understanding the point of the thread. I thought the OP was too discuss what men should be doing to provide them with the best option for a long term partner?
> 
> if the point of the thread is to discuss tactics to provide men with the best, limitless supply of casual dating opportunities, then yes, by all means, keep interactions at the superficial level. Vulnerability and interdependence should not be words in their vocabulary.
> 
> Just my personal opinion as a woman who mentors young women. Men who live their lives in a superficial and independent manner (sometimes playas, sometimes lifelong bachelors) rarely if ever settle down. If the man is the type to be playing the field, then I say let him go. Don't waste your time. *Life is not a romantic comedy and you're not the female lead*.


I would say it was to provide the best options period, no matter what your goal. As my income increased so did my options. Yes you can argue that the process made me a better person, but I was a decent person when i made minimum wage. Decent guy with limited options. Now I'm not advocating using money to impress women with, money is just a tool to build an interesting life and put you in the right places to meet people you normally wouldn't if that makes sense.

Money and fitness come up a lot because they are two things any guy can improve on. It's not about being superficial and I'd argue acquiring either takes a certain amount of discipline beyond what is common. When I was broke I really leaned into the fitness part because that was the easiest (no cost) thing to improve. Also with around 70% of Americans overweight it's probably the easiest way to separate yourself from the crowd whether you're a man or woman.

Which as far as fitness, women often talk about wanting an equal partner. So if the guy is in shape, is it superficial to expect the same?


----------



## ConanHub

Mr. Nail said:


> If I was 30, and was pulling down 100k/year, and had successfully dated 50 women in 15 years . . . . .There is no way in Hell I would give up that life stile to get married. An neither would the rest of the 3%.


This is probably pretty damn accurate but, as @Andy1001 mentioned, it does get old for many.


----------



## DudeInProgress

AGoodFlogging said:


> For many people it is inauthentic to focus on traits to the exclusion of others, yes. Why pick negative counter examples? What about the artist or thinker? Should they spend time chasing money and physical fitness instead of focussing on their talent?
> 
> 
> I'm hung up on it because it is so utterly clichéd and pretty red-pillish. If money and physique are not so important in that way of thinking then why are you arguing against my point that it is much more complex than that and people should seek authentic success for themselves. Happiness is the true success here.
> 
> 
> You don't need to be a "gym bro" but you do need to be "as physically fit as possible". Sorry they sound like the same thing to me. No, you don't need to be a physically fit a possible, you just need to take reasonable care of yourself. Being physically fit as possible requires a huge time commitment that you can't spend elsewhere on other facets of your life.
> 
> 
> It is but one definition of success. Just one. It is a lazy shorthand for something much more complex. It entirely depends on what you want married life to look like (if indeed you want to be married at all).
> 
> This all goes back to the point I made in my first post. There is no magic formula. Money and fitness are not the answer for all nor most men on their own. Despite the pretence otherwise from many on this thread, the idea that they are is very ingrained in masculine psyche (and seeps through the pores of many posts on this thread) and there are lots of commentators, vloggers and self-help book writers that are making good money of continuing to push that concept of masculinity.


*For many people it is inauthentic to focus on traits to the exclusion of others, yes. Why pick negative counter examples? What about the artist or thinker? Should they spend time chasing money and physical fitness instead of focussing on their talent?*

1. No one said to the exclusion of others.
2. If the artist or thinker is broke and doesn’t care about his physical fitness at even a base level, then they aren’t ready for marriage and will have a hard time finding an attractive wife anyway.
3. Assuring that you achieve some level of financial stability has nothing to do with “chasing money”


*I'm hung up on it because it is so utterly clichéd and pretty red-pillish. If money and physique are not so important in that way of thinking then why are you arguing against my point that it is much more complex than that and people should seek authentic success for themselves. Happiness is the true success here*.

1. Actually, happiness is often the byproduct of pursuing a valued goal or goals.
2. Oh heavens to Betsy, not that evil red pill thing…


*You don't need to be a "gym bro" but you do need to be "as physically fit as possible". Sorry they sound like the same thing to me. No, you don't need to be a physically fit a possible, you just need to take reasonable care of yourself. Being physically fit as possible requires a huge time commitment that you can't spend elsewhere on other facets of your life.*

1. No, it’s actually not a huge time commitment. I go to the gym for 45min-1 hour, 3-4 times a week. I pay attention to my diet but not fanatically so. This is the case for most in-shape guys I know. It’s really not that hard. And if you just wanted to achieve a marginal baseline, it would be even less.
2. I guess that it’s largely a matter of what you consider “taking reasonable care of yourself” means


*It is but one definition of success. Just one. It is a lazy shorthand for something much more complex. It entirely depends on what you want married life to look like (if indeed you want to be married at all).*

1. You could say that for anything
2. So let’s just throw out all standards and guiding principles for everything. Because there’s always an exception and someone who feels differently… Yeah, effective people base their choices and SOP‘s on principles/guidelines that apply most of the time and then adapt as necessary. You don’t just throw out directionally correct principles or guidelines because “sometimes there’s an exception or they don’t apply to everyone all the time”


*This all goes back to the point I made in my first post. There is no magic formula. Money and fitness are not the answer for all nor most men on their own. Despite the pretence otherwise from many on this thread, the idea that they are is very ingrained in masculine psyche (and seeps through the pores of many posts on this thread) and there are lots of commentators, vloggers and self-help book writers that are making good money of continuing to push that concept of masculinity.*

And there it is…
After all of that, the underlying issue is that you don’t like traditional masculinity.
For whatever reason, you’d like to reimagine masculinity. I’m guessing you have a problem with the idea that men should strive to be strong, competent, leaders (in general, and in their marriages).

I would suggest that perhaps there’s more to masculine/feminine polarity, intersexual dynamics, or evolutionary psychology, or basic human nature than you understand. Sorry if so many of the posters here are such Neanderthals that offend your sensibilities. Good luck with that.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

I feel like most men should accomplish death before marriage.


----------



## UpsideDownWorld11

Andy1001 said:


> Been there. Done that. It got old.


Could say the same about your wife.


----------



## In Absentia

Let me understand this... when you think you've met your soul mate and the love of your life, you don't marry them because you are not that muscly yet, you only earn 90k, your are 29 and you've only been with 47 women?


----------



## Numb26

Diana7 said:


> I think that some of us value very different things than the superficial.


