so why american guys date russian girls ? why not american ?

[dbneeley]

But seriously,..., 25 is perfect for me...,22 even better))

IQ?

wow,...,where is  that cluebat when you need it.

I don't know, JC--where did you put it. I know it may be hard to remember since it's been so long since you used the darned thing...

David

[el_guero]

....

but, why american men leave american or western girls and go to date marry russian..

....

no, im talking about guys who really date and marry.. (and most of them marry not
so young girls as i see)

....

so why they dont marry in US ?

and sorry for my bad english. iam from Portugal.. own business in ukraine and live in ukranie now.

waiting ur replay.

Well, for me it is mostly cultural.

I grew up very old fashioned with a strong Hispanic & Texican family values.

I am single never married.  And I noticed that women were very interested in me until I mentioned that I was looking only for serious relationships.

My good friend, extremely close background, and I have chatted about this for awhile, and I agree with him.

Mexican ladies and "Russian" ladies are a lot alike culturally.  Both want family and a husband.  Where they differ from each other is in educational achievement and beauty over the age of 40ish.

I am well educated, and I would really like a lady I can engage in good conversation and possibly have a family with, God willing of course.

What else?

[JeanClaude]

But seriously,..., 25 is perfect for me...,22 even better))

IQ?

wow,...,where is  that cluebat when you need it.

mmm .... with that kind of an IQ, you might not be able to read the directions.  So, just make sure that the placard which says "Place this towards target" is NOT visible before you swing.



Just couldn't resist a little well deserved 'swing' at you.

Who I date , or in what age-range, is my business and her free  choice to date me (or not). No need for  a morality preach!  To bad you harbor rancor in that regard..,,,well the green monster is a difficult beast to control, I am sure!! 

[JeanClaude]

But seriously,..., 25 is perfect for me...,22 even better))

IQ?

wow,...,where is  that cluebat when you need it.

I don't know, JC--where did you put it. I know it may be hard to remember since it's been so long since you used the darned thing...

David

Hi David, that's what we call a "rhetorical question", in Europe,....  ,.., Cluebatting is a fav pastime, my left arm is golden,   but one must hit harder depending on thethickness of the scull to get the point across...! ain't that right David??

[dbneeley]

Hi David, that's what we call a "rhetorical question", in Europe,....  ,.., Cluebatting is a fav pastime, my left arm is golden,   but one must hit harder depending on thethickness of the scull to get the point across...! ain't that right David??

Never fear, JC--I knew what you meant to say, and also how what you did say was capable of both interpretations, so I simply chose the one I wished.

How's the pursuit of the young girls going, by the way? Working for you okay? I must presume not, since you have been strangely silent on that score since your trip to Ukraine some months ago. Probably a somewhat humbling experience...

David

[JeanClaude]

@David,

I am silent, because speaking about it is a big no no on this forum,..,I tried but it turned into a free for by the PC crowd....to answer your question,..some of them had birthdays,..,21->22 , 22->23,.., 18->19,... but not looking for "replacements" as you might think!

Cheers David.

[djfourmoney]

 Frankly I believe dating women from Western Culture is like running in place. Location is not important and only has subtle differences.
 
 I still run smack into the age issue. Gotta a child? Add 5 years to make it an even 10 year acceptable age difference. That puts my min age at 30 sometimes, closer to 35, actually about 38 and if I'm lucky about 25.

  Acceptable (medically) age to have children is 32 and YOUNGER, not what Western Women would have you believe. They are basing their argument on being older on financial status, meaning its more likely your finish paying school debt by age 30.

 I also found a troubling story that has women admitting to marrying Starter Husbands - http://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/relationship-issues/articles/starter-husband

 I couldn't believe it. But in our strange reality that is "America" the reason there isn't a complete revolt by men from the dating seen should be more shocking. If I read women in their mid-20's are admitting to their first husband NOT being the one they will ultimately end up with is more telling than anything else I can think of. It means women in their 20's in Western Culture have NO IDEA what they want. This is why they feel its okay to have been married, divorced and even have a couple of children, its 100% acceptable!

 Yet again proving theirs a shortage of Women here...

  Why do I look at FSU/SA women, two overriding reasons -

 1) Can find a woman that's younger than 30, never married, no children, but wants to be married and have children.

