The Female Selection Of A Partner

   Well done to the author for the scientific work, BUT one misses. He puts on a scale the material prosperity of a man and his qualities as a father by presenting one at the expense of the other above a "minimum" defined by the Author (without defining the minimum). He also hypothesizes that the material above a certain (invisible) limit, it almost morally decomposes children or fattens them, makes them drug addicts and criminals. However, all statistics show the exact opposite. Children of the working class (for example, think of the inhabitants of Lyulin) are more likely to be addicted to drugs and to become criminals or victims of crime. The author also has the hypothesis that who earns a lot of money is almost necessarily absent from the lives of their children, and who bucks from morning to night in three shifts is present? It is uncertain. For example, the father may be in the pub after work and the family may still be poor. Poverty is not a dignity, and wealth does not deprive you of other human qualities and qualities as a parent. In our country, even women are not so demanding of men's success.

In the West it is much worse. There, only ugly and fat women are interested in men with below average income at all, but our men also have special requirements for figure, beauty, clothing, support, and this costs money. I admit I am married to a wealthy man and I do not regret it. However, I did not look for it purposefully, and so it happened. All my friends envy me, but not so much because of the money, because we do not parade and very few people know about our real condition. My friends envy me because my husband is serious, he can be relied on, he has self-confidence, he can express himself, He is educated, travels and has a wide horizon (he even has the status of a Senator) - that is, he travels a lot with him, and their husbands are in pubs, chatting with friends or have not yet separated from their parents - neither materially nor mentally. He who has succeeded in life has the corresponding qualities. Of course, my husband is interested in being a successful parent because he does not know failure. He spends every free minute with his family and does his best. I do not know where these prejudices come from, that the children of wealthy people are almost pampered and drug addicts, but this is not the case at all. Exactly the opposite. We live in our neighborhood wealthy people, I know my neighbors. Neighboring children all work at the age of 16 - in car washes, waiters, animators and so on, develop their own applications, even open their own companies. There are a lot of poor people in my family, but they do not allow their children to work and incite them against work, employers - "No mom to work for 600 levs, you will be lazy all summer, you will work all your life" They buy them tablets, iPhones, even cars to complete a dirty 12th grade, they satisfy them financially and stuff them with pizzas and sweets, because that's what the mother's son wants. Wealthy people have more discipline because the parents themselves are disciplined and expect the same from their children. In our home, for example, there is no rubbish to eat, and my relative gives her child chocolate for breakfast because she wants to. My child is in bed at 7-8 o'clock.

Her at 22-23 hours watching TV. She is a single mother with a very low income, but her child is ankle-deep. Only in the family. Grandparents compete for gifts. I know poor people with strollers for babies for BGN 2,000. For the poor, material is much more important and they are willing to invest much more time and effort in making money. Massively, even one or even both parents are abroad and so on. Why is material important for women? Well, in my opinion, it has always been important, even the cave woman chose the best hunter who could feed a generation. We have something else. Many girls have grown up with irresponsible fathers, because it was really a difficult year in our country and many men did not cope mentally, and women seem to be more stable in extreme situations. Women fed the families en masse. So was our family. Don't you think my father spent time with us? He was in the pub. I had a classmate - three children, he was the eldest watching the others while the mother worked non-stop to support the family and the father was chronically unemployed, bully and alcoholic. In my family I am the only one of 3 generations whose husband feeds the family. And you know, that's fine. I am calm, I do not worry about bills, food, shelter and my child is smiling and calm.