Sorry, I disagree. Having a good career and having money in the bank is no superficial. Love doesn't pay the bills and I wouldn't want my daughters marrying a pauper.


----------



## MJJEAN

AGoodFlogging said:


> I absolutely don't disagree, but there are many ways men can display they are worth the effort and many ways women assess that.
> 
> The reality is that the idea that the man has to be older, earning good money, etc before he is of interest is old fashioned. Wanting a guy who isn't a waster is hardly the same thing.


It's only an "old fashioned" idea until the monthly bills are due. 

As to older, that's a society problem. When extended adolescence became the norm the twenties became the new teens. What was once commonly expected of a man in his 20's isn't common anymore and the young men enjoying extended adolescence just aren't serious dating material until they're older and have matured.


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> I wouldn't want my daughters marrying a pauper.


I wouldn't mind, if they are happy. What's wrong with having little money? Some people have different priorities in life... you don't have to be capitalistic pig at all costs...


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> I wouldn't mind, if they are happy. What's wrong with having little money? Some people have different priorities in life... you don't have to be capitalistic pig at all costs...


There is already another thread about "poverty culture". And you also don't have to be a communist drone living of off others hard work either. 🙂


----------



## MJJEAN

Al_Bundy said:


> Money and fitness come up a lot because they are two things any guy can improve on.


Money: If a woman wants to have a family she needs a partner that can meaningfully contribute financially. 

Fitness: If a woman wants someone to grow old with she needs a man healthy enough to survive to old age. Not to mention health speaks to genetic soundness and ability to work.

Some say these things are shallow. I don't see it. Most normal women aren't looking for a millionaire when they say they want a man who is financially capable or Jason Momoa when they say fit. They just want a partner that can help provide their family a decent lifestyle who isn't going to be functionally disabled or drop dead on them by middle age.


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> There is already another thread about "poverty culture". And you also don't have to be a communist drone living of off others hard work either. 🙂


I'm keeping out of it on purpose... too much right wing crap going on there. Who's saying you have to be a communist drone living off others' hard work? Being a nurse here, in the UK, for example, is a badly paid job, but people do it because they want to help others. I guess you wouldn't want your son/daughter to marry a nurse.


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> I'm keeping out of it on purpose... too much right wing crap going on there. Who's saying you have to be a communist drone living off others' hard work? Being a nurse here, in the UK, for example, is a badly paid job, but people do it because they want to help others. I guess you wouldn't want your son/daughter to marry a nurse.


So you make a comment about "capitalist pig" and I respond yet you make a comment about "to much Right wing crap"? Typical.

Actually, my EX made 6 figures as a nurse and most of my family are nurses and make around the same amount so it's not a bad paying job. The reason it is so bad paying in the UK is because of UHC. But I am getting off my point.

My point is financial problems are in the top three causes for divorce. Why start off a relationship with a strike again you?


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> So you make a comment about "capitalist pig" and I respond yet you make a comment about "to much Right wing crap"? Typical.
> 
> Actually, my EX made 6 figures as a nurse and most of my family are nurses and make around the same amount so it's not a bad paying job. The reason it is so bad paying in the UK is because of UHC. But I am getting off my point.
> 
> My point is financial problems are in the top three causes for divorce. Why start off a relationship with a strike again you?


we agree to disagree... UHC, good thing that governments exploit to underpay workers. But I'd rather have that than the American health system.
Ok, off topic, now... I'll shut up!


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> we agree to disagree... UHC, good thing that governments exploit to underpay workers. But I'd rather have that than the American health system.
> Ok, off topic, now... I'll shut up!


We do agree to disagree....you prefer poverty for the sake of everyone waiting months or years for substandard care.
I do not.


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> We do agree to disagree....you prefer poverty for the sake of everyone waiting months or years for substandard care.
> I do not.


It's not "poverty"... it's earning less by doing a useful job, helping people. I do not agree with the level of pay, obviously. I know it's probably a concept you will never understand... but it's fine by me.


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> It's not "poverty"... it's earning less by doing a useful job, helping people. I do not agree with the level of pay, obviously. I know it's probably a concept you will never understand... but it's fine by me.


I understand the concept and I don't agree with it. You are willing to make less, to have less to give to your family, your kids. A drone, a cog. Not much of a life.


----------



## Laurentium

In Absentia said:


> Let me understand this... when you think you've met your soul mate and the love of your life, you don't marry them because you are not that muscly yet, you only earn 90k, your are 29 and you've only been with 47 women?


That was essentially my question a while back in the thread. The answer, which I kind of accept, was (a) dont get too literal about the numbers, and (b) if you haven't really worked on any of those things, you won't _know_ who your soulmate is.


----------



## In Absentia

Laurentium said:


> That was essentially my question a while back in the thread. The answer, which I kind of accept, was (a) dont get too literal about the numbers, and (b) if you haven't really worked on any of those things, you won't _know_ who your soulmate is.


yes, I get that (sorry, I must confess I didn't read the 467 pages)... I met my wife at 22... according to this thread, I should have ignored her completely and carry on sleeping with another 46 women... I was skinny and I was a student... and before you say, maybe you should have ignored your wife given the result lol, we did have 20 wonderful years of marriage. Are we really supposed not to trust our gut instinct in favour of mere, sterile numbers? I don't really care if I don't know exactly who my soulmate is. This is all so boring...


----------



## Laurentium

In Absentia said:


> yes, I get that (sorry, I must confess I didn't read the 467 pages)... I met my wife at 22... according to this thread, I should have ignored her completely and carry on sleeping with another 46 women... I was skinny and I was a student... and before you say, maybe you should have ignored your wife given the result lol, we did have 20 wonderful years of marriage. Are we really supposed not to trust our gut instinct in favour of mere, sterile numbers? I don't really care if I don't know exactly who my soulmate is. This is all so boring...


Well, me too. (I mean, I met _my _wife, not _your _wife.) But when I was 21, overweight, and a student. And we had 30 wonderful years. Nonetheless, do as I say, not as I did!


----------



## Diana7

By sticking to the criteria mentioned here you may attract a certain type of woman, for example one who wants lots of money, or has has had multiple partners to match yours, but that maybe isnt the type of women many men want.


----------



## Lila

Al_Bundy said:


> Which as far as fitness, women often talk about wanting an equal partner. So if the guy is in shape, is it superficial to expect the same?


First, by definition, using external characteristics to judge a person is "superficial". That is neither bad or good. It just is. 