 2) Re-read the first answer



 

 

[JeanClaude]

bull, in NIce I date 22-26,..,and I am the same age as you dj4$

[Manny]

Many Russian women are divorced at a young age too DJ. Lets not put all of them on an undeserved pedestal. If *any* race marries temporarily, it must be young Russians? Where else do women marry at 22 and divorce by 25?

[B.B.]

I also found a troubling story that has women admitting to marrying Starter Husbands - http://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/relationship-issues/articles/starter-husband

Wow.  As I told my buddy's 20 y.o. son, "If you know how most [AW] really thought, you wouldn't feel bad about treating them like crap."

B/B

[el_guero]

I also found a troubling story that has women admitting to marrying Starter Husbands - http://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/relationship-issues/articles/starter-husband

Wow.  As I told my buddy's 20 y.o. son, "If you know how most [AW] really thought, you wouldn't feel bad about treating them like crap."

B/B

That is totally wrong.

Over 60% of first time marriages are making it in the US.  (That is census data, so the sample is large enough to be meaningful).

Yes, there are issues in America with women, but most of those women are ones NOT GETTING married, &/or getting married and then divorced.

Women should not be treated badly just to get even.

[Muzh_1]

I also found a troubling story that has women admitting to marrying Starter Husbands - http://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/relationship-issues/articles/starter-husband

Wow.  As I told my buddy's 20 y.o. son, "If you know how most [AW] really thought, you wouldn't feel bad about treating them like crap."

B/B

That is totally wrong.

Over 60% of first time marriages are making it in the US.  (That is census data, so the sample is large enough to be meaningful).

Yes, there are issues in America with women, but most of those women are ones NOT GETTING married, &/or getting married and then divorced.

Women should not be treated badly just to get even.

Basically, the issues AW have is responding to attitudes like the above (BB) comment.

I have mentioned to local friends the dynamics I've observed between AM & AW regarding dating, or at least trying to date.

When they encounter and are not drunk but show some interest with each other what I see is a literal "put up your dukes" attitude. Like two boxers sizing each other up. No wonder there is this rancor.

During the flower child era women were emancipated from their traditional role as wife and home maker. As more women got into the workforce, they suddenly had disposable cash of their own, and therefore, felt independent from the hubby's weekly "allowance."

Men on the other hand felt threatened that their "supremacy" as bread winner and head of household was slipping out of their grasp and fought against this. They still do. This is what started the war of the sexes in this country.

[djfourmoney]

 @Manny -

 I hold FSU or SA women accountable the same way. I have never dated a divorced woman, no reason I should start now.

 @el_guero -

 Have you been on the battlefield lately? I have found some women to be very combative.

 @JC

 If I make any effort I can get mid to late 20's. I don't think its worth it anymore. At that age they simply just want to date and have a good time. If I want to date younger women I have to work at it. If I sit back and let things happen I get a bunch of over 40 women....

 

 

[JeanClaude]

Men on the other hand felt threatened that their "supremacy" as bread winner and head of household was slipping out of their grasp and fought against this. They still do. This is what started the war of the sexes in this country.

Another one brainwashed by the feminazi crowd,...,"Its all the fault of the WASP male"  I am all for equality and free will,...,but not for taking shit because she happends to have a vagina.

[B.B.]

Women should not be treated badly just to get even.

I never thought of my sense of humor as "subtle".

B/B

[B.B.]

Basically, the issues AW have is responding to attitudes like the above (BB) comment.

I think you might have a chicken/egg problem here. *shrugs*

Men on the other hand felt threatened that their "supremacy" as bread winner and head of household was slipping out of their grasp and fought against this. They still do. This is what started the war of the sexes in this country.

I think a lot of women got sold a bill of goods by an Upper East Side political elite.

FWIW,

B/B

[JeanClaude]

Basically, the issues AW have is responding to attitudes like the above (BB) comment.

I think you might have a chicken/egg problem here. *shrugs*

Men on the other hand felt threatened that their "supremacy" as bread winner and head of household was slipping out of their grasp and fought against this. They still do. This is what started the war of the sexes in this country.

I think a lot of women got sold a bill of goods by an Upper East Side political elite.

FWIW,

B/B

aint that the truth!

[Muzh_1]

I think a lot of women got sold a bill of goods by an Upper East Side political elite.

FWIW,

B/B

I love reading ignorant comments like this.