Therefore. At least during her motherhood she is 100 percent dependent on the man and if she can't feed a family, things go downhill very quickly. "If your child doesn't have a smartphone because his father can't buy him when all the other children have, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. If your child has to wear second-hand clothes and his jeans are worn out and the T-shirts are a little smaller, while all the other children are in great clothes - there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. The only bad thing is if his father can't get money for a doctor, medicine, sports school, healthy food. “Believe me, Author, I grew up this way, we didn't even have a TV, but don't you think that a father who can't buy clothes will be able to get money for food or a doctor? Nothing of the kind! Expensive electronic gadgets have been bought by poor parents lately with their last pennies. The children of the rich usually have children's emergency phones. At home, my mother paid for everything with her meager patch. She came home crushed from work to do her housework, cook, and give us some attention. Stress and bad food caused her hair to fall out in curls and her skin to be gray. We from the bad food, consisting of beans, bread and potatoes, were non-stop sick, and ours had no money for medicine. I felt guilty when I got sick and I tried to hide so that they wouldn't pay for antibiotics, and so on until I got to a tube dispensary for mechanical breathing. Okay, that it didn't pay extra because I was under 18, because that's what our people mostly asked if it cost anything. For them, the eternal justification - no money. Let's go for a walk in the park - no money. Absurd. That alone was a fixed idea. Whether there is money or not. I don't think about money today. We don't even talk about such things. We don't worry at all.

Do you know people with tuberculosis - I know. Whole families. Only the children remained healthy, because the vaccine only works for children and my 15-year-old girlfriend. She looked after her brother all by herself and they lived from winter. Author, we may be fed up with misery. Not that we can't. We do not want. So tighten up if you want to have a family, because a lot of women I see prefer to be alone, but not to support a man anymore or to tolerate incompetents. Does my child have a better father than me. Definitely. I took care of that. A woman has to think with her head - it depends on our decision whether our children will have a childhood and peace or not. No matter how many scientific papers you write, I don't see what you have plastered. It is obvious that you are an educated, smart person and you will certainly provide a standard above the average for your family, so you benefit even from this attitude of women. I don't see what you're unhappy about. You are stupid at the moment, because you are probably still a student and you do not have the means, but in reality you will be one of the men who will then provide a good life for your children. You just need another 5-10 years and at the moment you may be angry with older men with income.

Do not worry. And you are attractive to girls because you are promising. It is not said that you are necessarily looking for a man with money, but you are looking for a promising man with qualities who can feed a family, so you did not understand the female gender here. You yourself are from a good family for sure, on average and you do not know real material deprivations. You're probably from a big city and you're wondering how some girls are really just looking for money. There are some, of course, but they are rare, and they themselves do not have the qualities of mothers, so you do not miss anything. It is good to think about various topics. Well done. Good luck

   Good thoughts, Author, and generally correct .... I can only add a few things: My mercy has many years of experience with women and all kinds - Bulgarian and foreign, smart and stupid, poor and rich, lazy and hardworking, educated and rude .... In general, those who are about 40 today have a completely different view of things from the younger ones, they are much more realistic in their expectations. Maybe it's because they've caught up with the time when the value system was different. I myself grew up in a very poor teacher's family at that time. I dare say that my parents managed to raise me "quality", as they say in modern Bulgarian .... The aforementioned women of about 40 and up notice this and I can not get rid of candidates. My impression that after life has beaten them, they are already much more realistic and are satisfied that the man is just "normal", that is, not a drunk, not drunk like a pig, to be understood, calm, non-conflicting, etc. These women usually have one or another relationship behind them, that both children and they know what to expect, life has brought them down to earth ... Quite another beer are the smaller ones, say those who are about 30 at the moment plus or minus, especially minus. They have grown up in a society with a different value system, in a society of contentment, ostentation, decadence ... They still fly in the sky and think that in life everything is due to them! They buzzed until they were in their 30s, they were raised, at one point they were replaced by the next young beauty, they panicked that they would miss the last train and came across me :-) Good, but they come with their attitude from before, that is, he has to be financially secure, to pamper me, to look me in the eyes and to get what I want, I just have to flutter my (artificial) lashes and he melts .... If that doesn't help, plan B is included, that is, what doesn't happen with one whistle happens with two .... And while category 40 still has some thoughts about children, whether current or future, category 30 thinks and plans MAINLY FOR MYSELF. They are spoiled and obsessive. A few quotes from ladies in the above category that I have dealt with: - I want silicone tits (read "which you pay") - I want in Dubai (read "at your expense") - is not you want me to feel good. (read "I want presents, I want you to take care of my dog, to take me out every other day") - I want a child (from you) - I want two children, twins (from you) - I want to live together (but you pay the rent) - I want a car (to buy me) - I want an iPhone eight red (give it to me) - I want .... (fill in whatever you can think of) Generally valid the following rule for money: "mine are mine, and yours are ours." Last time I had a great interesting experience with a lady of 29, very nice, but completely in the above category: After she did her best all night: She: - I want a child I: - aha, and then? - then I will travel around the world, because I really want to - aha, and who will watch the child? - ooo, I'll have a wife to watch it I think that says it all. I summarize: - while middle-aged women have already come down to earth and are happy if they find an equal partner who is somewhat normal, the younger ones look and think for themselves, they see what they can "make" in a relationship, because they know that even if they get lost in time, they will take everything with them - from silicone tits to the child inclusive. And then they will create an account on a dating site and go hunting for another lollipop. Therefore, Author, in general, your reasoning is very correct, but I think there is a huge difference depending on the age category. Dirty Daddy