Second, there is nothing wrong with wanting a fit partner. And I'll go even further and say there is nothing wrong with wanting a fit partner _ regardless of what your level of fitness happens to be_. But I do think there is something wrong with making superficial characteristics the standard for "Quality". No, fitness level/beauty does not make one a better person/partner. That's called the halo effect and has gotten many a man in trouble. 

People are entitled to their preferences but I think the standard for determining "Quality" should be based on intrinsic values.


----------



## ConanHub

UpsideDownWorld11 said:


> Could say the same about your wife.


WTF?


----------



## ConanHub

In Absentia said:


> I'm keeping out of it on purpose... too much right wing crap going on there. Who's saying you have to be a communist drone living off others' hard work? Being a nurse here, in the UK, for example, is a badly paid job, but people do it because they want to help others. I guess you wouldn't want your son/daughter to marry a nurse.


My youngest son is engaged to a nurse in training.


In Absentia said:


> I'm keeping out of it on purpose... too much right wing crap going on there. Who's saying you have to be a communist drone living off others' hard work? Being a nurse here, in the UK, for example, is a badly paid job, but people do it because they want to help others. I guess you wouldn't want your son/daughter to marry a nurse.


It's badly paid because of your crap government interference.

My youngest is engaged to a nurse in training here and she is on course to be making out well.


----------



## TomNebraska

If I had sons, I'd tell them the most important thing is developing confidence in yourself. I don't mean the sort of superficial "confidence" charlatans sell in "pick-up artist" books, or that kinda crap... but a deeper confidence that comes from understanding how the world works and my place in it. 

For me, that really just clicked in my early 30's. I can't point to any one thing... I hit a point in my career where I had experience and skills; I had also read a lot - novels, non-fiction, philosophy, etc., NOT self-help crap. And while I had a few relationships, I was not anywhere near the numbers cited in the OP (which I think are widely unrealistic, unless you believe most men are rock stars or pro athletes...). I was at a point in life where if someone criticized me at work, or in a social setting, it wouldn't cut deeply, but I would just laugh it off. AND yet, I still made a huge mistake in choosing the woman I married around that time. 

I was too trusting when it came down to it. Assume the worst in other people, until they give you a reason not to. I think that was the piece of the puzzle I was missing. And the concept of maintaining "personal boundaries..." that was not a term I had heard before.


----------



## bkyln309

I work with the executive suite. I have known many of the CEOs, COOs, CTOs etc over 25 years. I will say none of them have tons of time in the gym because they were working or building their businesses.. Some do have trainers or play golf but this has been more in recent years when they are the boss and can spare an hour (or they work out before the job). All have spouses that were very tolerant of their work schedules because most of them are working long hours even on vacations. Most married relatively young and very few came from means before hand. They simply would not have had time in their 30s to date like described because they are so focused on career. Yes being successful does breed opportunity for higher end looking women and affairs are common in this set but few leave their spouse for the hot girl.

Nothing wrong with putting career and success over family. But realize those quality women by the mid 30s are probably already hooked up to high end men. The hit it and quit it woman is a dime a dozen and most this men recognize that they need to find a high quality woman, marry her and move on to other things.


----------



## ccpowerslave

I got married at 24. Having accomplished my setup goals of having an education, a car, an apartment, and a job in the profession I wanted to do since I was around 10 years old.

Next stuff on the list was get married and have kids, that was when I started to question the program (the kids part).


----------



## TomNebraska

bkyln309 said:


> I work with the executive suite. I have known many of the CEOs, COOs, CTOs etc over 25 years. I will say none of them have tons of time in the gym because they were working or building their businesses.. Some do have trainers or play golf but this has been more in recent years when they are the boss and can spare an hour (or they work out before the job). All have spouses that were very tolerant of their work schedules because most of them are working long hours even on vacations. Most married relatively young and very few came from means before hand. They simply would not have had time in their 30s to date like described because they are so focused on career. Yes being successful does breed opportunity for higher end looking women and affairs are common in this set but few leave their spouse for the hot girl.
> 
> Nothing wrong with putting career and success over family. But realize those quality women by the mid 30s are probably already hooked up to high end men. The hit it and quit it woman is a dime a dozen and most this men recognize that they need to find a high quality woman, marry her and move on to other things.


this. 

the real world is at-odds with what the charlatans tell teenage boys and 20-somethings that you need to do in order to be a man and be successful.


----------



## TomNebraska

In the United States, you need to be among the top 30% of income earners in order to be making at least $100,000 a year in salary. (link). The median household income is $68K (link), so fully 160,000,000 Americans earn less than that.

Not a lot of American men should settle down and get married, I guess. 

$100K/year is not a lot of money, especially if you have a lot of student loans to pay off (and in this country, it's incredibly likely you WILL have a lot of student loans to pay off if you found a job making that much before age 30, unless you already came from money).


----------



## In Absentia

ConanHub said:


> It's badly paid because of your crap government interference.


Our NHS is a fair system... everybody contributes and can use it equally. The problem is that the government has different priorities regarding its funding and paying its staff properly, which is a disgrace. They'd rather spend billions on some nuclear submarine we will never use.


----------



## Numb26

TomNebraska said:


> In the United States, you need to be among the top 30% of income earners in order to be making at least $100,000 a year in salary. (link). The median household income is $68K (link), so fully 160,000,000 Americans earn less than that.
> 
> Not a lot of American men should settle down and get married, I guess.
> 
> $100K/year is not a lot of money, especially if you have a lot of student loans to pay off (and in this country, it's incredibly likely you WILL have a lot of student loans to pay off if you found a job making that much before age 30, unless you already came from money).


The problem is kids are told that they HAVE to go to college in order to have a well paying job and this is absolutely not true. It's a scam.
I graduated from trade school in a year, had the loan paid of in 2 years (it wasn't even a 1/4 of what an average 4 year college cost), owned my first house at age 25 and started my own business by 27. 
Granted I didn't get married till I was 34 but that was more because I am overly picky.


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> Our NHS is a fair system... everybody contributes and can use it equally. The problem is that the government has different priorities regarding its funding and paying its staff properly, which is a disgrace. They'd rather spend billions on some nuclear submarine we will never use.