I suppose that the Republican/Conservative leadership and all their backer$ are common folk from middle class America, right?

Common as in average. I felt I had to explain being an elitist liberal from the Upper East Side. More irony.

Upper East Side = Money bags = Wall Street = GOP funds

Boy.

[dbneeley]

I think a lot of women got sold a bill of goods by an Upper East Side political elite.

FWIW,

B/B

I love reading ignorant comments like this.

I suppose that the Republican/Conservative leadership and all their backer$ are common folk from middle class America, right?

Common as in average. I felt I had to explain being an elitist liberal from the Upper East Side. More irony.

Upper East Side = Money bags = Wall Street = GOP funds

Boy.

Muzh,

As you so often do, once more you fall into the trap of gross over-generalization. Take a look sometimes at the comparative money donations from the Wall Street firms in the last few Presidential races some time. I think you may be in for a large surprise.

But then, why allow those pesky facts get in the way of your bias?

For example, in a Bloomberg piece a year ago: "Wall Street

Wall Street helped give a fundraising edge to Democratic committees and candidates. Employees in the securities and investment industry made $34.3 million in donations last year, about the same as in 2007, with 62 percent going to Democrats, the party’s largest share in a non-election year in the 20 years of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-04-21/democratic-party-helped-by-wall-street-outraising-republicans.html

In fact, Wall Street in modern times has tended to give more support to the party in power, whichever one that is at any given time. However, some of the consistent large donors are overwhelmingly Democrat in their giving--George Soros as example number one.

David

[Muzh_1]

I think a lot of women got sold a bill of goods by an Upper East Side political elite.

FWIW,

B/B

I love reading ignorant comments like this.

I suppose that the Republican/Conservative leadership and all their backer$ are common folk from middle class America, right?

Common as in average. I felt I had to explain being an elitist liberal from the Upper East Side. More irony.

Upper East Side = Money bags = Wall Street = GOP funds

Boy.

Muzh,

As you so often do, once more you fall into the trap of gross over-generalization. Take a look sometimes at the comparative money donations from the Wall Street firms in the last few Presidential races some time. I think you may be in for a large surprise.

But then, why allow those pesky facts get in the way of your bias?

For example, in a Bloomberg piece a year ago: "Wall Street

Wall Street helped give a fundraising edge to Democratic committees and candidates. Employees in the securities and investment industry made $34.3 million in donations last year, about the same as in 2007, with 62 percent going to Democrats, the party’s largest share in a non-election year in the 20 years of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-04-21/democratic-party-helped-by-wall-street-outraising-republicans.html

In fact, Wall Street in modern times has tended to give more support to the party in power, whichever one that is at any given time. However, some of the consistent large donors are overwhelmingly Democrat in their giving--George Soros as example number one.

David

Boy David, in your zealousness to put this liberal in his place, you missed the whole point.

Did I say the Democrats don't get money from Wall Street?

IF you visit the Upper East Side you'll see that Republican millionaires outnumber Democrat millionaires by a lot.

Now, one more time. My argument is that liberals are labled as "elitist" while no one mentions the Conservative elite. You really believe that this last election was won by the regular folk?

Since we are talking about NY, there is a bridge for sale. Cheap.

[B.B.]

I love reading ignorant comments like this.

Actually, the evidence would seem to be that you rather enjoy writing them.  Let's continue....

I suppose that the Republican/Conservative leadership and all their backer$ are common folk from middle class America, right?

This is immaterial to the argument at hand. 

I felt I had to explain being an elitist liberal from the Upper East Side.

Why? 

Upper East Side = Money bags = Wall Street = GOP funds

Awesome!  Is this like the SAT?  "Aardvark is to Parking lot attendant as Mousetrap is to (a) Luxury Yacht, (b) Eyeglass Case, (c) Designated Hitter...."

Boy.

[spittoon]

You can call me "Mister". 

[/spittoon]

Boy David, in your zealousness to put this liberal in his place, you missed the whole point.

Sort of ironic that you're accusing someone else of missing the whole point....

Did I say the Democrats don't get money from Wall Street?

Actually, that's a fair point for David to make, not only on the basis of the evidence he introduced, but also insofar as you played this gem:

"I suppose that the Republican/Conservative leadership and all their backer$ are common folk from middle class America, right?", which is at least as faulty, giving you the whole benefit of the doubt, as your complaint about David's rather factual and well written post. 