   I support №1 and I want to add that women are not the same and you can't put them under a common denominator. Every woman has her price, that is, her assessment of a "good man." You can't compare a famous educated beauty to a dark, ugly, simple-minded girl who speaks a dialect. Of course, the beauty will be required by the man to offer her high financial comfort, while the other girl would agree to be the wife of the tractor driver. And author, believe the ugly plowman and it doesn't even occur to them that their children needed schools, whether for sports or arts, they don't dream of Disneyland, they themselves haven't eaten quinoa and salmon, they won't buy the children either while the children of the famous beauty will order sushi at home. Such is life and has always been! Men who can provide a high material standard have smart beauties for wives, men who barely make a living take women with more "defects". And with our grandparents it was like that, the one who was the owner or heir of a large property and herds chooses the most beautiful girl in the village and her parents give her with pleasure, she will stay in the attic in the shade all her life and will hire workers to they dig their garden and help her with the housework, the one who is poor and works in other people's fields for a living falls for the ugly, depending on how hard-working and resourceful he is. Of course, the scale of diligence and resourcefulness is valued in money and real estate as it is today, the scale of ugliness and intelligence in women is clear to you. And with our grandparents it was like that, the one who was the owner or heir of a large property and herds chooses the most beautiful girl in the village and her parents give her with pleasure, she will stay in the attic in the shade all her life and will hire workers to they dig their garden and help her with the housework, the one who is poor and works in other people's fields for a living falls for the ugly, depending on how hard-working and resourceful he is. Of course, the scale of diligence and resourcefulness is valued in money and real estate as it is today, the scale of ugliness and intelligence in women is clear to you. And with our grandparents it was like that, the one who was the owner or heir of a large property and herds chooses the most beautiful girl in the village and her parents give her with pleasure, she will stay in the attic in the shade all her life and will hire workers to they dig their garden and help her with the housework, the one who is poor and works in other people's fields for a living falls for the ugly, depending on how hard-working and resourceful he is. Of course, the scale of diligence and resourcefulness is valued in money and real estate as it is today, the scale of ugliness and intelligence in women is clear to you. he who is poor and works in foreign fields for a living falls for the ugly, according to how industrious and resourceful he is. Of course, the scale of diligence and resourcefulness is valued in money and real estate as it is today, the scale of ugliness and intelligence in women is clear to you. he who is poor and works in foreign lands for wages falls for the ugly, according to how industrious and resourceful he is. Of course, the scale of diligence and resourcefulness is valued in money and real estate as it is today, the scale of ugliness and intelligence in women is clear to you.

   To comment 1: Does your husband have the status of a Senator because he is a senator in the US Senate? Come on without fiction!

   I am a woman and there is not a single member of the fair sex in my environment who is greedy for holidays in Thailand, shopping in Vienna, boutique clothes and in general for a piggy bank to lay like a golden hen. I don't know where you find such mercantile people, but stop drawing radical conclusions about all women, because it is insulting for those of us who can take care of ourselves and do not consider men financial donors. Yes, of course, no one wants a drone waiting for theirs or, worse, their mate, but by no means do we lurk for shiny Bavarians and heavy gold chains. Change your profiteering environment, see girls for whom it is a paradise to go for a few days in a tent in the mountains instead of "Dubai" and so on. But here comes the subtle moment what kind of women are you actually looking for? If you like shiny and sharpened muffins that want non-stop support and the image of expensive holders - yes, the author's reasoning is very correct and he will have to make a lot of money for one. But there are others (I'm not talking about all sorts of ugly jokes), for which the relationship with the man does not revolve around his salary, but around completely different qualities - humanity, love, honesty and understanding.