Apparently you aren't paying attention:









10 charts that show why the NHS is in trouble


The NHS faces unrelenting pressure despite funding rising. Why?



www.bbc.com













Britain's Version Of 'Medicare For All' Is Struggling With Long Waits For Care


Long waits for care are endemic to government-run, single-payer systems like the NHS. Yet some U.S. lawmakers want to import that model from across the pond. That would be a massive blunder.




www.forbes.com


----------



## Tasorundo

TomNebraska said:


> In the United States, you need to be among the top 30% of income earners in order to be making at least $100,000 a year in salary. (link). The median household income is $68K (link), so fully 160,000,000 Americans earn less than that.


It is actually fewer then that. Those are household incomes, not personal. Individuals making over 100k are in in the top 9-10%.


----------



## leftfield

Numb26 said:


> The problem is kids are told that they HAVE to go to college in order to have a well paying job and this is absolutely not true. It's a scam.
> I graduated from trade school in a year, had the loan paid of in 2 years (it wasn't even a 1/4 of what an average 4 year college cost), owned my first house at age 25 and started my own business by 27.
> Granted I didn't get married till I was 34 but that was more because I am overly picky.


Based on what happened you were not picky enough.


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> Apparently you aren't paying attention:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 charts that show why the NHS is in trouble
> 
> 
> The NHS faces unrelenting pressure despite funding rising. Why?
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Britain's Version Of 'Medicare For All' Is Struggling With Long Waits For Care
> 
> 
> Long waits for care are endemic to government-run, single-payer systems like the NHS. Yet some U.S. lawmakers want to import that model from across the pond. That would be a massive blunder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com


There is an easy solution to this... since we need to increase the spending on the NHS, tax the billionaires a lot more. Stop them opening bank accounts in tax heavens. Also tax more the likes of Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook who are exploiting loops in our tax system (I guess the government doesn't want to fix this). Increase taxes for everybody earning less than a fixed threshold (let's say £500,000) using means-testing, reduce dramatically military expenditure. Get rid of the blood-sucking monarchy. Ultimately, I guess we will need to switch to a mixed system, but no government will ever do that for fear of losing an election.


----------



## Numb26

leftfield said:


> Based on what happened you were not picky enough.


That is true! Haha


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> There is an easy solution to this... since we need to increase the spending on the NHS, tax the billionaires a lot more. Stop them opening bank accounts in tax heavens. Also tax more the likes of Amazon, Google, Apple, Facebook who are exploiting loops in our tax system (I guess the government doesn't want to fix this). Increase taxes for everybody earning less than a fixed threshold (let's say £500,000) using means-testing, reduce dramatically military expenditure. Get rid of the blood-sucking monarchy. Ultimately, I guess we will need to switch to a mixed system, but no government will ever do that for fear of losing an election.


Well look at that, we agree on something. Only problem with doing that though is that it will trickle down to the people who it would hurt the worse.


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> Well look at that, we agree on something. Only problem with doing that though is that it will trickle down to the people who it would hurt the worse.


Not if it's means-tested where it should be. But we know that for some governments, the word "fair" doesn't seem to appear in their dictionary.


----------



## Numb26

In Absentia said:


> Not if it's means-tested where it should be. But we know that for some governments, the word "fair" doesn't seem to appear in their dictionary.


No, I meant if they raise taxes on big corporations and the like all they will do is raise prices on their goods and services to compensate. Things will be no better then before they were before, worse even.


----------



## In Absentia

Numb26 said:


> No, I meant if they raise taxes on big corporations and the like all they will do is raise prices on their goods and services to compensate. Things will be no better then before they were before, worse even.


I'm not sure about that... the war is on price. They need to remain competitive. It's a cut-throat business.


----------



## Diana7

In Absentia said:


> Our NHS is a fair system... everybody contributes and can use it equally. The problem is that the government has different priorities regarding its funding and paying its staff properly, which is a disgrace. They'd rather spend billions on some nuclear submarine we will never use.


Its a great system. 👍 No one has to go without treatment due to having no money. I love the NHS. My DIL in law works for the NHS, they are not rich but they have enough. The pay isnt that bad compared to other things. My husband worked for the NHS for many years as well.


----------



## Diana7

Must admit that when I made a long list of what I wanted in a husband absolutely none of them were anything like the 4 things quoted here. Lots of money isnt an issue to me, multiple partners was a no no, whether he was ultra fit or not didnt even occur to me and the age was immaterial as I was already in my 40's.


----------



## Al_Bundy

In Absentia said:


> Not if it's means-tested where it should be. But we know that for some governments, the word "fair" doesn't seem to appear in their dictionary.


This is the problem with the money doesn't matter people. If you don't want much that's fine, but at least keep your hands off the wallets of those that have made different choices.


----------



## Numb26

Al_Bundy said:


> This is the problem with the money doesn't matter people. If you don't want much that's fine, but at least keep your hands off the wallets of those that have made different choices.


If they can't have it that don't want you to have it either


----------



## Al_Bundy

Lila said:


> First, by definition, using external characteristics to judge a person is "superficial". That is neither bad or good. It just is.
> 
> Second, there is nothing wrong with wanting a fit partner. And I'll go even further and say there is nothing wrong with wanting a fit partner _ regardless of what your level of fitness happens to be_. But I do think there is something wrong with making superficial characteristics the standard for "Quality". No, fitness level/beauty does not make one a better person/partner. That's called the halo effect and has gotten many a man in trouble.
> 
> People are entitled to their preferences but I think the standard for determining "Quality" should be based on intrinsic values.


People will want what they want, but some wants are more realistic depending on where you're at. I think the problems start when people think they're entitled to a certain kind of person without any regards to their current lot.

It's not like fitness and attractiveness are the only two qualities, but there has to be some kind of baseline. To be blunt a woman has to pass the boner test which will very by guy. A woman could be the nicest most amazing person in the world but if she qualifies to be in the same weight class as Brock Lesnar that's a no-go.


----------



## Numb26

Al_Bundy said:


> People will want what they want, but some wants are more realistic depending on where you're at. I think the problems start when people think they're entitled to a certain kind of person without any regards to their current lot.
> 
> It's not like fitness and attractiveness are the only two qualities, but there has to be some kind of baseline. To be blunt a woman has to pass the boner test which will very by guy. A woman could be the nicest most amazing person in the world but if she qualifies to be in the same weight class as Brock Lesnar that's a no-go.


People always says looks and fitness fall under "superficial" but that is how attraction starts. Doesn't matter if someone is the nicest person in the world, if they look like Gollum they are not getting a date.


