Originally posted by outfctrl

Originally posted by deviliscious

This is a catastrophically  terrible idea. It would be devestatingly costly and harmful to the poor and elderly. The medical equipment, the programs,  ugh everything that would have to be replaced.  Everything from blood glucose monitors to watches.  Talk about an evironmental wasteful nightmare. Even the damn pill cases now are calendar dependant, those old folks won't even be able to take their  meds. This is not the 1500's. EVERYTHING is calendar dependent and the people most affected by this cannot afford to replace everything they already have. All that crap would then wind up in landfills eventually seeping into the soil. Talk about making a big mess just because someone can't remember what day it is. LOL

People really need to do something more productive with their time than to think of ways to force those who cannot afford to live as it is into further despair.

 

 

Here is what the calendar would look like.  This is crazy.  Why fix something that works.

 

Now he is taking on universal time.

Not satisfied with conquering calendrical irrationality, Henry and Hanke take on timekeeping, too. “The time in Australia is the same as it is for us, but their clocks are set different,” Henry said. “We’re just saying, ‘Set your clocks to the same time, because it is the same time.’” All the world’s clocks would be set to Universal Time, or Greenwich Mean Time as it’s generally known. Time zones would be abolished, as would Daylight Saving Time, of which Henry is especially not fond.

The future is starting to look bleak.  Everyone will be the same one day, just to streamline life.

Amazing...over 60% of 19,000 votes like the new calendar on that site.  Interesting

Where is halloween? That just increases the number of kids who don't get a birthday every year. Leap year is bad enough as it is.  Regardless it is a costly and stupid idea. As for 60% of anyone liking something.. that is because stupid people outnumber intelligent  by far.

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea, either has not thought this through in regards to health,  safety, and enviornment or they just do not care what the reprecussions of implementing such things.  Hell here we still have a ton of elderly who do not have Television access over the whole analog/digital switch so they do not even get tornado warnings anymore. Yes they offered converter boxes, but many elderly do not even have transportation to go get them.  Basically, all those people who cannot afford to upgrade anything just get forgotten.

This is a catastrophically  terrible idea. It would be devestatingly costly and harmful to the poor and elderly. The medical equipment, the programs,  ugh everything that would have to be replaced.  Everything from blood glucose monitors to watches.  Talk about an evironmental wasteful nightmare. Even the damn pill cases now are calendar dependant, those old folks won't even be able to take their  meds. This is not the 1500's. EVERYTHING is calendar dependent and the people most affected by this cannot afford to replace everything they already have. All that crap would then wind up in landfills eventually seeping into the soil. Talk about making a big mess just because someone can't remember what day it is. LOL

People really need to do something more productive with their time than to think of ways to force those who cannot afford to live as it is into further despair.

Originally posted by Lovely_Laly

So far I can noticed 1/10 of previous population per server (except some busy worlds).
It shows well impact of bot in RS.
Looks like only few (silly?=P) players never used bot, or like 5% of gamers.

Due to fact that RS is slow, grindy & somewhat outdated, I can understand why people used bot for faster progress. (what I can't understand is what fun they have of bot using & why not play better game instate).

With total intolerance for RW trading bots, I would suggest to Jagex to take lessons of this bot issue & revamp game to bring way more fun & way less grind to it.

Or it's too late & 85%+ of sub are lost?

May be this game is unpopular for legit players & will now die due to number of players left.

 

Runescape has always had a good influx of new players that kept it going, now they might actually stay longer if they can keep  the bots at bay.

I think their bot nuking will benefit the game long term, considering it was getting as bad as silkroad before they did something to stop it. I just hope they can keep it up. They did well in shutting them down from what  I can tell.

Originally posted by Lovely_Laly

Draron, I wonder why you don't have any lag & most of people have or lag or dc etc...

Lately Windows made emergency shut up and I wonder if RS used data collection program which was seen as virus or sorta by Windows.

I updated Java but still have lag and time to time need to reload RS page due to *update*.

Game still lame to play, you never know when you be out...

I don;t have lag either. No firewall/antivirus issues as well.  It very well could be your system and setup. I built my computer and gutted my Operating system though simply because I do not like an OS that does anything without my permission. I manually shut down ports as well though, and rewrote the registry to my liking. So that could be a factor.

So far, this has been the most effective bot ban I have seen from Jagex  EVER. I was skeptical , but from what I have seen so far, Good Job Jagex.

