<p>Very much in line with what my female med school friends have been telling me. But at the moment, because we’re all poor, living off of loans, it’s usually about intelligence and ambition. Guys are intimidated by how smart these ladies are (or how much smarter the guys assume they are because they’re in medical school). The guys get so caught up on the medical school thing, that they ignore how great these girls are.</p>
<p>Solution: Don’t date, and don’t marry.</p>
<p>Unless they want that lady to get half of what they are making now if/when the divorce comes in a few years…</p>
<p>And even if these guys can’t take the above advice, they shouldn’t worry, because once those ladies’ biological clocks starts to run out, a lot of those them who turned those guys down before will be asking them for marriage (or at least for kids and a ‘father figure’). </p>
<p>Or so I’ve been told…to me, it doesn’t matter either way.</p>
<p>This conversation reminds me of a teacher who’s totally for feminism. She says “Women should be given equal rights, and why shouldn’t we change society the way it was 200 years ago?”. Then I just think “because women are supposed to take care of the offspring. If both the guy and girl go to get careers, then who is supposed to raise a better generation?” and so on…</p>
<p>FYI, I’m opposed to feminism and affirmative action.</p>
<p>Poster above me get ready for a full scale argument by thr feminsits! lol.</p>
<p>" The guys get so caught up on the medical school thing, that they ignore how great these girls are."</p>
<p>Those guys are missing out. </p>
<p>To of my Harvard roommates are doctors. One, who is on faculty at a major med school, married a guy who is now an elementary school teacher, and was, I think, a (college educated) bagel store manager when they met. They’ve been married about 20 years. Through much of their marriage, he was a stay at home dad.</p>
<p>The other, who is on faculty at another major medical school, married a guy who’s in law enforcement. They’ve been married about 15 years.</p>
<p>I have 2 women friends who are well respected law professors. One is married to a former waiter. The other is married to a writer who recently got his doctorate (They are in their 40s.), and for much of their marriage was working part time, low paying jobs that allowed him to do a lot with their kids.</p>
<p>As is the case with many men who have demanding jobs, often women who have demanding jobs choose to have partners with less demanding jobs because particularly after they have kids, there is someone at home with the time and energy to provide kids with the attention they need while also providing emotional support to the very hard working spouse with the demanding career.</p>
<p>“Then I just think “because women are supposed to take care of the offspring. If both the guy and girl go to get careers, then who is supposed to raise a better generation?” and so on…”</p>
<p>Wow, I didn’t think anybody thought like this anymore! You should have been born in 1533.</p>
<p>Oh yeah and I have no problem with women earning more than men if they work harder. Who WOULD have a problem with that?</p>
<p>I read this article carefully when it came out. One of the things I noticed was that the women weren’t complaining so much about the money the guys were currently making as they were about the ambition and responsibility (or lack there of) of the guys they were dating. One guy was a delivery manager or something and that’s as high as his aspirations went. He had no wish to develop himself intellectually or challenge himself in any way. Another guy wanted to hang out in bars for his entertainment. No one wants to date someone who has different leisure interests. I know plenty of women who pull in the bread for their families and everyone seems happy with the arrangement, but that’s because both parties can carry on a conversation with each other and like doing the same things for entertainment.</p>
<p>Almost all my friends and I met our soulmates when we were in Grad school. Some finished school right after Masters, got jobs, and settled down while some of us worked through our doctoral degrees and married before our dissertations were completed. We studied together, were broke in school together, got jobs about the same time, and are successful together.</p>
<p>When I look back at a few marriages that did not last the test of time, it was either because the husband gave up his ambitions and took an average job or because the hubby was much too ambitious and wanted his wife to give up her career and become a ‘stay at home’ Mom and be fully supportive of his career! The marriages that have been lasting over nearly 3 decades are the ones where both husband and wife have been career driven and have been a team. Wives in these marriages have sometimes taken a trough in their career when their motherhoods are in peak but they returned to work when kids went to school. Some of them are actually earning way more than the men. But again, in a marriage it’s not about who makes how much. WE make money for OUR family as a TEAM.</p>
<p>When looking for a ‘soul mate’, look for someone who reflects your intellect, energy, your enthusiasm, interest in your and her career. Support each other throughout. There’s nothing better than having someone who you come home to after laborious day’s work and be able to vent about some Scientific problem from work. It’s great to get their perspective. We go through this together as a team. This is why I think, intellegent women look for brains rather than muscles or just money in their soul mates.</p>
<p>If you have got ‘brains’, money will most certainly come along. For smart women, NOTHING is a better turn-on than an intellegent man!</p>
<p>Let us hypothesize as to why this thread is featured in a College Discussion forum.</p>
<p>For as long as I’ve been on CC, I’ve never seen a non-college-related thread make it into the “Top Threads”.</p>
<p>Maybe CC wants to reaffirm its reputation as not only a College forum, but an intellectual forum – thus decreasing profane or immature posts.</p>