----------



## Lila

Al_Bundy said:


> People will want what they want, but some wants are more realistic depending on where you're at. I think the problems start when people think they're entitled to a certain kind of person without any regards to their current lot.


And here I agree with you. Entitlement is an ugly attribute. Self actualization on the other is a very attractive quality.



> It's not like fitness and attractiveness are the only two qualities, but there has to be some kind of baseline. *To be blunt a woman has to pass the boner test which will very by guy.* A woman could be the nicest most amazing person in the world but if she qualifies to be in the same weight class as Brock Lesnar that's a no-go.


🤣🤣🤣 The bolded made my bust out laughing. That might be why it gets more difficult for people to repartner as we age. Those boners get harder and harder (no pun intended) to get naturally. 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> People always says looks and fitness fall under "superficial" but that is how attraction starts. Doesn't matter if someone is the nicest person in the world, if they look like Gollum they are not getting a date.


I think we've become such a superficial society that unless men look like the cover of fitness magazine or women look like the instagram ass models, the rest fall under the "meh" category which might as well be Gollum. Our expectations as a society are wholely skewed.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I think we've become such a superficial society that unless men look like the cover of fitness magazine or women look like the instagram ass models, the rest fall under the "meh" category which might as well be Gollum. Our expectations as a society are wholely skewed.


Maybe true but I think it is more biological then societal


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Maybe true but I think it is more biological then societal


I'm not sure about that. There's some generally accepted biological standards (facial symmetry comes to mind) but if you look at other parts of the world, each society defines "beautiful" in their own way.

Eta:. Look at your parents and grandparents. What defined beautiful to them?


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I'm not sure about that. There's some generally accepted biological standards (facial symmetry comes to mind) but if you look at other parts of the world, each society defines "beautiful" in their own way.


All I know is I am probably one of ugliest man around and even though I hit all the guidelines for the "Rule of 6" that some women follow my dating pool is cut in half if not 2/3rds because of it. 
Now if society changes their ideals to looking like Ernest Borgnine with Dumbo ears I will be set!


----------



## ConanHub

Al_Bundy said:


> To be blunt a woman has to pass the boner test


😜


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> People always says looks and fitness fall under "superficial" but that is how attraction starts. Doesn't matter if someone is the nicest person in the world, if they look like Gollum they are not getting a date.


I think smelling like him would be a real deal breaker!😉

There are lady orcs and ogres out there too.

Almost someone for everyone.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> All I know is I am probably one of ugliest man around and even though I hit all the guidelines for the "Rule of 6" that some women follow my dating pool is cut in half if not 2/3rds because of it.
> Now if society changes their ideals to looking like Ernest Borgnine with Dumbo ears I will be set!


I heard rumors that old gap tooth might have been a real lady's man.


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> I heard rumors that old gap tooth might have been a real lady's man.


Fame tends to cause people to overlook a lot


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> Fame tends to cause people to overlook a lot


I'm probably a weird mix of romantic and pragmatist but I've seen some interesting matches through my life as well.

My grandfather's brother was a tremendous troll of a man with a voice that could kill small animals at 20 paces and a laugh that scared children but he married an attractive woman and they were together until they both passed.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> All I know is I am probably one of ugliest man around and even though I hit all the guidelines for the "Rule of 6" that some women follow my dating pool is cut in half if not 2/3rds because of it.
> Now if society changes their ideals to looking like Ernest Borgnine with Dumbo ears I will be set!


I had to look up the "rule of 6". Dayam playa!!! 😉😁

How do you know you fall into the 2/3 exclusion? And you can't say online dating!


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> I'm probably a weird mix of romantic and pragmatist but I've seen some interesting matches through my life as well.
> 
> My grandfather's brother was a tremendous troll of a man with a voice that could kill small animals at 20 paces and a laugh that scared children but he married an attractive woman and they were together until they both passed.


Isn't it funny how that happens sometimes? I've seen a lot of that, both sides.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I had to look up the "rule of 6". Dayam playa!!! 😉😁
> 
> How do you know you fall into the 2/3 exclusion? And you can't say online dating!


I have never done OLD, heard to many horror stories.

I am just basing the 2/3 on the fact that I usually get a disgusted look in 2 out of every 3 people I meet. Hahaha


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I have never done OLD, heard to many horror stories.
> 
> I am just basing the 2/3 on the fact that I usually get a disgusted look in 2 out of every 3 people I meet. Hahaha


LoL! Damn that's harsh man!🤣


----------



## Laurentium

Lila said:


> I had to look up the "rule of 6"


I don't know what it is, and google can't tell me because here in UK, "rule of 6" is something about covid


----------



## ConanHub

Laurentium said:


> I don't know what it is, and google can't tell me because here in UK, "rule of 6" is something about covid


Men need to be six feet tall have six pack abs and make six figures. Apparently...


----------



## ConanHub

I had the abs but I wasn't tall enough or wealthy enough to hit the other criteria.

Fortunately for me, the women chasing me hadn't even imagined OLD yet!😋


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> LoL! Damn that's harsh man!🤣


I don't normally share stories about my day to day life but I will tell you this one to show you what I mean.
A couple of months ago I was at a party and was chatting up this woman who I thought was attractive. She was nice, made with the small talk but didn't really show any interest. That's fine, either it's there or it's not. I understand that.
Anyway, after I walked away she turned to the girl beside her and said that she would let me but only doggiestyle so she didn't have to look at my face.
The girl she said it too was the wife of my foreman, that's how I found out.


----------



## Numb26

Laurentium said:


> I don't know what it is, and google can't tell me because here in UK, "rule of 6" is something about covid


Rule of Sixes:

Over 6 feet
Over 6 figures
Over 6 inches
6 pack abs


----------



## ccpowerslave

I am not quite hitting the 6 pack abs, 6 pack of Coors Lite I have that down. You can feel my abs though but I don’t have separation. Something to get this year.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I have never done OLD, heard to many horror stories.
> 
> I am just basing the 2/3 on the fact that I usually get a disgusted look in 2 out of every 3 people I meet. Hahaha


I'm not going to say that your perceptions are untrue but I will say that perceptions are sometimes based on a narrative we tell ourselves to fill in gaps that may not have anything to do with us. Ask me how I know 🙄. Our minds can be both wonderful and dangerous. 