   Safe from the definition of "mercantile"! I have the unpleasant feeling that "mercantile" is any woman who flatly refuses to support men who "will not work for 600 leva." "Mercantile" is also anyone who cannot and does not want to cover half of the costs. On the other hand, she must have a perfect appearance, a good mother and (of course) take over all the housework. There are no such women anymore, they emigrated to Greece and Germany because they are already 50 years old and here they do not want to work, and there they are perfect for cleaners and caregivers of old people. They continue to send money to their mother's sons and their permanently unemployed husbands, but at least they have got rid of the endless housework and the requirement for appearance. Young women, seeing what awaits them, wonder if the man has succeeded and has money,

   The author next to N1 - I would refute almost every point you said, but I will not do it so as not to burden the audience with long texts. I will touch only one, and whoever reads and thinks will judge for himself for the rest of the things where the truth is. "In my family, I'm the only one of 3 generations whose husband feeds the family. And you know, that's good," "I said somewhere that it's not good?" I'm talking about something else. That if we have to rank the valuable qualities in a candidate for a husband, the ability to feed his family must be after the personal moral qualities that will set an example and bring up the children. I think I've written several times that I don't take family nutrition out of the list in any way. I'm just arguing about where he should be in the rankings.

   Author, I don't care who takes how much, I pay the bills myself. I have a serious profession. Well, they don't pay me very well, but I've achieved everything myself. And for a 30-year-old woman in my field is not small. After all, I work and I have self-confidence, I'm not a muffin. I'm only interested in the man next to me not being a simpleton and having a pretty decent appearance. Yes, but I'm an old girl and I only have "privileged friends" at the moment. Nobody wants to get seriously involved with me. I'm not ugly, I'm sexually liberated and I have a decent general culture. Men like me, but only to the point of sleeping with me, talking, complaining and seeking advice. Not that it doesn't suit me, I don't want someone to put shackles on me ... That's not the point. But it struck me that you men are rubbing your own gold diggers, dolls, because you like to play the role of the "weaker sex", to scratch your ego by fluttering your lashes. You only choose your bad partners, and many women choose shoddy men by financial criteria.

   For me, men who have had 'experience' with many women are terribly low in my eyes. At the same time, they intrude and impose morals, criticize and condemn, and they do not look at what kind of life they live. Number 2, being such an 'earthly' person, would have caught one of the generation, which is now 40 (plus) years old, had had 1-2 children and sitting at home to look after their children / child. And instead of what - he goes to 'communicate' with the young women of the newer generations ... Even if he is younger than the 40-year-olds he talks about, but if he likes them so much, why not get caught with any of them? Most likely, more than once or twice he allowed himself to go to nightclubs such as bars and discos and in general to places where women go who want to have fun and not be 'earthly'.

