I am with you there, she can sleep over and we can do weekends together but i dont want to live togehter full time, again i know what i am looking for is extremely rare, but ill stay hopeful.
It’s not that rare. If you date women who have their lives, finances, and mental health in check, you can easily find a woman who doesn’t want that. It really depends on where you live, what social circles you are a part of, and how well you are doing, financially.
It's simple really. You just hire a firm like Selective Search or Kelleher International or Model Quality Introductions (I did a quick Google search, I haven't used all of those lol, I'm not vouching for anyone). For $25K+ (and $25K is the Walmart level price, u you can spend $100K or more easily), they'll line up whatever type you describe for them, at least that's the claim. I tend to think they'll give you a pretty good shot though. I've known a couple women who signed up, hoping to be set up with guys who paid for the matchmaking services. They were each the type that guys here would love: attractive, ambitious (in a non-gold digging way), intelligent, high integrity, the whole package. Edit: Here's one that even touts interracial matches. The pic is wmbw though lol https://www.onluxy.com/# Edit 2: Nevermind! That last link is a dating site. Still may be of interest though Edit 3: Here's an interesting make up article. https://www.businessinsider.com/how-billionaires-date-according-to-an-elite-matchmaker-2018-4
LOL It would be more fun to just blow 100k while traveling and dating different women. Imagine spending that much dough on some research firm and the relationship still fails. lol I think no matter how you do it the process should be fun. If nothing goes long term at least you enjoyed yourself, but that's just me.
I slightly disagree. I've definitely been in spots where I would've loved a serious girlfriend, but I was beyond sick of dating. I would've happily *made* time for one but had no time for the other.
This is a fallacy. I've gotten into relationships like this. If you are too busy, you are too busy and you aren't ready for someone in your life. You will make the time when you want to or feel like it - that's not a relationship. Then there are other things that end up playing into it also. I'm dealing with that a bit right now. I'm very busy myself as well, but I make sure I keep some harmony in my life and that means having time for relationships and friendships. If they aren't already doing that - it's rough at best. We are clashing because of this. - where's your question for the women?
I would definitely consider living with someone on the weekends. I think it would be great to have someone who lives nearby. We can spend weekends together and have sex during the week at his place or mine, maybe go to lunch/dinner or do other things during the week. But not live together full time. I think that would be a great situation!
Well... depends on your situation, so it isn't a complete fallacy. I was more than ready for a relationship, and I was in one, but the long distance relationship thing didn't work while I was deployed in Iraq, because I was genuinely short on time. You try to do what you can, but the reality is, some people aren't up front or do not know how much time and attention they actually need. So, they inform you that they understand and then you find out that they overestimated their tolerance. Some women, like some military husband and wives, understand and make it work. When I was working in accounting and going to school, similar things happened. It really depends on the individual. But, you get sick of running into those who "say they understand, but really don't". You can make the time, but the time may not be sufficient for said individual. So, it isn't a fallacy.
It goes both ways. People aren't realistic about the time they want/need and they aren't realistic about the amount of time they have to offer. Long distance, military, etc are unique lifestyles that people should know about when they are getting involved or involving others.
Should and Do don't generally go hand in hand. But, my point is that it isn't a fallacy, and I agree that it goes both ways.
I dispute that it's a fallacy. But perhaps I could've been clearer about the distinction between *actually* being too busy and merely *perceiving* that you're too busy. I believe most of us aren't as busy as we perceive ourselves to be, and the surest proof of that is the way we miraculously find time for things we deem important. And even if you are legit too busy, there is still often latitude to reprioritize if something important enough comes along. I hope that's at least slightly clearer lol. I'm enjoying this discussion.
Military is brutal on relationships. I don't see how anyone maintains one while they are still in. Any relationship that can endure that kind of test is a damn good one.
I agree with every word of this. ^ I'll only add that sometimes we ourselves don't even know what amount of time we have to offer.
Here's my question for you ladies! Given the choice between these two, and only these two, would you prefer a partner who: A. was average looking but extremely wealthy, or B. was extremely handsome but made average money? For this question, assume that (a) the extreme wealth and looks would last at least for your entire relationship and (b) both choices are equal in all other regards (character, personality, humor, etc.).
