Conference quark::mennotes

Sure - if you play the game, you lose.  If you don't play, you can find
happiness and win.

				Steve

reminds me of this fella i spoke to. when i told i am tired of hunting he
said, relax, if you like one, you've got to send her an invitation, she'll
come if she wants to...

andreas.

    Make yourself available, don't be a pain, don't chase too hard and too
    long, don't juggle(one at a time), don't camp out by the phone, don't
    take no as an insult, don't get too excited when she says yes (at least
    don't make it obvious), don't spill your guts on the first date, don't
    mention your mom unless she asks, listen good, never talk about past
    girlfreinds until you know she's YOUR girlfreind, etc etc
    
    Just a small sampling...
    					Dan D 

wow! dan, here's one talking from major experience! :-)

impressed,
andreas.

    I was told to be a samurai warrior. Expect nothing, be prepared for
    everything.

i like the samurai's state of mind, but how is one to avoid the warrior part 
from getting in the way a bit when making love? :-)


andreas.

    What ever happened to just be yourself?  You people think too much,
    take it as it comes and enjoy it!
    
    w-

be yourself? what room does that leave to the game???

i take it, for you the mating 'game' is fiction.


andreas.

    re .6 (andreas)
    
    ALWAYS remember to leave your sword under the pillow...   8*)
    
    

    Just make her laugh and you've won!
    
    M

    � What ever happened to just be yourself?
    
    Died with Buddy Holley, Elvis and the gang.:)

re .9,  ...and don't get too passionate! <ouch!>


andreas.

    
    re. be yourself

    One of the criteria that I set for a new wife was that she would
    be intelligent enough to recognize what qualities I had to offer
    as a man.  Avoid like the plague those who will take any man with
    a fat wallet with the idea that she can "mold" him into what she
    wants.  

    This may be a good place to enter the cat story :^).

    fred();

    I say, carry fat wallet, and run quickly. (Carry a big stick and walk
    softly). Esp when they start demanding that you marry them cause they
    want you to take care of them. Not the old value set of we will work
    together as a team. The 'we' is dropped and the 'I' singular becomes as
    bold as beacon on a ship that has already crashed on the rocks.:)
    

    �Just make her laugh and you've won!
    
    Thats easy. Tell her that you dont have any money and you want to marry
    her.:)
    
    

re .14, so you mean there's no use for the fat wallet apart from getting
nookie (132.32), since, as fred() suggests in .13, a fat wallet might 
attract the wrong crowd?


andreas.

    Hey! Remember the song:
    
    If you wanna be happy the rest of your life
    bring an ugly woman home as your wife.
    
    Forgot the band. Great song.:)
    

re: .7 & .15, 


I'll second that ;-)

would pretending to have a fat wallet violate the rules of the mating game?


andreas.

    What ever works for you!:) Just remember, according to the rules of
    Boris_bad_enough, if fair play doesnt work, cheating always will be a
    fine replacement.:)
    

    
    re .19
    
    Depends on whether you're looking for a wife, or a quick roll in the 
    hay. ;^).
    
    fred();

    
    Reminds me of a joke I heard once:

    Three Texas businessmen were sitting in a Upper class type social
    establishment.  They were discussing their assets.  The first
    said he had 5000 acres.  5000 acres covered with oil wells.
    The second said he had 50,000 acres.  50,000 acres covered with
    cattle.  The third said he had 5 acres.  "Five Acres", exclaimed
    the others! "What do you have on five acres that allows you to
    be a member of this club"?

    

    "Downtown Dallas", replied the third.

    fred();

    This is horrible...I hope you're not all being serious! Not all women
    want a man for his money. Nowadays WE have our own and don't need 
    yours....especially since there all always string attached to
    it...........

    �I hope you're not all being serious!
    