<p>Some thoughts. Women want smart men, looks are very secondary, personality counts much more (shortness no issue- My H is 4-5" shorter, is ten feet tall in my mind and I forget he is shorter than other men). The current generation of young men has had the benefit of proper diagnosis and teaching of learning disabilities since elementary school (based on observations of son’s cohort here), and ADHD is not the excuse for so many to lack ambition or a sense of responsibilty as mentioned. I have seen and heard about far too many men who take the easy job now, most often in computers, instead of getting a college education. Women don’t care about a money or looks rich man, they want a man rich in character. Strong women want, and deserve, strong men- brains and the willingness to use them goes a lot further than money (especially if a woman doesn’t have to depend on a man for her income). Looks- beauty is in the eye of the beholder, women look at faces, not bodies, to determine attractiveness; character and interest in the other person shows. You guys want the girl, then learn what women want, it is different than what men’s biology directs them to. The rules may have changed, guys now may have to grow up/mature more than in the past. Making women strong does not diminish men, men are capable of meeting the challenge- but are they shell shocked by the loss of previous entitlements?</p>
<p>Addenda-pages could be written on this issue, some of the above is meant to provoke thought.</p>
<p>^I wish that was true. I really do.</p>
<p>A 5-foot-8 man was just as successful in getting dates as a 6-footer if he made more money — precisely $146,000 a year more. For a 5-foot-2 man, the number was $277,000." </p>
<p>“Maybe the most striking numbers are with regard to income-ethnicity trade-offs, as shown in Table 5.6. For equal success with a white woman, an African-American man needs to earn $154,000 more than a white man. Hispanic men need an additional $77,000, and Asian men need an additional $247,000 in annual income. In contrast to men, women mostly cannot compensate for their ethnicity with a higher income.” (page 29) </p>
<p>More info on heightism:
“A survey of Fortune 500 CEO height in 2005 revealed that they were on average 6 feet tall, which is 3 inches taller than the average American man. Fully 30% of these CEOs were 6 foot 2 inches tall or more; in comparison only 3.9% of the overall United States population is of this height.[6] Equally significantly, similar surveys have uncovered that less than 3% of CEOs were below 5′7″ in height, and that 90% of CEOs are of above average height.”</p>
<p>You are speaking of generalities. We are giving specific examples. My life experience has shown me that short men who are aware of being short often react less favorably to the world, ie they have a complex, whereas men such as my H act as tall as any 6 footer. Having a strong ego, ie having confidence in one’s self, makes people forget they are physically looking down. Having a strong, self absorbed ego likewise diminishes a man, no matter what his physical features otherwise are. It is easier to fit norms, but remember not all successful people fit norms, and people fitting norms do not always achieve success. You are also focusing on the business world- not all of us care about it- there are more elite men than those in business.</p>
<p>yayyy women. lol</p>
<p>Well one thing that we can gain out of this article is that the glass ceiling is now gone. Women can not complain about not making as much money as men. </p>
<p>Women will lie all day telling people that looks don’t matter and money doesn’t matter. It is complete horse crap. Women are worse than men when it comes to money, and BY FAR worse when it comes to looks. Think about it, who always has issues with height in relationships? It’s not men. You never hear a man say: “Man that blonde with the big rack is just too tall for me.”</p>
<p>The bottom line is that women dig confidence and manly attributes, and it will always be this way. Don’t complain about not getting any on a message board, go and ask some chicks out. Even if you get shot down, at least you tried.</p>
<p>This thread is a little stuck, and this isn’t a scientific observation, but what’s the deal with those sitcoms with the “attractive women” and the not-so-smart-rich-or-attractive-or-confident-husbands? Some kind of fantasy?</p>
<p>That was answer by someone on TV once. The deal is that most TV shows are written by fat guys, so hence the fat guy who can do no wrong with a hot wife premise. (King of Queens, Family Guy, The Simpsons, etc)</p>
<p>well…</p>
<p>Wrt smart girls, intelligence and passion does matter when it comes to “liking someone”</p>
<p>but when it comes at retention, intelligence and passion just don’t matter as much as they used to.</p>
<p>and I know one example of this now</p>
<p>yep. Women have been socially conditionded to say “it’s the heart that counts, women aren’t as superficial, we care about personality, blah blah”</p>
<p>In reality, women do the choosing. Their criteria is entirely physical, and based on perceived masculinity. They want a caveman, especially during ovulation.This is why brilliant men are left to die alone, including many of the world’s greatest thinkers. </p>
<p>Once women choose a man based on looks, they will often say, “oh, I like him because he’s so sweet, etc.” I know the most mysognist, abusive, football playing guys and girls FLOCK to them. The sweet nerd will either die alone or marry a girl who is so physically undesired, nobody wants her.</p>
<p>Most women will stay with a good looking guy who beats her longer than a guy who doesn’t look good to their friends.</p>
<p>So, I apologize if this nice guy doesn’t support feminist causes. Figure out what you want first.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seriously dude, you’re getting boring now. </p>
<p>Yeah you’re short. Sucks for you. Get over it. Thousands of people have it worse than you.</p>