Yews with closest bank- Bot free

Dragons- bot free

Fishing -Bot free

mining spots- bot freeThis is the least amount of bots I have ever seen in the game. I hope they do sue everyone they can as well as hard drive ban.

I saw one dragon bot that seemed to not be working. It was in the same spot a while until it finally logged out. Thank you Jagex for breaking the bots!

Maybe just maybe they can start fixing other areas of the game that need improvement now?

Originally posted by Robgmur

@ Devil - Try posting without bragging about yourself lol  That's a 'no no quality', we call them one-uppers where I'm from.

I have no clue what you think I am " bragging about". Honestly, the whole thing is embarrasing and painful. I don't think that is boasting, it is even hard to type now  without feeling like I am going to vomit.

EDIT: nevermind.

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

Overseeing is not  one task,  not at all. It requires you take on many tasks at the same time to be able to properly handle the situations that arise.  You must be able to see the details and the whole picture in order to be able to determine the best course of action by weighing the pros and cons quickly and being able to make an informed decision and be capable  acting on it in an appropriate and timely manner. Many things are considered with this, not just one, otherwise you make a poor supervisor. 

I disagree that you must be present to check the order, by preordering samples and  using our video capabilities that  now allow for you to do just about anything remotely.  Bargaining  is also done in this way as well, but moreso along the lines of bidding on pallets and such, or negotiating quantity prices directly from the manufacturer. We still communicate verbally and  there is no reason to do this in person anymore, as we can now accomplish these things without having to fly to Hong Kong.

I completely disagree about the necessity of being onsite to conduct business, and see that as a waste of resource, time and money. It is an unecessary expenditure that slows down transactions and decreases profits rather than increases them.

 

First i think we have a misunderstanding on what is one task and what is not. All these things you describe belong to the same subject so to speak. All are related and when thinking of one you're also thinking of the other. I was actually more thinking about things that don't obviously go hand in hand. For me that's not really multitasking but than again i guess it's a blurry concept?

Secondly i believe we obviously both have different filosofies on how to conduct business. I personally would take someone who cba coming in person to discuss a deal less seriously as i'd consider it as not willing to put efforts into it and thus disrespectful. (unless there is an already existing relation). That's why i don't believe in it. Maybe it's a "passé" filosofy, who knows, time will tell i guess.

But let's not derail this totally. This was about dating habits (let's just  agree to disagree on the rest).

My point about dating habits is that those habits you like about men are habits that went hand in hand with the previous social paradigm. The social paradigm having shifted so should your expectations about said habbits.

Now that is where we differ. Women have always conducted business, and women have always been courted by men. I do not see that as anything that has changed, as my families history is different than yours. That is your families history, women always conducted business in mine, men always courted in mine.

Originally posted by Grahor

Originally posted by deviliscious

WOW.  Just wow.  Yes, my grandfather moved from the reservation, we do have a choice as to whether or not we want to live on one, as much as people think we should be separated from the rest of society, as to not influence their Christian ideals, we are people too and should have rights to choose where we live as well. People act as if we are all dead these days, but no,  my tribe has around 7,000 left on this planet, so no despite your ignorance of the fact that we still exist here, most of my family still lives on the reservation. Most here already know my feelings towards Columbus here.  Do you have any idea how disgusting your comments even are?  You did not remove enough inflammatory remarks considering you think all tribes are related to Pocohontas.  I do not know how to even respond to such things.  It kind of  reminds me of when I was a kid and that kid asked me why I wasn't going to be an " indian" for halloween.   Idiots...

 

Quite honestly, I simply don't care. We all have came from someone, some tribe or other, and I don't give a flying duck for that. How much do you care about glorious and bloody history of my Lithuanian ancestors fighting for 400+ years against German Crusaders or Livs or some of the Russian tribes from the other side of my family, or... Yes, that's how much I care about Hopi. Actually, at least I've heard about Hopi. Have you heard about seafaring expeditions of Kurland Duchy?

 

Anyway, that was them, and I'm not them, even though I'm their genetic descendant; my culture, my values, my language, my self-identification are completely different, and so are yours; the Hopi as they were are infinitely far away from you. You are an American, a Texan at that; no more Hopi than historic reenactment people are Roman legionaries or whatever.

 

You want to self-identify with them? Be my guest, but don't expect us to care about it.

