Why men need to stop complaining that women are Goldiggers

I’m tired of hearing men describing women as whores, bitches, and golddiggers. Still today the majority of men who are saying this are also single. Whether they’re single by choice or because they have a few ideas not entirely screwed in properly, I would like to write my next little bleeg (I’m calling my blog “bleegs” because I don’t believe this is a proper blog) about these men. You can ask yourself why I have male friends like this, of course, but that would be delving into an entirely different subject, which I will leave for now.

I suppose in order to first understand why men are calling women names and revealing many states of distrust, is to first understand the circumstances in which we are now. As I have already mentioned my personal belief system, that feminism has created these circumstances of wishing women to be men rather than be women with equal rights to men but specifically designed for women, then you will understand men’s distrust. Not only do men now understand that women enjoy sex just as much or more as they do, they also know that women do not need men in order to have children. And many women, such as myself, have taken it upon themselves to have and raise their own children. I just read an article that said a large percentage of children are currently being born to single parents. Did that mean “single’ as in “unmarried”? Or did it mean “single” as in the man has vanished from the picture. Because certainly in places like Quebec women and men are having children not married, and living happily, as in many parts of the world: being ‘unwed” does not necessarily mean that women are having children “single”; there could be fathers involved. 

As for myself, I did plan on getting married but the pregnancy came first and when that happened the wedding didn’t happen, and I just had to live with that. It was probably for the best. But I digress........

My male friends keep complaining about golddiggers. Some of my male friends demand that a woman have an equally successful a career as they do in order to be dateable.  

It’s fine for men and women to both have successful careers and earn money, so long as you do not wish to have children. I honestly do not know how other women do this, I consider them like machines, but they work all through their pregnancies and then the minute they give birth, they have one year of maternity leave (in Canada and Australia) to raise their child and then they must return to work. This is dictated by law. A woman at that point must figure out what to do with their 1 year old infant. Usually women hire nannies or put their children in daycares, and then go back to work.

Now if a man is involved there are two incomes involved then chances are the man’s income will be higher than the woman's. I will not do the math but what ends up happening is that half or more than half of a woman’s salary goes to the childcare and more often than not couples will end deciding that the woman’s income is not worth the bother and she should just stay home and raise the children. Many women want to stay home but feel embarrassed about the loss of their careers and many women are bitter at the loss of their careers and get depressed staying at home. As this topic of childcare alone is an issue unto itself I will continue with the main agenda.

So, men, when meeting women are concerned that women are just golddiggers.

Ok - let’s keep this in perspective.

Men: 

When you meet a woman you are judging her based on her appearance and perhaps some other qualities. It’s only reasonable to presume that women are judging you as well. There is actually nothing wrong with a woman judging you based on your salary or ability to be responsible. If a woman is interested in having children she’s going to want to know that you will be a caring person to these children and that you will “provide” for them. If you are so fearful and tight with your wallet than, in my opinion, that is a translation of how cheap you are with your heart and affection. You cannot enter relationships with financial distrust. 

I can tell you from personal experience this financial distrust has destroyed many of my attempts at having a relationship: my daughter’s father was so concerned that I would eventually leave him and take half of his money he decided to post-pone our wedding even after I got pregnant, unilaterally, causing me to feel all sorts of grief and upset. Whatever his reasons, he is now still living alone 7 years later and I sincerely feel that at one point he regretted his decision. What ended up happening in our circumstances was that although he ran away he did eventually have to start paying child support, the only difference is that while he could have been more “open” about his financial circumstances and living with us initially,  he ended up living without me and without his daughter. His distrust for women was so extreme and offensive, and for the most part, still is today. 

****(On a side note, he was much more generous 7 years later when we went to visit him in Australia and I would like to think that he possibly learned his “lesson” of mistreating (a woman like me). 

But I digress again. 

If men wish to have children then they must be generous to their prospective mothers of their children. This is really the only way to create true equality. Men will never be able to have children on their own and women will always carry this burden. Unless the majority of men wish for the population to die off and they wish to die paying nurses to take care of them rather than their own children, they have that choice. 

I personally did not enjoy pregnancy. Nor do I wish to be a stay at home mother. But the alternative of not having any children is worse. 

