<p>Bedhead you are totally right.....when a girl sees a guy receiving attention from a bunch of girls, it makes her want that guy just that much more. If a lot of girls are attracted to a specific guy then a girl will just be like "well if they like him, then he must have something going...let me like him too."</p>
<p>Interesting point...you don't want jerks? Well, what would you choose between a superhot rock star who treats you like you're nothing, but who has huge success, and a really nice guy that would give anything to make you happy, who works on a computer?</p>
<p>Many women will want to sleep with the rock star. A really nice guy who works on a computer is good boyfriend material perhaps, if he has a personality.</p>
<p>What is it with the rockstars? To my mind, that's really stupid. I understand the urge to sleep with football or tennis players, they have great bodies and endurance :)...but rockstars are generally alcoholics, do drugs and have sex with all kinds of dirty women. Men have fantesies with models, nurses, teachers and these are understandable: none of them shhit on themselves, pardon the expression. If I was a woman, I would definetly avoid sleeping with a rock star</p>
<p>DeluxeHardballer, another dude in the men's marriage strike (at least I'm assuming so), nice to meetcha! I'm not planning on dating or marriage as well, at least not until the laws change to make things more equitable in divorce court for men, but when I hear stories of guys getting married and then having to pay for kids that possibly aren't his (paternity tests don't matter) after only 6 months to a year of "marriage", I figure, what's the point of marriage for American men?</p>
<p>Just find a woman you don't like, buy her a house, and mail her a check for a couple thousand every month for 18 years if you want to experience marriage...>_></p>
<p>
[quote]
not all American girls are gold diggers.
most aren't.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This used to be true a couple generations ago, now, as I understand it, its the other way around. Yeah, there are good women out there who aren't gold diggers and who aren't these modernized anti-male people who should be avoided at all costs, I'm not denying it, but the chances of finding her are so slim, and the chances of being burned by some woman and having to be her wage slave are so high, that its just not worth the risk to even look anymore. </p>
<p>
[quote]
A really nice guy who works on a computer is good boyfriend material perhaps, if he has a personality.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you meant...</p>
<p>A really nice guy who works on a computer is good wage slave material perhaps, regardless of whether or not he has a personality.</p>
<p>Has it ever occurred to you that these so-called "anti-male" women become like that after reading posts like yours? Yuck. Good thing you've decided not to date, so I won't have ever have the pleasure of being rudely hit on by you. But all men are interested in is sex, so why should you care if your girlfriend or wife doesn't actually love you? You never loved her, never even came close.</p>
<p>Fellows, if you look to Romanian models, find them beautiful and then decide that all Romanian girls are hot, you're complete idiots. Sorry about that, but there is a tool called Adobe Photoshop and some skills, which can turn even the most ugly 50+ lady into an ~20 years old hottie...</p>
<p>Whoa, BlahDeBlah, just for the record and the tongue is not in the cheek on this, I love and respect women. And I think learning how to do the dance that occurs between men and women is not a sign of disrespect, it's realism. There are realities, like my good friend Sharon who tells she's attracted to power and would sleep with a variety of politicians in a New York second, 'cause that's her aphrodisiac. It's just a reality; I don't think she's into rock stars though. Regarding the general rating of women, women do this all the time too. I see personal ads for, you name it, Asians, Blacks, Whites, etc. of a certain type even sometimes of a certain salary level. Women rate and choose all the time. It's just a reality.</p>
<p>And yes men are often driven by sex, but what they often end up wanting is a girlfriend they love and lust after. Both.</p>
<p>Hey, if various male posters are allowed to sit around and make generalizations that all women are after is rich men that they can screw over in a divorce, I'm allowed to sit around and make generalizations that men only care about to begin with is sex. If one is valid, then so is the other.</p>
<p>lol</p>
<p>Actually I think women are into sex even more than men are. But most women make a substantial effort to hide this, while most men are simply more open about their impulses.</p>
<p>Indeed men are only after sex. The thing is, to get it is a complicated process that involves women. Not fair. It is a pain to deal with their problems, too.</p>
<p>And yes, women are more into sex, they just do a better job of acting reserved.</p>
<p>So what if most men are only after sex?
