Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site aesat.UUCP Path: utzoo!aesat!rwh From: rwh@aesat.UUCP (Russell Herman) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: WORST kiss of death Message-ID: <175@aesat.UUCP> Date: Mon, 2-Jul-84 14:27:35 EDT Article-I.D.: aesat.175 Posted: Mon Jul 2 14:27:35 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 2-Jul-84 19:13:16 EDT References: <16600005@hp-pcd.UUCP> Organization: AES Data Inc., Mississauga Ont., Canada Lines: 57 Perhaps someone like myself, who is not single, and probably is about 10 years older than most of the discussants in this group, can bring a different perspective about women looking for nice, rich, men. One of the things I find fascinating about the discussions in this group is the fact that everyone is talking about an "SO". This reflects a rather different mindset from what I had when I was single, as well as what I suspect such women possess: some people are out there looking for PARTNERS. In fact, the largest single-parents group in North America is called "Parents Without Partners", not "Parents Without SOs". What is the partnership mentality? Well, back in the good old days when men were men (and women were chattels :-)), people had different, usually gender-related, roles to fill. Man as provider is one of them. There are still many, many women who are unable to do as well for themselves in this regard as most men. For them the answer is "Find a man. Be his helpmate." What's so terrible about that? Well, one of the worst things is that is puts the woman in a position of vulnerability. If her man takes off, she's got problems. Another is that it doesn't let either gender develop all aspects of their personhoods. However, I believe there is a lot to be said for concentration on different aspects of family life in a marriage. After all, we're quick to go to medical specialists (allergists, dermatologists) rather than a family physician, or an automotive specialist (MIDAS, AAMCO) rather than the corner garage. A successful marriage, like a successful business, can be built when people bring complementary skills and orientations to it. Sure, it's dangerous to rely on a single thing for attraction. Flesh withers, fortunes perish, nice people like me-:) get more crochety as we age. But we're not "meat" because we have (the prospects of) decent-paying jobs. Nor because we happen to correspond to today's whim of what's considered attractive. Nor because we're nice, nor because we're good cooks, nor any other reason. These are all assets we bring to relationships. If you can be generous with your assets, and find someone who values them enough to be YOUR idea of nice to you, you're damn lucky. For those of you who decide to select someone for a permanent (you hope) relationship, there's a lot of tradeoffs to be made amongst beauty, niceness, wealth, and intelligence. We all want all of them, but unless we have all of them ourselves, or one or more to an outstanding degree, it's not too likely that we'll succeed. Like it or not, the singles scene is the last vestige of the free marketplace - if you overvalue yourself, no one is interested. So don't be so down on these women. I don't think many of them are looking JUST for money. I'm sure most of them wouldn't marry a rich man who would beat them or be cruel to their children. For these women it's a valid way of improving their total life situation. And lucky is the man who finds one that is grateful for the improvement. -- ______ Russ Herman / \ {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!aesat!rwh @( ? ? )@ ( || ) The opinions above are strictly personal, and ( \__/ ) do not reflect those of my employer (or even \____/ possibly myself an hour from now.)