    Thats why I am not a humanist, I R A humorist.:)
    
    

.20, nah, george, i'm all for fair play. sides, what goods a relationship if
its based on $$$'s.

on the subject of fat wallets, there's this ad from citibank which comes to 
mind: "money talks, wealth whispers"

by that logic, a really fat wallet is hard to spot... 


andreas.

    
    reply
    
>    This is horrible...I hope you're not all being serious! Not all women
>    want a man for his money. Nowadays WE have our own and don't need 
>    yours....especially since there all always string attached to
>    it...........
    
    This is not always obvious, since women will rarely ( but it does
    happen somethimes) marry a man whose financial situation is less
    than her own.
    
    fred();

re .23 this topic serves as an in-depth discussion on whether the mating game
as referred to in 132 is in fact, fact or fiction. as you can see, we are 
struggling hard to find a more serious angle to the debate.

assuming for a moment the mating game is a fact, ie. there are well defined
behaviourisms to it and ones chances of succeeding in it are definable in
attributes (such as $$$'s), we have yet to establish what chances we're left 
with, after having been stripped of our $$$'s (132.35). imo, a futile 
effort, since in my experience, $$$'s don't matter. 

but i readily admint to being a one-eyed optimist and forever romantic :-)

andreas.

.26> This is not always obvious, since women will rarely ( but it does
.26> happen somethimes) marry a man whose financial situation is less
.26> than her own.

over here of course you'd be hard pressed to find a woman who marries
below her financial situation. not surprising if you consider that here,
women still get paid 70% of the equivalent male pay for jobs and in this
country women own 2% of the national $$$'s, and men sit on the other 98%.
    

andreas.

When my wife and I married, her financial situation was a heck of a lot better
than mine!

					Steve

    re . 28
    
>over here of course you'd be hard pressed to find a woman who marries
>below her financial situation. not surprising if you consider that here,
>women still get paid 70% of the equivalent male pay for jobs and in this
>country women own 2% of the national $$$'s, and men sit on the other 98%.
    
    This is a non-sequitor.  Even though a woman makes 70% of a man
    at an equal job, there is still nothing that says that she has
    to marry a man of equal job.  Men of lesser employment will likely
    make less than a female of higher employment even at 70%.  I know
    a _lot_ of men who are bound to make less than some of the women
    I work with.  Even if the 70% is true.  So I'd bet that there is 
    still plenty of opportunity.
    
    fred();

    
    In the U.S. a man who don't support his family is a "deadbeat", "lazy
    bum", etc...  A woman who don't support her family is a "housewife",
    "disadvantaged single parent", etc.

    RE Steve,

    Not saying that it doesn't happen.  Heck, Liz Taylor even married
    some truck driver or something recently.  Just saying that the rareness
    of the occurrence seriously suggests a pattern.

    fred()

re .30 sorry, forgot to mention that we haven't got as many females in higher 
employment when compared to the US (or the UK, which is comparable to the US).

to give you an idea, the last digital excellence award of software folks that 
i was on, the biggest delegation, the UK (over 100), consisted of 25% women 
engineers/managers, the swiss delegation (ca. 20) had one woman (engineer), 
and the german delegation (ca. 80) had one woman (consultant).

all the same, the argument probably applies (albeit to a lesser extent) to the
US too, since there are probably more men than women in better paying jobs.


andreas.

        re .32

>all the same, the argument probably applies (albeit to a lesser extent) to the
>US too, since there are probably more men than women in better paying jobs.

    All the same.  The rareness that the situation occurs as compared
    to the opportunity strongly suggests a pattern.  Even though the
    opportunity _may_ be small, the instance of occurrence is even smaller.

    fred();

    
    
    Now if Ivana Trump decides she wants to marry me and take me away
    from all of this I'd.....er.....uh....I'd have to think about it.
    .
    .
    .
    
    
    
    
    
    I think I'd better keep buying lottery tickets :).

    Men in the US of A who stay home and do the keeping of the children
    and hearth are called homemakers same as women who stay home and do
    the same thing for no pay.  