I mean, it's just sex.
But when love comes knocking on our door, we better hope we know it.
Face it, we're animals. We have it in our instinct to reproduce, if we don't our species won't survive. So it's a natural thing to have sex. Nothing to argue about.</p>
<p>But I understand a lot of American women look different on this?</p>
<p>Alec, I don't think you'd like to marry a girl who had sex with 40 guys before you. So, it's a good thing that women make a selection process before sleeping with someone. The tragedy is that they generally pick up morons.</p>
<p>So let's say I get married at 30.
And my wife is 30 aswell, she has been fiddling around since she was 15.
Thats 2 guys a year, or a really really wild summer.</p>
<p>As long as she loves me and only me until death do us apart, of course I'd marry her, if my feeling were the same.
I don't think you should throw away the love of your life because she had a lot of sex. I'd be devastated if a girl told me that she can't marry me cause I've been with a lot of women. Thats absurd.</p>
<p>Yikes, I forgot the whole cumulative thingy. Yeah, girls end up having banged at least 100 guys by the time they turn 30.</p>
<p>BlahDeBlah: Yes, you have every right to make those generalizations. But for the record: I wasn't saying that women just want rich guys, in case you were responding to my post when you said that. I was just saying that there are lot of women that similarly rate men on superficial characteristics. Oh, and by the way, I agree guys are often sex focused, but I said in an earlier post that I would rather go out with a woman who is, on some arbitrary 1 through 10 ranking a 6.5 - 7 and who is intelligent and spirited than go out with a "totally hot" woman. To be brutally frank, I would gladly sleep with the latter, but in my experience, really good looking women in the US at least let themselves go in other areas because they are so good looking. So they are vain, often, don't challenge themselves, and are therefore a lot of work. Interesting is better than hot, for me. And yes, men are wired differently for sex, but I would take a women I was really in love with and in lust with at the same time, over sleeping with a bunch of "hot" women.</p>
<p>It seems to me a woman's challenge, if she wants a relationship, is to make sure she finds a guy who is really into her, not just into getting into her pants. So, make him wait for the big act, though you might throw him crumbs along the way. And get to know him fairly well.</p>
<p>The point of this post originally wasn't men versus women, though, it was Americans versus others.</p>
<p>this conversation has officially gotten out of control. please give me reprieve of ur insensibilities: i've heard them all already. if u have any new ideas about women please do share, but if ur just going to repeat the stereotypical descriptions that we all already know, put a sock in. now, let me speak.</p>
<p>first of all, i'd like to correct the fallacious information given by some of the above posts, then i'll get to the nuts and bolts:
usa's major white ethnic group is not anglo-saxon or irish, it's german.
women are not more sexually demanding than men. this is incompatible for biological point of view in which men try to impregante as much women as possible in order to gain as much offspring by his gene pool while women tend to be more selective of choosing her sexual partner in order to insure her security and well-being. </p>
<p>i'm very surprised at how narrow-scoped this conversation is. we are merely describing women without any consideration of culture, history, art, etc. and we are also describing not all women, but only western women. this, i find, truly depressing. but since u have chosen so much of a dull subject, i will do what i can to expose u people to a bigger field of philosophy.
