How to convince my girlfriend she does not need to go on pricey dates?

[dinah]

Because they're spineless ninnies? I would expect so, if they're on a "Waiting" board. So much of how women are socialized to act makes me gag.

hahah, ninnies. such an awesome word. it all makes me want to gag as well.

[iris lilies]

Why are they so fixated on getting married though? Something like 40 percent of new moms are not married these days.


I guess that I don't understand why biological clocks are such a worry. Adopting a kid is the same thing. If a woman reaches 45 and then has a hard time getting preggers, why not adopt? That could cut down on that hurried feeling and mean she could not post so much on Wedding Bee.

I know your question is sincere but I suspect a little snark behind it. That's ok, Im pretty snarky myself so I will 'splain to you:

The 40% who aren't married occupy the lowest rungs of socio- economic society. If one wishes to join those ranks with babies in tow, go for it. I think that's stupid and irresponsible, I don't value poverty, but hey, those are MY values.

And that's what we are talking about here, values.

While a woman CAN reproduce without a man's commitment to his children as expressed by a legalized marriage ceremony, I think this cheats children out of important things. There are lots of details to this idea but
I'm giving you the executive summary.

Your idea that women should just want what you think they should have is silly.

Turning this on you, why don't you live with your girlfriend in her big house with all of her stuff,and get used to pooling your money with her so that you both can buy more crap and rack up the credit card debt? you don't because: that's not what you value.

Many women value a commitment as represented by a legally recognized public joining. On another thread we are talking about the legally supported financial institutions of society, one of them spousal Social Scurity benefits, and that's one among many reasons to get hitched legally.

I recognize that for some people, commitment without marriage is what they value. That's fine. I just think that in the vast majority of cases where they bring children into the world, kids are best served by two committed parents with legal protections.

[ApatheticNoMore]

You did not fear complications, illnesses, or that sort of thing?

well read about female sterilization it's a much bigger operation than a vasectomy - MUCH, then read about IUDs and how painful some women describe them as being to have inserted (they are but so is going through labor and probably worse) and what could go wrong (puncturing the uterus requiring surgical removal, but it's rare, or they could not take and keep coming out and having to be inserted again each time with less chance of working), and how some women have severe cramps afterward time of month and not time of month, then even read about how many side effects hormonal birth control has for some women (weight gain, craziness, nausea, lack of sex drive - in which case why even bother). And after you are done with that abstinence will start to sound good

yes my point of view most of the time is men don't understand anything, doh men - haha I never said they should date me (and they think there is something wrong with you if you take birth control more seriously than them, why worry your pretty little head about that dear .....) But Alan is too cool

[Ultralight]

I know your question is sincere but I suspect a little snark behind it. That's ok, Im pretty snarky myself so I will 'splain to you:

The 40% who aren't married occupy the lowest rungs of socio- economic society. If one wishes to join those ranks with babies in tow, go for it. I think that's stupid and irresponsible, I don't value poverty, but hey, those are MY values.

And that's what we are talking about here, values.

While a woman CAN reproduce without a man's commitment to his children as expressed by a legalized marriage ceremony, I think this cheats children out of important things. There are lots of details to this idea but
I'm giving you the executive summary.

Your idea that women should just want what you think they should have is silly.

Turning this on you, why don't you live with your girlfriend in her big house with all of her stuff,and get used to pooling your money with her so that you both can buy more crap and rack up the credit card debt? It's because: that's not what you value.

Many women value a commitment as represented by a legally recognized public joining. On another thread we are talking about the legally supported financial institutions of society, one of them spousal Social Scurity benefits, and that's one among many reasons to get hitched legally.

I recognize that for some people, commitment without marriage is what they value. That's fine. I just think that in the vast majority of cases where they bring children into the world, kids are best served by two committed parents with legal protections.

I agree with most of this and still see your point on the things I am dubious about.

[pony mom]

I've always felt that if the top five most important things to you are much different (or worse, totally opposite) than the top five most important things to your SO, things probably won't work out in the long term.

Why not alternate locations each week? Have her come to your place and you treat her, and she treats you when you go to her place? And maybe take a class or share an activity that's new to the both of you that you'd both enjoy?

Attraction only goes so far. The last guy I dated was a very devout Christian. Although we were greatly attracted to each other, it didn't work. He spent the entire time trying to convert me to his religion, which was very important to him. I had no interest in it, and although I loved being with him, often wished I was out riding my horse instead of hearing about Jesus all the time.

[Geila]

I have read this thread with interest, as DH & I appeared to have some similar issues when we dated. I hesitated to reply b/c it can sound pretty bad to some people, and I can sound at times stupid or greedy, but oh well, I don't really care what anyone thinks of it anymore, and I know that DH & I are solid.