    

re .33

assuming we have established a statistical truth (eg. "in 70% of cases") 
based on sampling purely the financial situation (as is) of women and men, 
and concluded "a woman is more likely to marry man whose financial situation 
is better than her's".

can we derive from this anything about the significance of the financial 
situation in the selection of spouses? to what extent do you weigh cultural
and ethnic factors, class, education and social standing (which is not 
necessarily linked to income, as in the case of artists)?

and once the income and wealth disparities were corrected out of the samples
(since there is a higer precentage of males in higher employment than females) 
how strong would the statistical truth be then? 

my guess is, pretty much 50:50

now, where's my rich woman... 

andreas.

ps. lottery sounds like a good idea! keeps the hopes up... :-)

    re :  .34 (fred)
    
    
    
    Hello...  Hello...   H E L L O !!  
    
    Fred, it's time to wake up now.   8*)
    
    
    Got a good chuckle out of that one!  Thanks, it made my afternoon.
    
    Tom

       > Men in the US of A who stay home and do the keeping of the children
       > and hearth are called homemakers same as women who stay home and do
       > the same thing for no pay.

    Gee. One guy I know who is home doesn't get paid. Is there there a
    minimum wage for this? Is there a minimum wage for a guy who mow's
    the lawn, wax's the car, paints, the house, stuff like that, as she is
    home as the homemaker? What would you call a woman who did that.
    Besides ambitious?

    

    
    I'll join .27 in being a "one-eyed optimist and forever romantic"
    
    there will always be mates for honest people willing to open their
    hearts.

    	At least in my direct experience, money has some influence on how
    you plan your lives together, but very little influence on whom you
    choose.
    
    	When my parents met, she was working for the British Navy (wartime)
    while he was a university student. Obvious income comparison, since she
    was doing a skilled job and he had none.
    
    	I met my wife at university, and we graduated at the same time. She
    stayed on for a postgraduate qualification while I got a job (earning
    while she was not), but as a result, by the time we married she was
    getting a higher salary than I was.
    
    	My son and his wife also met at university, and in some ways it was
    a similar story. She stayed on for a postgraduate qualification while
    he spent a year with DEC and was TFSO'd. I wouldn't guess which of the
    two is getting the better salary at the moment.
    
    	My elder daughter has been engaged for some time to someone who was
    an electronics design engineer (computer science degree), but has
    recently become a salesman on commission. She has just finished her
    degree course (biology) and joined an accountancy firm in London, with
    job release for doing the courses and exams to become a member of the
    Institute of Chartered Accountants. At the moment, having only been
    working a month she is certainly earning less than he is, but I doubt
    if either of them would hazard a guess at their relative salaries
    if/when she gets her membership of the institution (probably 3 years
    time).

    133.15
    
    That is BS....Love has NOTHING to do with the size of a man's bank
    acct....and if that was the case I my parents would have never married!
    
    
    

    It seems from all these replies that you all are placing financial
    responsibility on just the male...What ever happen to working together 
    as a team?  Doesn't it take two make a marriage? 
    
    Wake up guys...women DON'T want to be taken care of anymore we
    want to contribute... 
    
    Only a stupid, young women or man would think that MONEY is the key 
    to a successful relationship.
    
    
	

.42> It seems from all these replies that you all are placing financial
.42> responsibility on just the male...

no, no, noooo.... we don't _all_ share the same opinion!!!

however, have you given some thought to 132.35? i'd like to see this point 
discussed. it really isn't that straight-forward for a guy to risk taking on 
new financial commitments in a new relationship once he's been taken to the 
cleaners in a previous relationship (that does happen!). i mean, not all women 
are idealists or self-sufficient you know. neither are all guys for that matter,
i know one who's taken his lady for a good ride.

basically, can you appreciate that someone, who's been through an expensive
divorce and who's still being burdened financially from a previous relationship,
is somewhat reluctant to take up new a commintment like marrying and children?
since such a relationship also has financial implications, especially when it
breaks down?


andreas.