However, now that you've brought it up.... The OP mentioned that physical fitness, 100k salary, not marrying prior to 30, and having lots of relationships before getting hitched. You mentioned 3 of the 4. Do you think there's truth in the OP?


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> Rule of Sixes:
> 
> Over 6 feet
> Over 6 figures
> Over 6 inches
> 6 pack abs


Someone added penis size?🙄


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I don't normally share stories about my day to day life but I will tell you this one to show you what I mean.
> A couple of months ago I was at a party and was chatting up this woman who I thought was attractive. She was nice, made with the small talk but didn't really show any interest. That's fine, either it's there or it's not. I understand that.
> Anyway, after I walked away she turned to the girl beside her and said that she would let me but only doggiestyle so she didn't have to look at my face.
> The girl she said it too was the wife of my foreman, that's how I found out.


What a *****!


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Someone added penis size?🙄


Rules are rules, apparently. From what I have been told


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> Rules are rules, apparently. From what I have been told


Good gravy!


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I'm not going to say that your perceptions are untrue but I will say that perceptions are sometimes based on a narrative we tell ourselves to fill in gaps that may not have anything to do with us. Ask me how I know 🙄. Our minds can be both wonderful and dangerous.
> 
> However, now that you've brought it up.... The OP mentioned that physical fitness, 100k salary, not marrying prior to 30, and having lots of relationships before getting hitched. You mentioned 3 of the 4. Do you think there's truth in the OP?


Yes and no. 
I believe the first two do increase your dating pool.
The third can be looked at two ways. And these apply to both men and women. 1: If you are concentrating on your career or business then yes I can see waiting till you are 30 to get married. 2: Somebody mentioned the nowadays the 20's are the new teens. I believe this from what I see around me. So thinking that way a majority of people would not be emotionally or mentally ready for marriage before 30.
The fourth is just ridiculous


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I don't normally share stories about my day to day life but I will tell you this one to show you what I mean.
> A couple of months ago I was at a party and was chatting up this woman who I thought was attractive. She was nice, made with the small talk but didn't really show any interest. That's fine, either it's there or it's not. I understand that.
> Anyway, after I walked away she turned to the girl beside her and said that she would let me but only doggiestyle so she didn't have to look at my face.
> The girl she said it too was the wife of my foreman, that's how I found out.


Seriously??! How old was this woman?? She sounds like a mean girl who grew old.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> Someone added penis size?🙄


Where is @Faithful Wife when we need her?


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Seriously??! How old was this woman?? She sounds like a mean girl who grew old.


True story. Believe me when I say I hit the weights hard the next day to deal with it.
She was in her 30s I think


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> Where is @Faithful Wife when we need her?


LoL! She's probably the culprit!😉


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Yes and no.
> I believe the first two do increase your dating pool.
> The third can be looked at two ways. And these apply to both men and women. 1: If you are concentrating on your career or business then yes I can see waiting till you are 30 to get married. 2: Somebody mentioned the nowadays the 20's are the new teens. I believe this from what I see around me. So thinking that way a majority of people would not be emotionally or mentally ready for marriage before 30.
> The fourth is just ridiculous


So having experienced singledom in your twenties and now again 40+, do you think physical fitness and 100k salaries provides you a bigger dating pool? And if not, what do you think does? 

I'm not picking on your but you're about the only one on here who's posted that you've got the physical fitness and $$$ AND actually experienced this as a 20 something/30 something.

Eta:. And is currently single and experiencing the dating world.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> True story. Believe me when I say I hit the weights hard the next day to deal with it.
> She was in her 30s I think


That's ****ed up.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> So having experienced singledom in your twenties and now again 40+, do you think physical fitness and 100k salaries provides you a bigger dating pool? And if not, what do you think does?
> 
> I'm not picking on your but you're about the only one on here who's posted that you've got the physical fitness and $$$ AND actually experienced this as a 20 something/30 something.


I had $$$ in my late 20s but definitely NOT the fitness. I was always the "fat" kid. I was to busy working, etc. to date anyway but my weight and looks would have kept me from dating.
Was married during my 30s and 40s so can't really comment on dating. 
Now that I am single again in my 50's I can tell you that the women who do show interest in me tend to be younger (20s and 30s). What I find interesting is they do not know anything about me other then what I look like so maybe fitness does play a bigger role then what we think.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I had $$$ in my late 20s but definitely NOT the fitness. I was always the "fat" kid. I was to busy working, etc. to date anyway but my weight and looks would have kept me from dating.
> Was married during my 30s and 40s so can't really comment on dating.
> Now that I am single again in my 50's I can tell you that the women who do show interest in me tend to be younger (20s and 30s). What I find interesting is they do not know anything about me other then what I look like so maybe fitness does play a bigger role then what we think.


Interesting info!


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Interesting info!


I try to hide the other part as much as possible


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I try to hide the other part as much as possible


That's probably smart. I usually dress like a gym rat and often walk around in my hat, so weird and not well off comes to mind.🤠


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> That's probably smart. I usually dress like a gym rat and often walk around in my hat, so weird and not well off comes to mind.🤠


I dressed like everyone else around here and drive a dirty pickup like everyone else. I blend in well


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I had $$$ in my late 20s but definitely NOT the fitness. I was always the "fat" kid. I was to busy working, etc. to date anyway but my weight and looks would have kept me from dating.
> Was married during my 30s and 40s so can't really comment on dating.
> Now that I am single again in my 50's I can tell you that the women who do show interest in me tend to be younger (20s and 30s). What I find interesting is they do not know anything about me other then what I look like so maybe fitness does play a bigger role then what we think.


Interesting. I won't disagree with you even though I'm jaded from seeing what I've seen living in S. Florida. 

But you did prove my point about perception. You have 20/30 year olds interested so you can attract women.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I dressed like everyone else around here and drive a dirty pickup like everyone else. I blend in well


That's one thing I've never been able to accomplish.

It's interesting that the 20's and 30's are attracted.

I've been speculating for years about the selection of mates when it comes to younger men and the pickens honestly look a little slim to me.

It wouldn't surprise me that younger women might be looking for greener fields wherever they are.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Interesting. I won't disagree with you even though I'm jaded from seeing what I've seen living in S. Florida.
> 
> But you did prove my point about perception. You have 20/30 year olds interested so you can attract women.


Yes but are they are attracted for "superficial" reasons?