And you did give us this equation: "Upper East Side = Money bags = Wall Street = GOP funds".  Where's the "Democrat" variable in your equation?  Well, it's clearly  not there, and you are now backtracking (and spinning like a top, I might add).

IF you visit the Upper East Side you'll see that Republican millionaires outnumber Democrat millionaires by a lot.

Rather than visit, perhaps you should just substantiate your claim.  Go right ahead.  We'll wait.

(and I see you have redefined "elite" as "millionaires" apparently, which may/may not be the case.)

Now, one more time. My argument is that liberals are labled as "elitist" while no one mentions the Conservative elite. You really believe that this last election was won by the regular folk?

If you can argue that the "Conservative elite" are secretly behind radical feminism, then we can start talking about them in the context of my post.  Until then, neither they, nor your discussion of them, bear any relationship to my post, nor, really, does your non-sequitur about the last election and "regular folk". 

B/B

[el_guero]

They are ALL liberal elitists.

[Muzh_1]

IF you visit the Upper East Side you'll see that Republican millionaires outnumber Democrat millionaires by a lot.

Rather than visit, perhaps you should just substantiate your claim.  Go right ahead.  We'll wait.

(and I see you have redefined "elite" as "millionaires" apparently, which may/may not be the case.)

I suppose you still believe political parties do cold calls to find out who's who.

Since I'm from the "elite" I'd like you to know political parties have moved to GIS tracking of districts by party affiliation. Information they share.

Tell you something. I prefer to be with the elite than with the ignorants. I know for a fact that if a person requires specialized surgery they will ask for the best, the elite. Imagine asking for the so so doctor for a life saving procedure.

That happens to be the problem with the ill informed, they confuse terms. Common people are not ignorant by nature but by choice. However, I see some ill informed associating the term elite with some negative connotation, appealing to the ignorant as if they would be "contaminated" or worse. And it is in the best interest of these "non-elite" to maintain the populace as ignorant as possible; easier to manipulate.

If you believe that the teabaggers are not run by elitist, you are in for a surprise.

It is obvious I wasting my time here since I was expecting intelligent discussion. Too much to ask I guess.

Same to you Wayne.

[B.B.]

I suppose you still believe political parties do cold calls to find out who's who.

This is immaterial to my post.

Since I'm from the "elite" I'd like you to know political parties have moved to GIS tracking of districts by party affiliation. Information they share.

I'd like you to substantiate your assertion.  You have not.  You have, for some reason, decided to redefine "elite" to the comparative number of GOP vs. Dem "millionaires", which I don't think is relevant to my post, either, but since you've chosen, the least you could do is back up your assertion.  Why you want to go on about political party economic demographics is beyond me.

If you believe that the teabaggers are not run by elitist, you are in for a surprise.

The so-called "Tea Party" isn't at all relevant to my post. 

Unless, of course, one believes that the Tea Party is behind radical feminism. *shrugs*

It is obvious I wasting my time here since I was expecting intelligent discussion. Too much to ask I guess.

Well, let's review; you've basically behaved like a seagull, in that you came in, squawked a lot and crapped all over everything.  Seagulls, in their defense, don't seem to have superiority complexes.  Additionally, the non sequiturs about the Tea Party and number of GOP vs Dem millionaires (which is not particularly relevant, I might add), all because my post about American women being sold a bill of goods has somehow gotten your man-panties in a bunch.  Not exactly the stuff of intelligent discussion. *shrugs again*

B/B

[dbneeley]

Muzh,

Your illogical defense of the "elite" of which you claim to be one is telling, far more than I or anyone else could assert on our part.

However, it's curious that you attack the "Republican elite millionaires" as being "more numerous" than, presumably the Democrat elite millionaires--although when considering the New York metro area as a whole this is probably incorrect.

You seem to be saying that it's perfectly fine to be an "elite" if that elite shares your politics, but is somehow wrong if they do not.

For a scientist, I suggest you blow the dust off your university logic books and bone up a bit. You would be far better prepared in cases like this.

And by the way--I seriously doubt you would qualify as a true "elite" although you might well fit into the "intelligentsia" class, especially if you were to make your arguments a bit less predictable and a bit more cogent. The "ivory tower liberals" have done your share in creating the incredible financial disaster we now face, after all, but are generally the tools of the true power centers of the Democrat party.

David