Well, there are women who do "want to be taken care of".  I dated several
of them until I realized what was going on.  I don't blame them particularly,
it's what women have been trained to want for decades if not centuries.
Luckily there are many women who are looking for a partner, not
a sugar-daddy.

					Steve

    .42
    
    Yha should listen to the song by Bessy Smith, 'God Bless the Child'.
    And you should take a cup of reality and go sit in on a few divorce
    cases at your local district or superior court. Try the one on Elm
    Street in Nashua. The better ones are going on at 300 Chestnut Street
    in Nashua. And perhaps read up on some real old cases in the libary
    stacks that go back to your forfathers. Its the same old stuff. Men and
    the walking wallet. And if he works to hard, he is neglecting his
    family and if he doesnt work he is neglecting his family. And its
    always the rasputin role of men, money, and the marriage. 
    
    Perhaps you should also watch the Stock Market. Watch when it takes a
    real slam. And watch your friends and neighbors go thru the divorce.
    Then watch em all get married when good times come about. 
    
    It is a come about of the last 20 years or so the 'Me first, and screw
    you', or 'team work is a plural, and I is a singlar'. Or its our money
    and my money. 
    
    

    The latest issue of TIME magazine (topic "Infidelity") had some very
    interesting ideas related to this string...  Anybody else read/see
    this?

    If you go look up the statistic, you'll find that by far the most 
    common cause of "domestic" problems and divorce is over money.  
    
    There was one Country&Western singer who put it, "The next time I
    feel like getting married, I think instead I'll just find a woman
    I can't stand and buy her a house".
    
    fred();

    I hope that all of you don't sterotype the entire female
    population. I have a group of thirty girlfriends(who all come from
    wealthy families) that I went to college with and none of them really care
    how much a man makes. We all agree that if money is important to us
    then it is our responsibility to make it ourselves.
    
    	

    
    re .48
    
>    I hope that all of you don't sterotype the entire female
>    population. I have a group of thirty girlfriends(who all come from
>    wealthy families) that I went to college with and none of them really care
>    how much a man makes. We all agree that if money is important to us
>    then it is our responsibility to make it ourselves.
    
I'll reserve my judgement until I see how many of them marry waiters or
    cab drivers and take them home to be their sugar-love-baby.
    
    fred();
    

    .48 I should show you the personal adds that say things like you should
    be financially secure, or she is looking for a man to take care of her.
    And such...;) and I have a tenant who is going back to New York cause
    she cannot find a man with lots of money in Nashua NH to provide her
    with the ways and means she wants to get accustom too.:)
    
    Cave people? Beats me. Sounds like the pot needs to be heated up for
    you to drink some of that fine coffee.
    
    

re .48

You and your friends are an exception.  Consider yourselves to be more
enlightened than the general population.

as .51 says, it's difficult to find singles ads that specify "financially
secure", a few are even more obvious than that.

The TIME article seemed to attempt to say that it was nature causing women to
desire the men with the most resources (where resources currently are money),
but I believe that nuture has a significant roll in there too.

Rich

.48> I have a group of thirty girlfriends(who all come from wealthy families) 
.48> that I went to college with 

it is probably a fair assumption that the majority of men and women (out there)
do not share this background and that the significance of material values also 
depends on ones background and the ability to be self-sufficient.

i come from a wealthy family and like my parents and grand-parents i had a 
university education. the woman i married was 'culturally' quite the opposite.
money was never of any importance to me, to her it was, most important - as i
could find out during divorce. i refused to get pulled into the mud-slinging 
and all that and had it not been for a fair judge (a liberal, pro-woman judge 
as my attonery cautioned me) i'd have had a far worse deal.