   From number 1 Author, specifically the ability of a man to feed a family again for me remains in 1st place, simply because if he is not a serious person (not just a man!) In his work, no profession, no interests, then the rest will be lame. Now do you remember. What kind of father can be a man-passed or a mother's son for example? What a father can be a man who leaves work at the slightest obstacle. He can abandon his family as well. What kind of father are you when you don't have self-confidence, because you can't even take your wife to the movies or you don't have a car, a house, and you live with your parents. A man's ability to have a good income, job, business, success in life is a litmus test for his other qualities. It is also important for women, but we have other functions such as babysitting, old people, social functions. In addition, women make the selection real .... H 8 is a very common phenomenon, by the way and that is why men in our country are not taught that they have responsibilities as feeding the family. This is a phenomenon mainly for the countries of the former socialist camp. The bad thing is that such women have believed in themselves that they give the man the feeling that they do not need him. Such are the women in my family, and I fought this country quite purposefully, because I am convinced that my father was like that, precisely because my mother kept telling him non-stop that he didn't need him, throwing money at him even when he gave for the family to humiliate him. After my mother lost her job (long after I moved out), my father tightened up and made a real career, reduced alcohol and now even takes the maximum pension for the country, but this only happened after my mother hung up and recognized him as man. Men run away from women like 8, because when you take away their functions to feed a family, there is not much left. Men are neither better in the household, nor in social competencies, nor can they give birth or breastfeed. In older children, they play a very important role, but by then you are divorced. Don't get me wrong. I do not blame the Bulgarian men, but the Bulgarian mothers and women for the situation. Our men do not know what their real role is and what is required of them. I admit that I eventually married a foreigner. There are simply no fixes - in our country most men wait for a woman for absolutely everything - vision, household, children, cooking skills, to tolerate his mother and the rest of the family, to pay the bills equally and in return 0. The younger ones at least help with children and household, but my generation and those older than me are also in this bare water. Zero help, but they look at what money you take and how much you can give for HIS car, his hobbies, for repairs and so on. For me, women's income should be on top. That is, the man must be able to cover all household expenses and the woman what she takes to really raise the standard of living or if the man does not earn and does not want to work - at least to run children and household (in our country it is impossible directly). However, I would never deal with a man who takes less money than me. Never. I can't respect him ... even if he were an intelligent university lecturer, I said I knew men I liked, but I would never go out with them. My first friend was a teacher, by the way. Very intelligent, polite, but terribly complex precisely because of the material and he earned it for me. Man without BGN 5 in the pocket becomes an aggressive complex. This is my opinion and I have a life experience that has compiled it for me.

   Author: N1 / N10 one grandmother knows, one grandmother knows ... "specifically the ability of a man to feed a family again for me remains in 1st place, simply because if he is not a serious man (not just a man! ) in his work, he has no profession, no interests, then the rest will be lame to him. "- and where does the opposite come from - that if he knows how to feed his family, automatically, he will be able to give a good upbringing to his children? Because, only if the opposite is valid, then it would make sense for the ability to feed the family to be the leading criterion. I will answer you where the opposite comes from - out of nowhere. I will not go into explanations and examples, because the conversation will become completely stupid.

   You will not stop your child from smoking with slaps. Otherwise to Hp1 - thank you, you are absolutely right! I need a woman like you, mostly intelligent enough to be able to understand all these things you wrote ...

   Author, you do not tolerate someone else's opinion, but wanted it. I explained to you exactly from a woman's perspective what things look like, but you are on the principle "one grandmother knows, one grandmother knows" Maybe you want to compensate for the lack of success in work and business with other qualities (babysitting, housekeeping, etc. n.), which is not bad, but you will have to find a woman like number 8, and they are usually not very pleasant partners and like to command and determine. However, if you want a family in which you can hear the man's word and slap your children, you will have to prove yourself and succeed in life in the first place. And more - you will have to compromise with the vision of the woman or with some other qualities or shortcomings. There are passengers for each train. In my family, women as number 8 are the rule, not the exception. My relative didn't look at the material at all, the man's success - she could do it alone. Well, her husband is 40 years old. They live with his parents, she supports him, he allegedly goes to work, but leaves after 2 weeks. Eventually she went abroad, where she chatted something and got enough of him, but she is now a single mother and really lives as she wanted - alone as a dog and not dependent on a man. I prefer to be dependent on a man, but to be a quality man, than to be an independent single mother. That's why you think BEFORE a woman gets married and that's why today young girls, especially the more attractive / smart ones with many candidates, carefully choose the man next to them, the father of their children and with whom to mix their genes. Why compromise when we can have both - a good father and a successful man in his work and business? Or do you think that if you succeed professionally you will be operated on by your other positive qualities? Exactly the opposite. One leads the other. Whoever is successful also has other qualities - social intelligence, entrepreneurship, diligence, education / professional skills and knowledge, social contacts and connections. With such a man and your children can then better socialize in life and succeed in turn. With such a choice, you ensure your family at least 2 generations ahead. Not only children but also grandchildren. Definitely worth it. I decided once and for all to break the chain of incompetent men in the family and I succeeded. The last women who were somehow financially dependent on their husbands were my great-grandmothers, who were ultimately the most normal and balanced. However, this does not mean that a woman should lie on a lazy hip. For example, my great-grandmother was a housewife and worked on the family farm while her husband was brought to Belene, and then she managed to look after her children on her own. My other great-grandmother was also a quiet housewife, but her husband was against educating their 4 children. She opened a paint shop (on clothes and fabrics) in the yard literally and managed to study all 4 of her children, my grandfather even studied at a lyceum in Plovdiv. My other great-grandmothers were housewives until the end, they all lived to be over 95. The next generations are already a string of misery, alcoholism, the downfall of women like number 8 and male miscreants. The woman in my family is the cargo donkey and finally nothing. So I decided to be different and I'm happy with my choice. I'm looking after my child, we're planning a second one, I'm taking high maternity, which I spend on my own needs, I have two separate credit cards to spend on my household and I'm comfortable. I don't think about bills, shelter, clothes and material children, but I can concentrate on raising my son, and when he grows up, my husband will do some business for me and I will earn for saving and other needs. No more misery - my children, if they want to study abroad, will be able to realize whatever dreams they want. At least I'm giving them a chance I didn't have. Just as I am creating children from a successful and intelligent man, these qualities will pass on to the next generation. 50% gene, 50% environment! By the way, number 2 is right, but women over 40 are not looking for a father for their children, but for someone to scratch ... or for antiques. Most are quite desperate because men of their age and over who are single are looking for a young man and generally do not choose. The despair over the age of 50 is even greater. That is why it is important not only to choose a good husband and father for your children, but also to keep it. Here is the art.

