[_Cicero]

Benjamin Franklin made this point first in his letter of advice on the choice of a mistress... http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey...1-fra.html

All of his points are good...

(03-17-2015 07:59 AM)ThrustMaster Wrote:  

Plenty of guys out there willing to hit older strange. I work with guys in their late 20 and early 30's that tap women in their late 30's and 40's all the time - they consider them less effort and willing. The women get the validation they so desperately seek and the guys bust nuts. Not going to change.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(03-18-2015 03:28 AM)_Cicero Wrote:  

Benjamin Franklin made this point first in his letter of advice on the choice of a mistress... http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey...1-fra.html

All of his points are good...

(03-17-2015 07:59 AM)ThrustMaster Wrote:  

Plenty of guys out there willing to hit older strange. I work with guys in their late 20 and early 30's that tap women in their late 30's and 40's all the time - they consider them less effort and willing. The women get the validation they so desperately seek and the guys bust nuts. Not going to change.

Old women in his times was probably mid 20s, so I would not overvalue his advice there.

Girls were married off in their teens and had their first children then. By the time you were 25 you had your 6-8 kids. He likely was not considering 40 year olds who would have been grandmothers then.

[Sourcecode]

Ben Franklin said to smash older women cause less risk of kids.
Women weren't going infertile in there 20s

[Dr. Howard]

(03-18-2015 05:26 AM)Sourcecode Wrote:  

Ben Franklin said to smash older women cause less risk of kids.
Women weren't going infertile in there 20s

He talks about putting a basket over their heads and you won't see their wrinkles...so I agree, these are above 20 year old bitches.

[Paracelsus]

Well, well: the New York Post has come out swinging against Rinaldi, too.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/29/promiscuity...ghtenment/

Choicer quotes:

Quote:

But let’s return to George’s advice for a moment, because it’s the kind of stupid thing women tell themselves all the time. We meet a man and we immediately start thinking of all the things we will change about him. Maybe you can get the guy to pick up his dirty socks more than once a week. But men are not children. And as the average age of marriage has ticked up further, our spouses are even less likely to alter fundamental aspects of themselves to suit us. If you think a 40-something man is going to change his mind about children or religion or politics or money — well, don’t count on it, sweetie.

And that's mainly due to the unintended consequences of feminism: because women are more determined to ride the carousel, men are much less inclined to wife them up and bang them up with kids.

Quote:

A pastor I interviewed in Atlanta once told me that when he is advising young people on dating and marriage, he says, “you have to know your non-negotiables.”

We are so clear on our plans for our educations, our jobs, even what kind of house we’d like to buy. But finding the right partner seems to inspire reticence and confusion — particularly for women.

It’s more politically correct for ladies to plot out their career trajectories than say we are looking for someone who will make a good father. (If you look at the profiles of the people cast in the next season of “Married at First Sight,” for instance, all of the men and none of the women say they were looking for someone who was family-oriented.)

Yet more evidence of housewife-shaming: the suggestion that you want a family man is not politically correct for Western women.

Quote:

Trying to suppress maternal desires in an effort to seem enlightened has the potential for disaster — as Rinaldi quickly learned.

In fact, it may be more necessary now than ever to have detailed conversations before we tie the knot. As more and more people decide to forego having children, we can no longer simply assume that men are just going to “come around.”

Quote:

Indeed, the whole Wild Oats Project is a way for Rinaldi to escape the devastation she experiences when she realizes she will not be a mother. So, can feminist empowerment provide her the comfort she needs?

Rinaldi finds new lovers — at a commune, on business trips, through dating websites, etc. The sex, she reports in great detail, is amazing. (Rinaldi’s prose has a kind of “Fifty Shades of Grey” quality — both the style and the substance.)

But in her quest to become a more fulfilled woman, she sounds like, well, a man. She proudly uses sex partners as objects and works hard to not become emotionally attached to them — her web ad says that she will go on no more than three dates with anyone.

Her journey to feminist enlightenment ends in a predictable place. “I learned I didn’t need a man or a child in order to experience true womanhood.” Just like a fish doesn’t need a bicycle. She ends the book divorced, and childless, in a relationship with one of her lovers. She says she has found “security” in herself.

Count me skeptical — the book is dedicated to “Ruby,” the child she never had.

Who's this Naomi Schaefer Riley? They're not allowed to print this sort of thing in the mainstream media!