.48>			-< CAVEMAN ATTITUDE >-

sorry, i am unable to follow you on this one. as far as i can tell, we're 
discussing one aspect of relationships from a male perspective. an aspect 
which is of significance, certainly as far as i have experienced. i would not 
myself attribute such an attitude ('cavewoman') to any section of the female 
population. i think this is rude and impolite. i think part of learning in 
life, is learning about different attitudes - whether they appear materialistic 
or not, i'd be more cautious before passing judgements on attitutes which are 
too different to my own.


andreas.

.50> ...how many of them marry waiters or cab drivers...

ya never know, with true love they might even stay together! :-)    

as far as i can tell, key to a good relationship is compatibility... 


andreas.

    re .54
    
    >as far as i can tell, key to a good relationship is compatibility... 
    
    I find a much more important key is how you define "compatability".
    
    fred();

    RE: 48
    	
    
    	OK then:
    
    	1.	Married a guy who owns an Ice Cream Shop
    	2.	A guy from Ireland who is a carpenter
    	3.	Another women married a guy is just getting in politics
    	4.	- DEC fiels service rep
    	5.	Manager of Saga Foods at BU
    	6.	Joined the Peace Corp and meet a man while on assignment
    	7.	Married a computer programmer
    
    And the list goes on....
    
    	One out of 30 is marrying a very wealthy man this September but when
    	they met in high school he wasn't wealthy...I doubt his earning 
    	potential had very little with her falling in love with him...
    
    
    I think if a man is secure with himself as a person he realizes that
    money has nothing to with his identity or his ability to give and
    receive love.
    
    Maybe you are all meeting the wrong women....Not all of my friends
    are married...ha,ha,ha.....
                                          

    re:51 
    
    
    <<<Cave people? Beats me. Sounds like the pot needs to be heated up
    for......>>>
    
    	What???	
    
    	Cave people...what I was meant is that in this day and age of 90's
    	men this idea of women looking just for men with money is kind
    	of old....

    re 54....
    
    	I sorry to hear that you had such a horrible time. I can only offer
    	you hope in saying that there are women out there who don't care
    	at all about the size of you wallet.

re .58, gee, thanks!

re. 55, fred(), i was going to write like i mean compatibility like in 
mutually shared values. more like a compatible social background with more 
or less mutually shared values on family, education, looks, health, money, 
spiritualy, social environment, culture, politics... etc.

and that there is of course the old 'opposites attract each other'... 

but right know i am having serious doubts about that.

anyway, we seem to have gone off track somewhere, where were we?!!


andreas.

    
        re .56

    The only one's out of the list that I'd give you are the Peace Corps
    guy, and maybe the politician and a big maybe on the carpenter.
    I know that "carpenter" covers a lot of territory.  Some "carpenters"
    are hardly in the class of waiters and cab-drivers.  Also I'd have
    to know just what the earning power of the Peace Corps woman relative
    to the guy she is meeting.  Is he also college educated and from a
    well-to-do family.  Same with the politician.

    Second I'd say that you sample is not statistically significant to
    prove your point.  As has been stated before you can find singular
    examples of nearly anything.  

>    Maybe you are all meeting the wrong women....Not all of my friends
>    are married...ha,ha,ha.....

    Or maybe they have met them ( ha, ha, ha ).  And maybe it's a testament
    that there are some intelligent men out there that they are still single
    ...ha, ha, ha....

    fred();

.60> And maybe it's a testament that there are some intelligent men out there 
.60> that they are still single

ah yes, the benefits of a single life are much undervalued, but that's another
topic.


andreas.

    
    actually it seems that, locally, waiters are more in demand than
    software engineers, who are a dime a dozen and shunned as 
    dreadfully boring and having pitiful bodies..
    

of course a 'dull' and 'dreadfully boring' software engineer could improve 
his chances by taking on a saturday night job as a barman. i did this last 
year, helped out some friends who run a disco, by doing the bar once a month. 
the job has unthought of merits! :-)

but before we go into another rathole (if its not yer wallet its yer body!),
i'll side with .7, stay natural, be honest and enjoy the good time whilst it 
lasts. :-)


andreas.    

ps. as regards the game, if U must, then remember, play safe, stay safe!

re 132.35 and

.47> "The next time I feel like getting married, I think instead I'll just
.47>  find a woman I can't stand and buy her a house".

best of course would be to work out the divorce agreement with the new spouse
first, before remarrying... this way one gets into it without worries. this
may not sound awfully romantic, but heck, as my attorney put it (when i started
a business-partnership years back): "work out the exit procedure first! what's
a real partnership if the termination can't be discussed properly?".


andreas.