Men must begin to understand that having a woman in their life is an opportunity and it saddens me when men fail to understand the larger picture as to why women judge men the way they do. None of it is bad. Of course there are “people” who wish to use others and take advantage and take their money but I would like to hope that the majority of people, men and women, but particularly women, are just looking into their biological best interest: if you do not have a job or ability to earn a living you really lower your prospective of finding a woman to have children with you, and men cannot be bitter for this. On the contrary, men who have lots of money would really benefit from having a wife and children to take care of. They may say they enjoy being alone and growing older with their money but I am certain that the minute their health starts to fail they will begin to regret these decisions. I am not saying that children will necessarily take care of their parents in their old age but one hopes they would. 

If you want to see the world and it’s human inhabitants start to fade, then do not have children. Do not listen to me. But if you wish to understand things more deeply then you need to understand that although money is a necessity it is not a biological imperative: children are. And women are just seeking ways to have them. They are not all “golddiggers” for this reason. 


* If you're wondering why I underlined math it's because I originally put it as "man". 

Wanted: new words to describe who you are

Wanted: new words to describe who you are

I’d like to get back to the casual use of the term “friend” that we’re throwing around and perhaps clarify what it  is I believe in at the same time.

Example 1:

My one young male friend says that he is visiting with a woman he’s excited to be working with many months ago. Upon catching up to the story he continues to explain such a wonderful time that he had with his “friend” but that she had an item of his he was waiting to be returned. Upon closer analysis of the story, I asked, “did you have sex with this friend”? And he said, “yes”. 

My question is, what kind of “friend” is this?

Example 2:

Another male friend says that he just cuddled and fondled a woman he recently met, but that he’s not really “into her”. This is just one of the many stories he tells me about, women whom he claims are his “friends” he uses for sexual gratification however he complains that he finds none of them remotely sexually attractive and would not consider any of them for his “girlfriend”.

Are these “friends”? 

Example 3: 

Someone whom I may or may not have been dating spoke of many women as “friends” and in fact had me hanging out with some of them at points. Upon recent investigation it turns out that he now considers that he’s dating one of these “friends” yet they had not had sex, last time I asked. 

Is that really a “friend”?

Is it so wrong for me to ask that people use their words clearly and not be misleading? Perhaps the more people understood the language they’re using the more they would feel right in their own heads.

Now I will be clear about how I use words, how I define these types of relationships, and  then explain my belief system and what I believe in terms of modern relationships, to clarify this for everyone I know, or should know.

If you sleep with someone they’re more than a friend

We do not have the right words for this in the English dictionary at the moment and I’d like to ask that everyone actually try to think of some new words. I now know that many of what I thought were romantic preludes to relationships were actually men considering me a friend and using me for sex. It could have mutual ignorance and using, and at the time I did not even realize it was happening except to feel some angst and upset when I found out that they were seeing someone shortly after me that they actually did call their girlfriend.

To digress, I once had a boyfriend in University. I had met him in High School and I found him the most annoying person I had ever known. I did not find him remotely attractive but I humored a friendship with with him casually in the hallways because it seemed like the best way to seem somewhat sociable. At the time, my “best friend” a girl who now prefers women but seemed androgynous or sexually questionable back then, and I decided to take a trip to Montreal. We were discussing these plans and this annoying guy invited himself a long. 

The trip was horrible. He kept talking incessantly at my friend, I’ll call her Androgyny for now, and it felt like he was ignoring me. I presumed he had a crush on her, like all men, like all my high school days - using me to get to her or another really good looking friend.

Nonetheless, two years later after re-convening a friendship, it turned out that he confessed his true affections for me and we began to “go out”. Our first romantic endeavor together was not very romantic. We were hanging out a lot and I asked him if we were “going out”. He looked at me sort of excited and asked if I wanted to be going out, and so I said, “sure we can try” and that was that. 

But he slowly became disenchanted with my true nature. I had a high libido and bad relationship skills. I rarely called him to chit chat and when he held my hand I would rip it away.

I suppose the objective in talking about this past experience is that while my initial experiences with men I preferred to be “gender neutral” and so “having romantic involvement” (aka sexual encounters) with “friends” seemed more normal. It’s only after experiencing a (what I thought to be) real love did I realize how much I enjoyed the tenderness of sensuality and affection in relationships, and my “walls” to being more emotionally and physically invested in a relationship went down - a bit.

But now there are so man variations of “relationships” that when talking to people it all seems confused and I hate having to guess the true nature of these so called relationships. So now I’m back to my original question - how can we create a true language that is honest about the reality of our relationship experiences?

