SolidCamel wrote:Ladies how many of you cool with a bidaar?


Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators
SolidCamel wrote:Ladies how many of you cool with a bidaar?
sophisticate wrote:In terms of spousal abandonment that is obviously case-by-case. However the gender disparity is certainly present.
In consonance with previous work on the question, women remain far more likely to want out of their marriages than men: 55% said they wanted their marriages to end more than their spouses while only 29% of men reported the same. And the differences don’t seem to be due solely to differences in perception by gender: 42% of men reported that their spouse wanted the marriage to end more than they did and only 20% of women said the same.
Naa yareey you need to relax.sophisticate wrote:Phinks, no offense walaal but your snet writing style comes across as abrasive. Take it easy son and don't come to any rash conclusions. You don't know me and I certainly don't know you. Just because I value myself and have not participated in premarital relations, that doesn't make me nice or a good girl. Dare I say I'm just as capable of being self-interested and as manipulative as the next person (its a matter of keeping these forces in check). Those terms are situational and they depend on who you ask. I'm diplomatic most of the time. However, you must distinguish between an individual's private and public persona. All I know is if I'm not getting better as a person, or making amends for my past grievances then there is something truly wrong.
This isn't the first time you mentioned this fellow. In fact, I can recall you mentioning him several times. Tbh sophisticate, I still don't understand these "values" you're on about. You had a tall, financially secure and presumably good looking man who wanted your hand in marriage and it honestly sounds like to me that you really fancied him. But alas; this is none of my business and to prod further into your personal life would be rather rude and disrespectful on my part.sophisticate wrote:Of course a guy that is tall, makes money and is good looking is a catch. The fellow I used to talk to matched that. However, we didn't have the same values. I wasn't willing to negotiate. So, that in and of itself is not enough. And there are a lot of men out there that are "good enough". They might be missing a characteristic or two that you outline, but they make up for it in other ways. Because I know life isn't as clear cut as that, does not make me disingenuous. Just because someone is desirable doesn't make them "a good fit," nor does it make them "compatible."
sophisticate wrote: If you did a cost-benefit analysis on a play boy you'd come out robbed. - There is no ROI (return on investment). Whatever short-term gratification would be outweighed by major losses and time wasted. I've known that since childhood thanks to my books and because aabo taught me game theory (and not how to be played when you are set-up for zero-sum losses, as a female) before I started high school. He was well before his time. Those that are trying to fill a void normally go for cads.![]()
Estarix wrote:I can see Phinks is swimming with red pill knowledge, lol do you frequent returnofkings.com.
Id like to add that while women have inherent value (vagina, childbirth) men on the other hand have none whatsoever, in essence depending on who's in charge an slight excess of them they can be served as cannon fodder in conflict or are expended in any other way. The only value a man has lies with how much money earns. Women are instinctively wired to value men in this way (feed and shelter her children), men that fail to meet this level are useless in her sights. The only exception to this rule is when they are chasing excitement (bad boys).
SolidCamel wrote:Ladies how many of you cool with a bidaar?
Wow...Amira143 wrote:![]()
![]()
sophisticate wrote:It's not prying. I don't have anything to be ashamed of. Phinks if you much know, I don't have anything to compare it to. That is the first and last example. Hence, that's the only notable reference point. I've decided to refrain from aimless conversation at food/beverage establishments ever since.
Horta what are you implying or insinuating now?sophisticate wrote:Not surprised you subscribe to returnofkings. Makes a ton of sense now.
SolidCamel wrote:Thanks sxb. I'm not really that concerned with it, I rock the bald look with a fresh bread.
Rambie wrote:Phinks
At least those actors banged every beauty queen you see in Hollywood nowadays before they got the bidaar or settled down.
What the poor Faraax have accomplished in contrast?
Amira143 wrote:Phinks dear, I wasn't laughing at him. I![]()
at the sad face. Anywho I don't discriminate against the hairless unless he is beardless too, then its a no no.
Bald head + beard =
Bald head + beardless =
I like to think we both made good points. She explained her position with eloquence and great clarity which is a nice change from the usual clusterfuck of topics and posts that litter Snet.Rambie wrote:Kudos for both of you. I wish all topics on Snet is discussed like that. What a magnificent and rare debate we have here.
Sorry Soph, but I am more into Phinks point of view, he said what was in my mind and even more.