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Interesting. I won't disagree with you even though I'm jaded from seeing what I've seen living in S. Florida.
> 
> But you did prove my point about perception. You have 20/30 year olds interested so you can attract women.


And I do have to throw this out there even though I know I am opening a can of worms. 

I always worry about younger women being interested because I have no fascination with women with Daddy issues.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Yes but are they are attracted for "superficial" reasons?


It's the million dollar question isn't it? But the bigger question is whether that matters to you or not?


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> And I do have to throw this out there even though I know I am opening a can of worms.
> 
> I always worry about younger women being interested because I have no fascination with women with Daddy issues.


Maybe you are more masculine and hit more primal triggers than the younger guys they have available?


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> It's the million dollar question isn't it? But the bigger question is whether that matters to you or not?


Yes it does


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> And I do have to throw this out there even though I know I am opening a can of worms.
> 
> I always worry about younger women being interested because I have no fascination with women with Daddy issues.


That would probably make one helluva new thread. Lol 🍿🍿🍿


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Maybe you are more masculine and hit more primal triggers than the younger guys they have available?


I don't know. The men around here are come from tough stock; hard working, rough.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Yes it does


Smart man😉


----------



## Torninhalf

Numb26 said:


> I don't know. The men around here are come from tough stock; hard working, rough.


Where would this be? 😉


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I don't know. The men around here are come from tough stock; hard working, rough.


Maturity is a factor as well.

If the younger guys have their heads on straight, who knows but it's cool they find something attractive anyway.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Smart man😉


I can get my "needs" met easily. That isn't hard. But finding someone to talk too? That's harder.


----------



## Lila

Torninhalf said:


> Where would this be? 😉


🥶🥶🥶🥶🥶🥶 Land


----------



## Numb26

Torninhalf said:


> Where would this be? 😉


Cattle country. LOL


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> Maybe you are more masculine and hit more primal triggers than the younger guys they have available?





ConanHub said:


> Maturity is a factor as well.
> 
> If the younger guys have their heads on straight, who knows but it's cool they find something attractive anyway.





Numb26 said:


> I can get my "needs" met easily. That isn't hard. But finding someone to talk too? That's harder.



This is what I meant about intrinsic values. 6 pack abs and a six figure salary will only attract so much. Have you seen or heard of those young men who make millions of dollars streaming themselves playing computer games, yet they are as mature as gnats? As a parent, would you want your daughters to marry one of those guys? 

Most young women of quality want a mature partner who makes her feel SAFE (defined by whatever characteristics that means). Money and abs can come and go. Maturity is usually tougher to get rid of.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Cattle country. LOL


Thread jack..... Do you/your employees ride horses to round up the cattle?


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> This is what I meant about intrinsic values. 6 pack abs and a six figure salary will only attract so much. Have you seen or heard of those young men who make millions of dollars streaming themselves playing computer games, yet they are as mature as gnats? As a parent, would you want your daughters to marry one of those guys?
> 
> Most young women of quality want a mature partner who makes her feel SAFE (defined by whatever characteristics that means). Money and abs can come and go. Maturity is usually tougher to get rid of.


But I see now that without my fitness I wouldn't be as attractive to the other sex and it would be harder to find dates. So maybe it's all part of a bigger picture?


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Thread jack..... Do you/your employees ride horses to round up the cattle?


Yes and side by side quads


----------



## ccpowerslave

Hmm well I am pushing 50 and still pretty immature. 

When I don’t have important meetings I wear heavy metal t shirts to work and track pants with flip flops

I have streamed video games.

I have low grade drug and alcohol issues from time to time.

I own a skateboard and go to the skate park with kids who laugh at me.

That said will be celebrating I think my 23rd anniversary next week.

Real security is not being limited. Being able to do what you want when you want to and not caring about it or being limited by time or money.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> But I see now that without my fitness I wouldn't be as attractive to the other sex and it would be harder to find dates. So maybe it's all part of a bigger picture?


Yes!!! It's a whole slew of attributes that put together add up to someone attractive. It's like baking a cake. It needs specific ingredients at proper amounts to make it taste like a cake. Some people also prefer flourless cakes. Some have allergies to eggs and milk and have to find alternatives. But there is always a whole list of things that must be mixed to make a cake. 😁


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Yes and side by side quads


I know it's a business but that sounds like so much fun!


----------



## Numb26

ccpowerslave said:


> Hmm well I am pushing 50 and still pretty immature.
> 
> When I don’t have important meetings I wear heavy metal t shirts to work and track pants with flip flops
> 
> I have streamed video games.
> 
> I have low grade drug and alcohol issues from time to time.
> 
> I own a skateboard and go to the skate park with kids who laugh at me.
> 
> That said will be celebrating I think my 23rd anniversary next week.
> 
> Real security is not being limited. Being able to do what you want when you want to and not caring about it or being limited by time or money.


I am partial to AC/DC shirts and bourbon myself


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Yes!!! It's a whole slew of attributes that put together add up to someone attractive. It's like baking a cake. It needs specific ingredients at proper amounts to make it taste like a cake. Some people also prefer flourless cakes. Some have allergies to eggs and milk and have to find alternatives. But there is always a whole list of things that must be mixed to make a cake. 😁


That's a good analogy!


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I know it's a business but that sounds like so much fun!


It is a lot of hard work but I love it. Nicer then my first career LOL


----------



## ccpowerslave

Numb26 said:


> I am partial to AC/DC shirts and bourbon myself


That works fine for me!


----------



## happyhusband0005

ccpowerslave said:


> Hmm well I am pushing 50 and still pretty immature.
> 
> When I don’t have important meetings I wear heavy metal t shirts to work and track pants with flip flops
> 
> I have streamed video games.
> 
> I have low grade drug and alcohol issues from time to time.
> 
> I own a skateboard and go to the skate park with kids who laugh at me.
> 
> That said will be celebrating I think my 23rd anniversary next week.
> 
> Real security is not being limited. Being able to do what you want when you want to and not caring about it or being limited by time or money.


Funny I was just thinking, I am really immature most of the time. Glad I'm not the only one.


----------



## ccpowerslave

happyhusband0005 said:


> Funny I was just thinking, I am really immature most of the time. Glad I'm not the only one.


I suspect there are more than a few folks of both sexes on this forum. Some perhaps even with six packs!