as i probably mentioned earlier, shopenhaur believed that men are physically, anatomically more beautiful than women. why? women bear children, thus their hip is grossly enlarged to meet this biological necessity, and their breast renders them almost completely incapable of partaking in strenuous exercises which above all things shape the human body to its truest and greast beauty. we look at art (i am art history major) and see from the age of classical greece to the dawn of modernism the encompensing preoccupation of europe with the human form, the " backbone of western art up to 1860s" of the human form, the male body predominated. the greeks, and then the italians were so much in love with the male body, the organic contours, the softly bulging bones, muscles, etc. today, we are familiar with some of the modernized characteristics that render tialian men so beautiful: loose white collar, unshaven dark face, ferrari, tuscan beach, tenor voice. of course, today these characteristics connotes a romantic quality. thus let me here conclude that italian, not french, is the the "language of love" i know french from experience i know it is not in anyway beautiful.</p>
<p>my second point must concern with the subject with which we are concerned with: beauty of women. the art-producing giants, italy and france, had produced many works of art that represented their notion of beautiful women: big latinized eyes, fleshiness and chubbiness. aftern romanticism, and especially after neo-classical period, women's form seemed to improve through movements such as impressionism. but them, this trend was slashed and trampled by the oncomming tide of modern art through c</p>
<p>The point of this thread has nothing to do with what you're saying. And it's not about American versus others, it's just about American girls. Who cares if they trap stupid guys into marriage for money? I just wanted an opinion about how good looking they are. I'm not planning to get married in the next 8-10 years, so I really don't care about the aspect of lawsuits. I just wondered how much fun will I be able to have in college...it's odd how you all got into serious discussions about marriage and children</p>
<p>Sauronvoldemort: Dang you are, well, kinda pompous, and when you adopt that tone, you'd better be right. See below on ethnic make-up.</p>
<p>By the way, I think your high-fallutin' tone is kinda funny. Are you still a virgin? Job one is to work on that, my friend, if you are. It will help your prose, make it more natural. If you're not, you still need to work harder.</p>
<p>I think the point of your last paragraph was that you were getting ready to wind up and say a sense of beauty is subjective. Duh. Of course. Some cultures think tan is low class and others think it's youthful and beautiful, as just a small example. But I don't know if you were going to say that since you're posting got cut off.</p>
<p>Yes, a lot of posts on this site focused on European women, but not all. Personally, I like dark women, have dated Indians, African Americans, and various Asians happily. But prefer Latinas (who often happen to have African or Indian blood). I talked about this. They are an increasing part of the ethnic mix here. The European bias reflects in part the fact that he's coming from Europe and also that US is predominantly European. But anybody in his right mind who appreciates the female physique should be an equal opportunity employer.</p>
<p>I didn't get your point about male beauty being the focus of aesthetics through history. First of all, I had assumed you are a guy, but maybe you're a woman, so sorry if I got it wrong. What does the aesthetic focus of art through history have to do with this conversation? The man who posted was a man interested in women. Answers started with that assumption. If you as a guy find the "grossly enlarged" hips of women to be repellent, I don't doubt you find these posts disgusting and limited. You might be more comfortable on a thread that extols the beauty of the male physique. I don't take Schopehauer's words for it, my friend. Give me a woman's grossly enlarged hips any day. I will worship them, spank them, and do anything else with them that she likes. But I digress. Let me catch my breath her and wind things down a notch. If you are into the beauty of men, that's cool. Embrace it. Explore it. The poster seems to like women, though.</p>
<p>God, I hope I meet the women you meet, if you think women are more sexually demanding than men in the sense that they want it more. And if you do meet a lot of women like this, what are you reading this post for (assuming you came back to read it)? Women are built differently in general. I was once approached by a women who was a swinger. She let it be known that she liked sex with several people at once. But the funny thing is: she wasn't loose. It was not easy to get into her pants. She wanted love and a boyfriend and eventually a husband. You can put the swinger in the woman, but you can't take the woman out of the swinger. Women are more exacting and generally will not just jump into the sack with anyone, whereas a lot of men would. Women need more out of sex, generally. And I agree that they have more at stake, from an evolutionary/mate selection standpoint.</p>
<p>ETHNICITY IN US</p>
<p>Yes, Germans rank the top by sole ethnic group. However, you note I said (if you were referring to my post) Anglo and Irish, broadly speaking. And if you wanted to count Scots in this category, I am even more right. Do the math, Irish and English together far outrank Germans.</p>
<p>Ancestry of U.S. Population by Rank
2000Rank Ancestry group Number Percent
1. German 42,841,569 15.2%
2. Irish 30,524,799 10.8
3. African American1 24,903,412 8.8
4. English 24,509,692 8.7
5. American1 20,188,305 7.2
6. Mexican 18,382,291 6.5
7. Italian 15,638,348 5.6
8. Polish 8,977,235 3.2
9. French 8,309,666 3.0
10. American Indian1 7,876,568 2.8
11. Scottish 4,890,581 1.7
12. Dutch 4,541,770 1.6</p>
<p>I think YOU'RE missing the point of the topic. Girls are evil. Women are manipulative.</p>