Not even sure why I am responding to such ignorance,  We are NOT past. We are not dead.  My family is not far from me. These aren;t some ancient ancestors that are long gone here that we  do not know.  My sister, cousins, aunts, uncles still live on the reservation as they have for thousands of years. I am of the bear  clan. This is not past.:

  My family is not far from me In fact, I took this pic of my Nephew this afternoon:

No, we identify ourselves as Hopi, because that is who we are.  Yes, some of us have assimilated into American society, but that does not change who we are. Hopi is the name of our people. Not that you care  or anything....

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

I could go into the whole " women are better at managerial work and men are better at manual labor arguement", but you know that is just as wrong as what you are doing here. Yes multitasking is far better for overseeing operations than carrying them out, however, I am not going to be so narrowminded to limit and sterotype people in such ways.  Men and women are both capable of excelling in these areas.  Women and men both have natural strengths and weaknesses, but are both capable of adapting as needed as well.

I wouldn't even agree with the better at overseeing part anyway. Overseeing someone is one task, not multiple ones. You better focus your overseeing or you're going to miss on a lot.

You can only adapt that much.

From my experience men are better at housekeeping, but that is just my experience. First time i've heard that in my life. But like i said exceptions can be found.

I have almost always have had a higher income than men I have dated. Many home based businesses allow you to fully operate from home.  You can order merchandise, sell it, ship it, oversee operations,do payroll,  conference  and  advertise all from home now.   Yes, you can completely run a  business from your home now, which has allowed many more options for both men and women as to how they choose to operate.  There are various other forms of employment that allow you to work from home in accounting, transcription, internet security, graphic design, programming, sales and such, but I am not familiar with all of their options there, as I have never needed to look into that, considering I am the employer not the employee. Sure there is on site work, but much now can be done from home now instead.

I have little faith in that as i believe many of these tasks can be done better by being on the terrain (except maybe the payroll thing). (ordering requires checking the things you buy, selling requires bargaining , etc ... All can be done better when being on the front in person)

I am finding many more men are enjoying at home work as well these days allowing them to have more quality time with family as well. Most of the people I know that are working from home are actually men, not women. They seem to enjoy the benefits from doing so just as much as women do.

If it works for them fine by me, i don't believe in the whole doing stuff from your home as anything you can do from home can be done better on the front.

 

What i do find ironic is that you can't seem to accept the fact i could only settle with an old fashioned women while you couldn't handle a man who doesn't pay the drinks... Quite funny how women nittpick what should be continued and what is ooooh so wrong. And all we should do is bend over and say yes to everything while expecting nothing to go our way.

 

Overseeing is not  one task,  not at all. It requires you take on many tasks at the same time to be able to properly handle the situations that arise.  You must be able to see the details and the whole picture in order to be able to determine the best course of action by weighing the pros and cons quickly and being able to make an informed decision and be capable  acting on it in an appropriate and timely manner. Many things are considered with this, not just one, otherwise you make a poor supervisor. 

I disagree that you must be present to check the order, by preordering samples and  using our video capabilities that  now allow for you to do just about anything remotely.  Bargaining  is also done in this way as well, but moreso along the lines of bidding on pallets and such, or negotiating quantity prices directly from the manufacturer. We still communicate verbally and  there is no reason to do this in person anymore, as we can now accomplish these things without having to fly to Hong Kong.

I completely disagree about the necessity of being onsite to conduct business, and see that as a waste of resource, time and money. It is an unecessary expenditure that slows down transactions and decreases profits rather than increases them.

Originally posted by Praetoriani

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

 

Traditonally, in my culture, The women were in charge of economy, business, home and family.  There was not a problem of the household not being attended to, because women conducted business from their homes. It is a design flaw in your society that requires women to work outside the home that is the problem there, not that women should not conduct business. No offense but the system you refer to cannot work, period. Only menial tasks can be performed from your house. You can't go have business meetings at your home, personal contact is needed. And most jobs simply cannot in any conceivable ways be performed in your home. You can't be a cop, soldier, construction worker, manager , etc. from your home, you need to be on the field, period.

  It is refreshing though to see that your" advanced civilization", has now been progressing forward to the " work at home mom" and shifting in regards to more home based businesses, which I personally consider the advanced model, that the tribes were using for thousands of years that your society is finally catching up with.