----------



## Al_Bundy

ccpowerslave said:


> Hmm well I am pushing 50 and still pretty immature.
> 
> When I don’t have important meetings I wear heavy metal t shirts to work and track pants with flip flops
> 
> I have streamed video games.
> 
> I have low grade drug and alcohol issues from time to time.
> 
> I own a skateboard and go to the skate park with kids who laugh at me.
> 
> That said will be celebrating I think my 23rd anniversary next week.
> 
> Real security is not being limited. Being able to do what you want when you want to and not caring about it or being limited by time or money.


That's not immature. Your bills are paid and you're stable. You just like to have fun. Big difference.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Al_Bundy said:


> That's not immature. Your bills are paid and you're stable. You just like to have fun. Big difference.


Perhaps. Juvenile maybe? I will trash talk with 10 year old kids on Call of Duty.


----------



## NotEZ

ccpowerslave said:


> Perhaps. Juvenile maybe? I will trash talk with 10 year old kids on Call of Duty.


Me too! And I'm a 38 year old female ha ha.

I find these threads interesting but REALLY hard to relate too, from personal experience. I can honestly say that I've never looked at a man and said "wow, he's hot" or "I'd do him". Not since I was in high school anyways (and I was with my kids father from 15.. so it never went anywhere). Women on the other hand, I will actually think or say out loud that girls beautiful. Not in a sexual way, just she's friggen beautiful.

The 2 men in my life have been COMPLETE opposites. My children's father, who I was with for 18 years, from the age of 15... was short, black and unfortunately sick. He was the most beautiful man I ever met and the most loving caring partner and father I could have asked for. He became unable to work because of his illness, and was not permitted to work legally until 2 years before he became physically unable (at the age of 29) because he was too sick to¹ get permanent residency in Canada under his parents who brought him here with them when he was 3 (a whole nother topic). It took 7 years from the time of our first daughters birth to get him legal status in the country he has lived in since the age of 3.


He passed away at the age of 42. My now fiance is 6' 3 (I'm 5'2), almost see through in skin color and is opposite of EVERYTHING I would have said I was looking for physically.. plus I made more money than him. He is now the most beautiful person in the world in my eyes. And he literally had everything I would have once said I hated in the looks department.

So unless I'm different from most women, I think this list is more about MEN who have these things being more CONFIDENT and attracting women with their CONFIDENCE, then it really has to do with real women looking for those things.

Sent from my SM-A530W using Tapatalk


----------



## SpinyNorman

If approaching marriage this way is helpful to some people, they should do it. I am all in favor of people thinking out what will work for them as opposed to just doing what society expects, especially when it comes to marriage.

That said, it sounds alien to me. My approach to adulthood was, establish independence, establish an enjoyable lifestyle, figure out if someone fits into it. If the standards I set for myself aren't high enough for someone else, then we just aren't a match.


----------



## DesertRat1978

I can see the value in the recommendations but it is a bit pie-in-the-sky. Expecting 20-year-old men to not make a litany of dumb decisions therefore setting them back is unrealistic. 50 women and not having an unwanted pregnancy or some negative consequence... again a bit fantastical. However, to take it down a step how about we have our sons try to focus on getting college done, go on a road trip, etc. before settling down. Have the little ones too soon and there is inevitably going to be some unrequited desires that get put aside but bubble to the surface later.


----------



## Mr. Nail

.


----------



## oldshirt

I kinda forgot about this thread and didn’t keep up with it.

I haven’t read through all 12 pages of responses but I looked through the last couple pages and I think some of it is missing the point the original commentator was making. 

It’s not so much about making a man attractive to woman although that does play into it.

The main point is if a man accomplished those things, he will be more developed as a man and more competent and confident in his ability to find a suitable mate for him and better able to make a conscious decision on who and what he wants in a mate.

So many men simply bumble into relationships and then float through them with blinders on. For many young men if a pretty girl that smells nice gives him the time of day or especially if she has sex with him, he will bumble along and agree to about anything even if it’s not in his own interests such as marriage, having kids at a young age, signing a mortgage with someone who does not have a living wage etc etc etc. 

The point is not to make women think a fit, 30 year old man with a decent income and has dated 50 women is “hot.”

It is to equip the man to have the skills, wisdom, maturity and experience to navigate through the minefield of women, relationships, sexuality etc and be self aware competent in being able to pick a compatible partner as well as being able to attract such a person. 

Otherwise many guys are simply committing to whatever woman is sucking their **** at the time without having the wisdom and competence and know-how to fully grasp what they are getting into.


----------



## gaius

The way you describe men oldshirt, I think you're more giving advice to a specific type of guy, not men in general. Not every man in my experience has taken so long to figure out what he wanted or allowed himself to be so led by what women want. Even at a young age.

I married the second woman I ever slept with. Knew she was what I wanted from the day we met in person. It's been a blessing being able to learn, grow and mature together. Not with 50 random skanks. 

Men should at least learn how to talk to women first, will agree with that. Don't need to sleep with them all unless you're really feeling it. Not having an STD or kids by a few different women is usually a huge positive whenever that one you really want comes around and you're looking to seduce her.


----------



## oldshirt

gaius said:


> The way you describe men oldshirt, I think you're more giving advice to a specific type of guy, not men in general. Not every man in my experience has taken so long to figure out what he wanted or allowed himself to be so led by what women want. Even at a young age.
> 
> I married the second woman I ever slept with. Knew she was what I wanted from the day we met in person. It's been a blessing being able to learn, grow and mature together. Not with 50 random skanks.
> 
> Men should at least learn how to talk to women first, will agree with that. Don't need to sleep with them all unless you're really feeling it. Not having an STD or kids by a few different women is usually a huge positive whenever that one you really want comes around and you're looking to seduce her.


Neither I nor the original commentator said to actually have sex with 50 women. 

Each man would need to follow his own beliefs and moral compass in terms of actual sexuality. 

The concept is to meet/get to know/date etc a variety of women casually before deciding to commit to one. 

I can’t argue with your success nor do I think you are necessarily a huge exception. 

But sooooo many men sleepwalk into commitment and marriage and children and mortgages etc, simply because some gal that was pretty and smelled nice rubbed up against him. 

Some times it does take being with a variety of women before a guy can take a serious objective look and make an actual rational and informed decision.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Apparently a guy should be prepared to ask his soon to W if she's going to let someone do oral on her or screw one last guy just before the wedding.

That other thread did get a little bumpy. For my part I regret some immediate responses I made. Edited a post or two I did.


----------