    A prenep? Ha! State side they are not worth the paper nor the legal
    fees! Many a prenup has been thrown out in court. One guy married some
    lovely lady. Was married for 6 months. She wanted out, He had one of
    those boring jobs, worked for an airline... needless to say, she
    cleaned him out. She go the house, that had been paid for by him....and
    although she was a working woman, she had a wadge disparity between his
    and hers. And he pays alimony/maintence..... for how long.. beats me!
    And! The marriage was six months. I donno about the caveman attitude
    here. :) But I know a pilot who lives in a cave, or under a bridge.:)
    
    

.65> A prenep? Ha! State side they are not worth the paper nor the legal fees! 

did they ever count?

over here (switzerland), marriage is a contract [there are actually three 
contractual forms as far as i am aware] and it is possible to keep material 
assests separated throughout the marriage if the contract is set up for it 
from the start.


andreas.

    They counted for about a fort night....:)
    

Re: .56
    
>  I think if a man is secure with himself as a person he realizes that
>  money has nothing to with his identity or his ability to give and
>  receive love.

You may have struck on something here.  Perhaps it isn't
the women who always perceive that a man's worth is in the
weight of his wallet.  Note how many men measure themselves
by this ruler, and perhaps that carries over into the way
they present themselves to others, including potential
mates.

God knows I've met enough men who seem to think the world
of themselves simply because of the car they drive, the
job they hold, or the money they have (even if they merely
inherited it), only to find beneath that veneer, a raging
bozo...

tim

    And they love them bozo's cause they are earth mothers.:)
    
    

>   And they love them bozo's cause they are earth mothers.:)

That's not what I meant...;-) it's just that someone who feels 
self-confident and secure in themselves, presents themselves as 
such, and the people around them sense it.  It could be based on 
whatever that individual decides to choose as their own self-worth, 
including money.

In other words, if a man decides that his wallet makes him
valuable, he'll project an image of self-confidence and security
to others, including women.  Not everyone will necessarily realize 
that it's based on a value that they don't necessarily share: money.  
They may simply see this man as a self-assured, confident, secure man.  
I mean, it's not like he's going to come right out and say, "I 
feel good about myself because I'm rich", and not everyone will see 
through him right away.

Of course, when they do, and if they're already pissed about other
things, they'll realize that the one, best way to really do some
damage is to hit the guy where it really hurts - his self 
worth: his money.

I'm not saying it's always like this - I think both instances exist:
the gold-diggers and the money-kings.  I'm sure the divorce courts are
full of them both...;-)

tim

    
    you cannot deny that wealth is somewhat of a confidence builder.
    
    but, that still gets us back to confidence as the best attractant 
    for females.
                              
    men who have the requisite confidence, do well in their relationships.
    confidence can emanate from Zen, money, faith in some religion, or
    a host of other sources.
                         

i tend to agree that between two, money has little to do, with the ability
to give or receive love. but does money not invariably enter somewhere down
the line when you're into making real commitments like moving together,
buying a house together, starting a family? is this sort of commitment not
often expected when pursuing a relationship? and when making this type of 
commitment, can money not become an issue when both partners are not more or 
less on (financially) equal ground? ie. if it is (again) one of the two, who 
is primarily responsible for income.

also, following divorce when starting a new long-term relationship, how easily 
are prior commitments accomodated? for instance, i pay the lion's share towards 
my childrens house, their schooling and their upbringing, not that i am legally 
obliged to any longer, and even without having custody, children are a 
life-long commitment. whilst this makes sense to most parents, ie. voluntarily 
maintaining prior commitments (without having custody), this does not always 
make sense to potential mates without children.

very often, money seems to play a role somewhere in relationships.


andreas.