You can only do so much from your home and even for tasks you do at home at one point or an other you'll need to go somewhere else (you work on a project at home and than you'll need to present it , maybe to multiple people, maybe than need to revise it , cooperate with others which could be much easier if you're all in the same room, etc.)

I would also like to add that having some part time job you can do at home while taking care of said home doesn't disturb me in the least. My concern lies with partners who think it's more important to prove they are "emancipated feminists" rather than actually ensuring the home is well taken care off. (no i don't believe in daycare centers and alike)

Women are more subtle in their ways to let a man know she is interested. We talk with our eyes. Men have cued into this over the generations and know what " the look" means. 

I suck at body language, so you can do whatever you want with your eyes, i won't see it (and i'm fairly certain there are many like me). Unless you're crying or have eyes that look like you didn't sleep for 2 days your eyes say nothing to me.

 

 

 

 

Of course all jobs do not allow for you to work from home, but many do. Women do not always have small children to attend to at home either.  Your views on who can do a job better are quite narrowminded as well, considering women are proven  far superior at multitasking then men, it does not surprise me you would not understand that concept and see that women should only specialize because that is how men function.

 

No, they are not better at multitasking than men. For every sensationalist story that hits the news, there are ten peer-reviewed research articles with a substantial sample group from reputable cognitive psychologists and neurologists that usually prove the exact opposite. 

New studies have proven that in fact men and women think different, our brains ARE different, and that we use different parts of the brain to process information.  With the advancments in technology, we are really starting to be able to understand these things better than in the past.  Women and men use different parts of their brains in different ways, as well as there being distinctive differences in the actual physical aspects to the male and female brain.  Much progress is being made in this area in recent years,  and yes, we are in fact " wired" differently.

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

 

Of course all jobs do not allow for you to work from home, but many do. Women do not always have small children to attend to at home either.  Your views on who can do a job better are quite narrowminded as well, considering women are proven  far superior at multitasking then men, it does not surprise me you would not understand that concept and see that women should only specialize because that is how men function.

Oh i agree but multitasking is not very useful for most job which require your entire focus on one matter. And i'm fairly certain this ability to multitask hurts the ability to put your entire focus on one thing as you're more likely to think and focus on other things as well. This is off course my believe, but honestly seeing history i just have a hard time believe we would have been totally wrong for such a long time. (do mind there are always exceptions to the general rules)

And tbh, my apologies that i don't consider women godesses which are better at everything. Why is it so bad to say women are better at housekeeping and men at most "payed jobs" ? There is nothing bad nor negative about that. Everyone has something he/she is good at.

And i really don't think "many" jobs allow you to work at home. Some maybe but many?

I could go into the whole " women are better at managerial work and men are better at manual labor arguement", but you know that is just as wrong as what you are doing here. Yes multitasking is far better for overseeing operations than carrying them out, however, I am not going to be so narrowminded to limit and sterotype people in such ways.  Men and women are both capable of excelling in these areas.  Women and men both have natural strengths and weaknesses, but are both capable of adapting as needed as well.

From my experience men are better at housekeeping, but that is just my experience. I have almost always have had a higher income than men I have dated. Many home based businesses allow you to fully operate from home.  You can order merchandise, sell it, ship it, oversee operations,do payroll,  conference  and  advertise all from home now.   Yes, you can completely run a  business from your home now, which has allowed many more options for both men and women as to how they choose to operate.  There are various other forms of employment that allow you to work from home in accounting, transcription, internet security, graphic design, programming, sales and such, but I am not familiar with all of their options there, as I have never needed to look into that, considering I am the employer not the employee. Sure there is on site work, but much now can be done from home now instead.

I am finding many more men are enjoying at home work as well these days allowing them to have more quality time with family as well. Most of the people I know that are working from home are actually men, not women. They seem to enjoy the benefits from doing so just as much as women do.

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

 

Traditonally, in my culture, The women were in charge of economy, business, home and family.  There was not a problem of the household not being attended to, because women conducted business from their homes. It is a design flaw in your society that requires women to work outside the home that is the problem there, not that women should not conduct business. No offense but the system you refer to cannot work, period. Only menial tasks can be performed from your house. You can't go have business meetings at your home, personal contact is needed. And most jobs simply cannot in any conceivable ways be performed in your home. You can't be a cop, soldier, construction worker, manager , etc. from your home, you need to be on the field, period.