I clearly do not have the answers to these questions but I will tell you my definitions, or at least, my belief system currently.

These are the types of relationships that I believe I have. Please help me find definitions for them because I do not like the words “fuck buddy” or other modern emotionless terms

MALE FRIENDS EQUAL = 

- Ex Boyfriends

- Men I dated who were not interested in having sex with me who became friends

- Men I dated who I may have had some sexual encounter with who were commitmentphobic and not interested in a long term relationship with whom I am friends with because that’s the only relationship I can have with them

 - Men I dated and I became commitmentphobic for some reason or another but there are facets of them that I appreciate - from a distance - and thus we are “friends”

 - Men who I never dated who never liked me romantically who I never liked romantically either who are friends

THESE ARE NOT MALE FRIENDS

• men who were once my lover, whom I dated in which things may or may not be over and I feel that there is a possibility for a romance in the future except circumstances may or may not permit it
• Men who are romantically and sexually interested in me
• Men who I am romantically or sexually interested in
• Men whom I’m dating
• or men whom I may be having a romantic interlude with

Of the above, I refer to ex boyfriends as “ex boyfriends”. Men whom I’ve dated who have become friends I clarify and qualify to people when speaking of them as exactly that: “men whom I’ve dated but things did not work out but we’re still friends”. Of the male friends in which there was never any romantic underpinnings I refer to simply as “really good male friends”.

Now for the lingering males who are not friends, I will generalize and say: “romantic interests” or “love interests”. For men whom I’m currently involved in I will say, “lovers”, or “someone I’m dating”, or a “romantic prospect”. I also use the terms a “crush”.

Now for the fancy word work. What kind of words can we create as an intelligent group of people to describe more interestingly what I point out here. I don’t want to be generic anymore and refer to all men in my life as “friends”. It’s just not accurate. There are complexities and I feel that they only reason people are using the term “friend” lately is to be shady and to mislead. While for myself, although I’ve had many male friends (now take in mind these are the ones that I have not slept with nor ever will sleep with because these are my definitions of “male friends” aka “really good male friends whom have no romantic interest in me and vice versa”) tell me that my experiences and definitions are way above average , I still feel that there can be some good in creating a more specific language.

Can you help out here?

Now to quickly clarify a few things, just for the record.

I do not believe in having sex with friends. I do not have sex with strangers and then afterwards call them friends. I merely would be happy to suggest that if a romantic relationship can’t work out that we can try being friends but I have very high standards to my friendship, and I expect honesty and decency which I find that sometimes cannot happen after romantic interludes. I believe that friends can become lovers but unfortunately for me I think physicality is important and although I may have crushes here and there, ultimately my belief system is that if a man is too afraid to communicate or physically approach me on their romantic or sexual interest in me then they’re too cowardly to deal with me as a long term partner. Although I hate the term “long term partner” this is what I believe and everything else you may think about me is junk.

I believe that we as individuals should commit to relationships. I think that being in a relationship is fundamentally better than being single. Being in a relationship is financially, emotionally, and physically more satisfying than being single, if you can get yourself into a functional and healthy dynamic with your love interest.

I think that I am a commitmentphobe and I struggle daily to fight against it. I believe in family and traditional roles  - I want that just in a non - conventional way: I want something originally made by me and a love interest over the long haul. I am non compromising. I know what I want out of life and I can and will only commit to a person that I truly feel will be good not only to me  but to my daughter and my family and loved ones as well. I am looking for a reliable and decent individual who will not fear me, as others have. I do not need to be in a relationship and if I cannot find someone I will always feel happy knowing that I have experienced and tried to love, and I have been loved and I will continue to be loved. I believe that having sex with friends is wrong and emotionally disjointed and I do not applaud that behavior nor do I wish it for myself. I’d rather have random sex with strangers than use a friend for sexual gratification  without committing to them long term - as we’re already emotionally bonded. 

Most importantly, I think that although I claim to be happy single I think most single people are miserable and they put it upon themselves, as I do, in staying “single” and that they should just try harder to be in a relationship with someone instead of thinking the “other person” should do all the work. No one wants to feel used and worn out. Make things even as you can, in the way you can. Although this has nothing to do with my original question, I just wanted to slide in my belief system in there.  I know I often will contemplate ideas and throw them out there too but as I mature I find it easier to communicate my true essential self. Now if only I could communicate this better with better words....well that's why I asked you for help with that. 

How being “single” is the norm?