    If money has nothing to do with relationships, ask someone who has 
    divorced. Either side will have the same word in the context of 
    the name calling, or the reasoning of not getting along. Money. 
    When it is tight in the house hold, the couples start to argue about it
    most. When there is plenty at hand, there is no agruments. No
    disagreements. All is one major long weekend vacation.
    
    For some men, who still pay the way to the movies, dinners, and open
    doors. For these men, no money, no dates....., no dates.... no
    relationships. When they have commitments of prior families, it is the
    same game.
    
    
    
     Anasdfd yeasdft, they havafdfage a  

.73> For some men, who still pay the way to the movies, dinners, and open
.73> doors. For these men, no money, no dates....., no dates.... no
.73> relationships. 

being old-fashioned myself and not (yet) in a financial straight-jacket, 
paying "the way to the movies, dinners, and ..." is a pleasure. the question
is of course, where does one go from there.

my issue is more with relationships, and what to consider a meaningful 
relationship in a situation, where there are already existing priorities
with regards to the children. priorities which i don't want to have to
compromise on.

is it natural to narrow the field of (understanding) mates to those in a 
similar situation...
    
.73> When they have commitments of prior families, it is the same game.    

...and then possibly, continue together, much as before, hopefully with a 
qualitative improvement? :-)


andreas.

    
    re .74

>is it natural to narrow the field of (understanding) mates to those in a 
>similar situation...

    In searching for a mate, I believe it is helpful in the long run to
    look for a _mate_. Not just a sex partner.  Too many marriages fail
    because the married for "love", then woke up a couple years later
    wondering what it was that they ever saw in that person.  If you
    marry a sex partner, it can often be cheaper to just go pick it up
    on the street corner and pay for it up-front :^}.

    Doesn't mean that there shouldn't be love there too, but marrying 
    someone with the idea that they'll change or that you can change
    them is naive if not outright arrogant.

    And there's always exceptions to the rule as far as women in 
    the same situation.  My wife could never have kids.  I have four.
    Sometimes I wonder if she took the kids to get me or took me to
    get the kids ;^).  As I said before, there are a few nuggets,
    but you have to sift a lot of sand to find them.

    fred();

    >basically, can you appreciate that someone, who's been through an
    >expensive divorce and who's still being burdened financially from a 
    >previous relationship, is somewhat reluctant to take up new a 
    >commintment like marrying and children?
    >since such a relationship also has financial implications, especially
    >when it breaks down?
    
    Being an almost divorced woman with 2 kids, I always wanted things to 
    be fair on both sides. And that's the way we did it when we separated.
    If I met someone having a financial burden from previous marriage 
    wouldn't affect me too much because I wouldn't accept to depend on 
    him anyway. Question of pride.
    On the other hand I wouldn't like either to pay for his past : he would
    have to sort that out himself and I wouldn't like to be involved.
    
    As of new relationship and financial implications ... why would you
    start one if you already think of when it's going to break ?????
    You'll never get anywhere this way ...
    
    Kathryn
    

> why would you start one if you already think of when it's going to break ?????

poor track record i guess... :-(


andreas.

        re .76

    > why would you start one if you already think of when it's going to break ?????

    I think a lot of men make the mistake of _not_ considering this.  Many,
    especially those entering marriage, are in deep denial that, "It
    will never happen to me".  Many who are married are in the denial of,
    "I hope to God it doesn't happen to me".  When entering into a 
    relationship, a man is committing to more than he may bargain
    for.  Especially if children are involved.  Much of which he will
    have little or no control over.  If more men consider the long
    term, or consider what is likely going to happen if the relationship
    breaks up, then more may reconsider entering into the relationship
    in the first place,  or at least give more consideration about
    who they enter into the relationship with.

    fred();

    Why is yours breaking?

since the author of .76 is from my neck of the woods, the most common cause
for divorce around here (re. 132.77) probably applies to her too, ie. "the 
partners have lived themselves apart and have little reason left to stay 
together".

am i close? ;-)

andreas.