  It is refreshing though to see that your" advanced civilization", has now been progressing forward to the " work at home mom" and shifting in regards to more home based businesses, which I personally consider the advanced model, that the tribes were using for thousands of years that your society is finally catching up with.

You can only do so much from your home and even for tasks you do at home at one point or an other you'll need to go somewhere else (you work on a project at home and than you'll need to present it , maybe to multiple people, maybe than need to revise it , cooperate with others which could be much easier if you're all in the same room, etc.)

I would also like to add that having some part time job you can do at home while taking care of said home doesn't disturb me in the least. My concern lies with partners who think it's more important to prove they are "emancipated feminists" rather than actually ensuring the home is well taken care off. (no i don't believe in daycare centers and alike)

Women are more subtle in their ways to let a man know she is interested. We talk with our eyes. Men have cued into this over the generations and know what " the look" means. 

I suck at body language, so you can do whatever you want with your eyes, i won't see it (and i'm fairly certain there are many like me). Unless you're crying or have eyes that look like you didn't sleep for 2 days your eyes say nothing to me.

 

 

 

 

Of course all jobs do not allow for you to work from home, but many do. Women do not always have small children to attend to at home either.  Your views on who can do a job better are quite narrowminded as well, considering women are proven  far superior at multitasking then men, it does not surprise me you would not understand that concept and see that women should only specialize because that is how men function.

Originally posted by Grahor

Originally posted by Robgmur

A tribe? wtf is going on?

Dallas, TX - I say, native american heritage. Them americans love to trace their bloodlines to both Mayflower and Pocahontas. Conveniently closing the eyes on all the rape rape things that were merrily going along that way.

 

Actually, that's the first time I've looked at her profile and seen that she's from Texas. Wouldn't even bother answering, knowing that.

 

P.S. That was initially pretty long post, but since I'm trying to conform to local rules, I had to remove all the potentially inflammatory opinions from my post, to the point where there is next to no point in posting. :( Bah.

WOW.  Just wow.  Yes, my grandfather moved from the reservation, we do have a choice as to whether or not we want to live on one, as much as people think we should be separated from the rest of society, as to not influence their Christian ideals, we are people too and should have rights to choose where we live as well. People act as if we are all dead these days, but no,  my tribe has around 7,000 left on this planet, so no despite your ignorance of the fact that we still exist here, most of my family still lives on the reservation. Most here already know my feelings towards Columbus here.  Do you have any idea how disgusting your comments even are?  You did not remove enough inflammatory remarks considering you think all tribes are related to Pocohontas.  I do not know how to even respond to such things.  It kind of  reminds me of when I was a kid and that kid asked me why I wasn't going to be an " indian" for halloween.   Idiots...

Originally posted by Robgmur

A tribe? wtf is going on?

Yes, I am Hopi.  We are not all dead yet.

Originally posted by Robgmur

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Grahor

Originally posted by deviliscious

>>Everything is give and take.

So, what is it exactly that you give? There is nothing I actually want that you can give me.

>>If a guy is so hung up on not pulling out a chair or picking up the tab,  it should be a big warning to a woman that he is only going to be more difficult and more indifferent in the treatment of the woman long term, and she would be better off passing on that one.  

And she will be absolutely right that I will not "treat her long-term". I am not interested in women who need to be treated; I am only interested in women who treat themselves.

 

As I said. BIG WARNING SIGN.  Most " normal  men" love to have a good home cooked meal, and full body massage, and would think you completely mental for not wanting one. Men like this are too mental to consider dating, and it is good you put that upfront, so that women can know ahead of time they should run like they are set on fire.

 So what you're saying is... for a few drinks you will make them dinner and massage them? that's basically what a prostitute is.. minus the cooking part, for christs' sake a guy would rather get a happy ending then a nice steak..  I think if I met a girl at the club or bar and she baught me a few shots I would think highly of her, as would any guy.

Quite being silly. I am talking about dating, not prostitution.  So if a man buys a woman dinner and gives her a full body massage he is a prostitute as well? Treatting each other with love and respect is not prostitution. 

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

Never once, as a woman have I thought a man was paying the bill because they were the " money earners". I do not see it that way at all. I see that as a man  who  is paying for dinner because he wanted to provide you with a fun  and entertaining  evening. Men pay the bill because they are showing interest in the woman and would like to demonstrate that interest in a way that is not just jumping on her and humping her leg. It shows  they are capable of putting  her first.