1. DH and I dated for 3 years before getting engaged and married within the year after that. We broke up several times during the 3 years, partly b/c he was not interested in getting married again or in having children ever. I proposed to him in the first year or two, and he said, "No thanks. Nothing personal, just not doing that again." Instead of ending our relationship, I decided that he was the best person I knew, that I wanted to be with him, and figured it would end at some point b/c I knew I wanted kids. Instead, he came around to marriage and to kids. In fact, he had to propose a couple of times to convince me that he meant it.

2. DH was cheap. Not frugal--cheap. When we first started dating, he was making no money and I was earning plenty, so I paid for almost everything, no problem, including international mission trips that we both did. When he started making a little money, I'd get offended when he would spend it on crap or on futzing around on his Jeep and then tell me he couldn't afford anything that I wanted to do. I did make him take me out to dinner sometimes at that point--usually to an ethnic restaurant, nothing fancy. We broke up one time b/c he refused to spend money on a visit to see me (by then we lived a flight away from each other) after I'd spent money and vacation time visiting him more than once. He was earning some at that point. I needed to know that I was worth his time and his energy and his money. When he did show up, he brought an engagement ring. Before I accepted the ring, I got the stone changed--from a chip to a tiny stone. I made him pay for it.

3. I believe in marriage, and I believe in going "all in." When DH & I (finally) got married, I tackled his debt with our combined income, most of which was earned by me, as if it were OUR debt, because at that point it was. I was happy to eat rice & beans (kind of easy when you're hispanic) and spend very little and simply be together. There is a saying in Spanish, "Contigo, pan y cebollas." With you, bread and onions (is enough). I'm the one who has budgeted and invested and grown our net worth, not by my income alone (we've both had ups and downs with income) but by my work for our family as a single unit. DH doesn't know from budgeting or investing. He's a great DIYer and has saved us thousands in home repairs and improvements. We are a team.

UA, if I were your girlfriend, I'd think you care more about fishing than about me if that's where you're putting your money, your energy, and your time.

Why would you think this would make you sound stupid or greedy? It sounds to me like you knew what you wanted, you made conscious and well-thought out decisions, and you were clear about what was important to you. This sounds pretty great to me!

Every couple is going to have to navigate the ups and downs and compromises inherent in any relationship, but being direct and honest about who you are and what's important to you seems the best way be. Personally, I don't think 2 dates a month is unreasonable, if they are affordable to the people involved. If I was dating a guy who scoffed at that, I would see it as a sign that it was time for me to move on. At that point, he could decide if he valued spending time with me more than fishing several times a week, or not.

[pinkytoe]

I have a niece who at 37 became obsessed with the biological clock urge. She joined match.com and found her eventual mate there within a year and found exactly what she wanted - athletic, well-paid professional who wanted two kids and the lifestyle she was accustomed to. It seems to have worked out for them - six years later, he is making the big bucks, she stays home and raises a boy and a girl. She assumes she can resume her career when they are older.

[Ultralight]

I've always felt that if the top five most important things to you are much different (or worse, totally opposite) than the top five most important things to your SO, things probably won't work out in the long term.

Why not alternate locations each week? Have her come to your place and you treat her, and she treats you when you go to her place? And maybe take a class or share an activity that's new to the both of you that you'd both enjoy?

Attraction only goes so far. The last guy I dated was a very devout Christian. Although we were greatly attracted to each other, it didn't work. He spent the entire time trying to convert me to his religion, which was very important to him. I had no interest in it, and although I loved being with him, often wished I was out riding my horse instead of hearing about Jesus all the time.

Sorry that your relationship met such a fate.

She and I don't talk about religion very much.

[Ultralight]

Why would you think this would make you sound stupid or greedy? It sounds to me like you knew what you wanted, you made conscious and well-thought out choices, and you were clear about what was important to you. This sounds pretty great to me!

Every couple is going to have to navigate the ups and downs and compromises inherent in any relationship, but being direct and honest about who you are and what's important to you seems the best way be. Personally, I don't think 2 dates a month is unreasonable, if they are affordable to the people involved. If I was dating a guy who scoffed at that, I would see it as a sign that it was time for me to move on. At that point, he could decide if he valued spending time with me more than fishing several times a week, or not.

Take it easy! I am giving her the dates and changing my name on here from UltraliteAngler to UltraBrokeDater.

[Ultralight]

I have a niece who at 37 became obsessed with the biological clock urge. She joined match.com and found her eventual mate there within a year and found exactly what she wanted - athletic, well-paid professional who wanted two kids and the lifestyle she was accustomed to. It seems to have worked out for them - six years later, he is making the big bucks, she stays home and raises a boy and a girl. She assumes she can resume her career when they are older.

Match.com should make a commercial with her in it! Many, many women on match.com are 37 and obsessed with their bio-clocks. I have been on second dates where women are naming our three kids that have to be born in the next three years!

Before I met one woman she said in the first online conversation: "I really want to be a mom. I am 40! This needs to happen soon."

I was still talking to her about which gourmet pizza place she wanted to go to on our first date. Then BLAM!