    > Why is yours breaking ?
    
    ... Feelings are missing ... not money ! An't I a lucky lady eh ?!
    
    > partners have lived themselves apart and have little reason left to
      stay together".
    
    > am i close? ;-)
    
      ... Basically ... that's the way the story went ...
    
    Now about mating game ... I think the mating game exists on both sides.
    It can be fun and nice (if we both feel this special complicity), I
    don't like it when it's made to betray the person in front.
    Honesty is, to me, major in any kind of relationship.
    
    Kathryn

    > "partners have lived themselves apart and have little reason left to
      stay together"
    
    Oh yes? how is that? 
    
    What happened to their "vow"? to their "word" given in marriage? 
    
    I find that A GOOD REASON to stay together.  It was promised, with
    witnesses, and signed by a judge, and in most cases by the church as well.
    
    If feelings are missing, committment should not, "let's bring the
    feelings back" should be the solution...(in my opinion)
     

    
    I find that those who base their relationship on being "in love" 
    will forever doom themselves to one broken relationship after
    another.  The "chemistry" will always wear off after a year or
    too.  Unless it is replaced by a deeper love and commitment to 
    each other, the relationship will die.
    
    Ten years and fifty to go.
    fred();

    30 plus years and a many more to go...
    
    Ana

.82>    > "partners have lived themselves apart and have little reason left to
.82>      stay together"
.82>    
.82>    Oh yes? how is that? 

for instance, marrying way too young when still developing, maturing. if the 
two don't come from a similar background and take a different path in their
development it can happen, that one day, they have nothing left in common.

that can happen you know, it did so in my case. fwiw, there's alot more
"commitment" and "respect" in that old relationship now than there ever was,
just that the "love" has gone.


andreas.

    Better late then never, right. Here is my 2 cents worth.
    
    In my experience I never heard of a woman who didn't consider
    money when considering a husband... 
    
    It goes like this, if she is rich ... Alla Elisabeth Taylor
    then it doesn't matter. But if she isn't, marriage is definitly
    the one of the ways, (many would say the best way) to improve
    your situation in life. 
    
    There isn't to say that women don't consider anything else,
    that there is no love, etc. Its just that if you are not in
    the right bracket you are not even considered, "nothing can
    come of it, so don't even ask for a date".  Exceptions must
    exist, but I can't seem to remember a single one.
    
    Gil

<    In my experience I never heard of a woman who didn't consider
<    money when considering a husband... 
    
<    come of it, so don't even ask for a date".  Exceptions must
<    exist, but I can't seem to remember a single one.
    
   Any woman who marries a GI is not considering money.  One latched on to me
23 years ago when I was making a whopping $750/month, not much even for 1971.
We're doing much better now, but there could have been little monetary 
consideration at the time. We paid taxes on about $7000 combined income that
year (not all my Navy pay was taxable.)

   Sorry to hear you're experiences have been so negative.

Al

    I didn't consider money when I married.  At that time my husband to be
    was unemployed, and even when he was employed during our courtship I
    made more than him.  In fact to this day I still make twice his annual
    salary.  All our money goes into the same account, and it is just
    that...our money...not his and mine.
    
    Shilah

	When we got married, I was underemployed and just out of
	grad school, working mornings at McDonald's and peddling
	my resume in the afternoon.  Jan was a programmer/analyst
	with the government.  With an English Lit. degree, I was
	not exactly prime material for a job, much less a rapid
	rise in salary.  Musta been my charming disposition... 8^)

	Just another data point.

	Ron