Men show they're interested by going out , just like the women. Otherwise i have to take from that when a women doesn't pay the bills she isn't interested.

It isn't about money  or power at all.  It would make no difference if the man had packed a picnic basket and had a candle light dinner under a tree overlooking the lake. To be honest, I prefer that over the whole " getting dressed up uncomfortably and dining out in a place that  creates tons of awkward moments" anyhow. It is about showing the woman he is interested in her enough to put her first.

I never said it was about "power" either, there is no power conflict whatsoever, merely a role conflict.

Maybe that is where the whole misunderstanding comes from. Men look at it as a money issue, while women look at it as an " interest" issue.

The issue here is if it's about interest than women aren't interested in us. I don't see why a man should put more efforts to show interest than women.

 I find  your entire view of women should not have a career quite disturbing however.

Because i care about a household that is well taken care of? I believe in specialisation. And from what i've seen men usually are lesser at taking care of a house than women (this is a compliment unlike what feminists might say). Meanwhile i firmly believe men are better at the majority of jobs. So in my eyes it's just a matter of doing things the most efficient way.

 

Traditonally, in my culture, The women were in charge of economy, business, home and family.  There was not a problem of the household not being attended to, because women conducted business from their homes. It is a design flaw in your society that requires women to work outside the home that is the problem there, not that women should not conduct business.  It is refreshing though to see that your" advanced civilization", has now been progressing forward to the " work at home mom" and shifting in regards to more home based businesses, which I personally consider the advanced model, that the tribes were using for thousands of years that your society is finally catching up with.

Women are more subtle in their ways to let a man know she is interested. We talk with our eyes. Men have cued into this over the generations and know what " the look" means. 

Originally posted by Grahor

Originally posted by deviliscious

As I said. BIG WARNING SIGN.  Most " normal  men" love to have a good home cooked meal, and full body massage, and would think you completely mental for not wanting one. Men like this are too mental to consider dating, and it is good you put that upfront, so that women can know ahead of time they should run like they are set on fire.

I'm quite a cook myself; if anyone would be making a good home cooked meal, that would be me. In fact, that's what I already do. As for massage, it's indeed nice, for both people, and "give and take" I prefer, in that area, "I do a massage for you, you do a massage for me".

 

As I've said, there is absolutely nothing you can offer me that I want and that I can't get with women who see "equality" same way I see it; as such, I don't see any "give and take" from the likes of you, but only "take, take, take".

 

And of course I am always fully upfront about it; upfrontness from both sides is something I also consider the mark of equality.

Interesting that you could view that as take take take, considering  My ex husband was the  one taking advantage. I worked multiple jobs,  paid for his college that he did not attend, instead he opted to go pool sharking instead and pretend to do homework. He kept up the charade  for almost an entire semester. Until someone came into my work and told me they saw him down at the pool hall. Then I found out he had not attended classes at all, classes I paid for. I had found him several jobs before I finally had tired of his lies, drug abuse, and physical abuse. I worked 3 jobs put myself through school, and yet that was what I received in return. It cost me dearly, but was well worth finally ridding myself from that.

It is ironic that you view " my type  of woman" as a taker,  considering  the man I am in  a relationship with at this time has told me I am the most giving woman he has ever met.  " upfrontness " is a sign of respect, however, weird hangups on treating a girl like a girl is just that to me.. weird. I love that my man brings me flowers for no reason. I love that he opens my doors, pulls out my chairs, prepares me a nice cherry bubble bath. I would not want it any other way. It is give and take, just as he does special things for me, I do special things for him. He loves it when I come up to his work dressed seductively and make his coworkers jealous feeding him strawberries in his office. He loves me bringing him a massage pillow at work when his back was hurting from moving my couch for me. 

I think that men think entirely too much about career/power/ money issues in a relationship.  In my tribes tradition,  women were responsible for business, economy, home and family. Men still courted the women,  and brought the food home, but they were equally giving.  Men took on the womens clan name, but yet they still courted the women approriately.  You look at money and power being tied to mating rituals. I do not.