I’m curious if a long time ago when humans were still quite animal like running around the planet like wild apes, if they at any point would look at another human ape creature and think to themselves, “why doesn’t that human ape have a husband? Or a nice cave or hut to dwell in”? 

I’d hate to argue on behalf of polygamists in saying that humans were not meant to be in monogamous relationships.

Let’s say that although I believe humans are still animals to a large extent, behaving in animal ways, and although I support the idea of monogamy (more on the basis of trust and friendship than in religious idealisms), that there are large arguments against the idea of conventional relationships.

Trying to start this again.

When I was 5, I enjoyed playing in the playground with my friends. Kids did not “hook up”. It seemed normal to go to school and come back, without a companion. In fact, if we had any companions at all, they may be a “bestie” or there may be a small pack of “besties”. 

Only as we age and gain some sexual maturity or desires do we consider looking towards others for sexual gain and emotional gratification, or other things - filling the void within ourselves.

But at what point did “being in a relationship” become the norm?

My argument lately is that while a lot of friends I know are in relationships, I do consider things long term. So, I have some single independent female friends. They earn their own money. They have a place to live. They support themselves. They have friends occasionally they have lovers......

They look at other women or men in relationships or marriages and think to themselves that they’re not the norm. But in reality there are a lot of single people, and a lot of them are single out of choice.

It’s not like 50 years ago, or even 30 years ago when individuals felt pressured to marry “whoever” just in order to keep up with the Jones. Now people take their time and are trying to find “Mr. or Mrs Right”. It may take this generation a long time to realize that the truth is there is no perfect Mr. or Mrs. right but I’m not one to discuss the importance of being realistic, for this posting anyway (given that I’m a self declared commitmentphobe and perfectionist, especially).

Now I think it is lovely that people are married and they are for a long time. But let’s be realistic.

People get divorced. People die. You could be in a relationship for 15 years and have your spouse have a heart attack. Life is full of unknown futures. Just because you have found someone does not mean they will be there, forever. (Of course let’s hope that they are for optimisms sake).

Now to make clear what my agenda is here is that I would like to say to all my super sad single friends a few things.

1. You have been single for your whole life, and you will always be alone. Learn to be happy with or without someone in your life. Even if you find someone that makes you happy, they can’t always be there to keep you afloat.
2. No one likes a perpetually depressed needy person. Let’s face it. Crying is unattractive. Pleading to stay in a relationship is - unattractive. Why would you do that to yourself? If you are dating someone and they’re not interested in you, why are you torturing yourself by continuing to call them up and hound them? Clearly they do not care about you, because if they did, they would make more effort.
3. You are not perfect. You may not be tall, skinny, or good looking. Most often I hear my sad single friends not only criticizing themselves but then ripping all the potential “romantic prospects” to shreds.

I am a sarcastic bitch sometimes. I criticize everything. I am self aware. I accept that I can be neurotic. I know my idea of vision for myself is not expectations I should hold onto others. I struggle with this understanding of the difference between standards I hold for myself and realistic standards I should hold for others - every day. But I know I am not perfect. No one will be. 

If you want the commitment, you just have to commit, pure and simple. That is not to “commit to abuse”. That is just to commit to someone that is decent enough and wishing to commit to you as well, if a monogamous relationship is what you want.

But let me just say that although I often desire a relationship, the past year I have been enjoying my solitude so much. I get so much done in my free time. It’s almost like all the years I spent with my very large family screaming at one another has disappeared and my home is now my tranquil space in the universe. I guess for an introvert my dwelling is my safe haven, my lair, as I may say. Since I enjoy writing, reading, and trying to self actualize creatively and emotionally, the free time, alone is just so wonderful.

Lately sometimes when I have people over, although I enjoy it, I get so very tired after a short while. I have reduced the amount of people I entertain at my house. And if I go out, I prefer doing action oriented activities like dancing! 

I wonder sometimes whether I am even capable of understanding what compromising at this point would be all about. I’m certain I could do it........but I’m relishing this time that I am alone. I know that whether I am involved with someone or not, I will always find opportunity and enjoyment in the time I have for myself, whether large or small.

After all, it is more natural to be single. We are independent organisms living separate lives. Most ideals about relationships have been super imposed upon us, over time, and usually by religious doctrine. Now that we have the separation between Church and State, what truly is forcing us to feel badly by our decisions to evolve in our relationships, from conventional norms? 

Boys and Girls by Blur