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

 

I consider them creepy because they are more " hung up" on  trying to destroy the courting process, they  obviously care more about that then being attentive to their date, and ensuring it goes well. I would much rather be out with a guy who is trying to ensure I have a good time, and that we get to know each other better, than a guy who has all these hang ups he can't even put aside to have an enjoyable date. If the man asks a woman out,  he should be prepared to entertain her, and that means picking up the tab. If a woman asks a man over to her home for dinner, she should be be prepared to make it an ejoyable experience for him as well. It is all give and take. If I am out with " friends" we often go dutch, but if I am asked on a date, I expect him to provide that date. Now, I also believe that if I had fun on that date, and enjoyed his company, I will do something nice in return, such as invite him over for dinner, and massage for example.

Why would I waste my time with a guy who cares more about  his " issues" about treating women well, than he does about ensuring the date goes well?  That just comes across as " too mental" and if I had ever made the mistake of actually accepting a date from a  guy like this, I would be glad to pay for the dinner,  just to  allow me to excuse myself quickly. I can only see paying for dinner, if I do not wish to see him again.

But you see i don't mind the old fashioned model, i actually love it but here's my problem. Most women nowadays want to "wear the pants". They want to be independent, take men's jobs , etc... And yet we still have to pay the bill? Well that's convenient!

The whole point of men paying up the bills is because they are supposed to be the ones providing the money, women didn't have incomes so the men payed, quite normal. But if you're gonna take men's job than you can take their bills as well!

I personally would pay the drinks and so on, but at the same time i wouldn't stand having a partner persuing a carreer. (there are other reasons to this, like the fact i believe a home needs a provider of money and one who ensures it is used well for the home and kids to be taken care of)

Never once, as a woman have I thought a man was paying the bill because they were the " money earners". I do not see it that way at all. I see that as a man  who  is paying for dinner because he wanted to provide you with a fun  and entertaining  evening. Men pay the bill because they are showing interest in the woman and would like to demonstrate that interest in a way that is not just jumping on her and humping her leg. It shows  they are capable of putting  her first.

It isn't about money  or power at all.  It would make no difference if the man had packed a picnic basket and had a candle light dinner under a tree overlooking the lake. To be honest, I prefer that over the whole " getting dressed up uncomfortably and dining out in a place that  creates tons of awkward moments" anyhow. It is about showing the woman he is interested in her enough to put her first.

Maybe that is where the whole misunderstanding comes from. Men look at it as a money issue, while women look at it as an " interest" issue.

 I find  your entire view of women should not have a career quite disturbing however.

Originally posted by Grahor

Originally posted by deviliscious

>>Everything is give and take.

So, what is it exactly that you give? There is nothing I actually want that you can give me.

>>If a guy is so hung up on not pulling out a chair or picking up the tab,  it should be a big warning to a woman that he is only going to be more difficult and more indifferent in the treatment of the woman long term, and she would be better off passing on that one.  

And she will be absolutely right that I will not "treat her long-term". I am not interested in women who need to be treated; I am only interested in women who treat themselves.

 

As I said. BIG WARNING SIGN.  Most " normal  men" love to have a good home cooked meal, and full body massage, and would think you completely mental for not wanting one. Men like this are too mental to consider dating, and it is good you put that upfront, so that women can know ahead of time they should run like they are set on fire.

Originally posted by generals3

Originally posted by deviliscious

 So yea, the creepy guys who think a  girl should pick up the tab, and buy her own drinks.. it is their loss.

 

Why would you say the guy is creepy? Because he doesn't do it the old fashioned way? (which would be quite ironic)

I consider them creepy because they are more " hung up" on  trying to destroy the courting process, they  obviously care more about that then being attentive to their date, and ensuring it goes well. I would much rather be out with a guy who is trying to ensure I have a good time, and that we get to know each other better, than a guy who has all these hang ups he can't even put aside to have an enjoyable date. If the man asks a woman out,  he should be prepared to entertain her, and that means picking up the tab. If a woman asks a man over to her home for dinner, she should be be prepared to make it an ejoyable experience for him as well. It is all give and take. If I am out with " friends" we often go dutch, but if I am asked on a date, I expect him to provide that date. Now, I also believe that if I had fun on that date, and enjoyed his company, I will do something nice in return, such as invite him over for dinner, and massage for example.

Why would I waste my time with a guy who cares more about  his " issues" about treating women well, than he does about ensuring the date goes well?  That just comes across as " too mental" and if I had ever made the mistake of actually accepting a date from a  guy like this, I would be glad to pay for the dinner,  just to  allow me to excuse myself quickly. I can only see paying for dinner, if I do not wish to see him again.