   Author, urging women to behave sensibly and turn their backs on greed is a lost cause. Very wrong approach. They will tell you: "Yes, author, you are right, this must be there, but the man must have a second and third and a fourth and a fifth and a sixth and a seventh, etc." If you demand something from them, they will say "but how can you want a slave and a maid. " You know on someone else's back and a hundred sticks are not enough.

   Author, let's stop talking nonsense. If he can't feed the children until it's time to raise them, they will starve to death. It is evolutionarily justified. Of course, it is not the only trait by which we choose the father of our children, but it is very important, definitely more important than the "moral" one.

   See now, 1-10-14. A controlling and commanding woman does not always mean a woman who knows how to make money. So much money that she is really financially independent. (Even in most cases, women who earn well spend all their energy, all desire and enthusiasm for .. control, power, leadership in their work, and with their husband / boyfriend they want to be 'weak', to be led and protected) from him.) There are many more women who play him type: 'I'm stupid and helpless and obedient and I want to listen to you' - so tie a man, give birth to 1-2 children and as the infancy of children show themselves !! Often, even such a woman really does not have the qualities to develop professionally, let alone do business, because she is LAZY TO BE INTERESTED IN and deepen in ANYTHING, BUT at the same time she WANTS TO CONTROL, to manage someone, possibly several people. Here's your mother - she worked ... and at one point what - you lost your job .. and what .. did she find a new one - no. And why? Probably because she was so good at what she did. She knew that no one would tie her to take her, then making money is not like tying a man ... Here, look (let the other readers dig to see) only on this site how many topics there are from complaints of girls and boys for controlling mothers! - mothers who constantly want to interfere in the lives of their grown children! In most cases, these mothers are women who do NOTHING. They don't make money. (Or they work something enough to charge them for a pension, something they are not very good at, they have no passion to do it, and if possible they would just lie down and command their families. ) BUT they have a mania for control, they want to control the people around them. Because they have this energy, which is not really a bad thing in itself, but because they are lazy women, and even more so because they have a very low rating for themselves and their abilities, they realize / release this energy on her husband and on her children. I guess your mother, precisely because she felt, even realized very well, that she was not very good at her job, mentally crushed your father, raised her self-esteem on 'his back' and thus felt fulfilled and significant. And it's no coincidence that she chose your father to take down, who was obviously somewhat insecure (at the time) for some reason - his guard was low, that's why he tied her up. She was the (emotional) parasite, and he was her host! And that, that some men are not taught to take responsibility is the fault of their PARENTS alone. Otherwise, I agree with many of the things you said.

   Author to N 16: well, well, is it that hard to read? "If he can't feed children" - where am I even talking about this option? In everything I have written, I do not compare this situation anywhere at all. I do not know how many times to repeat that I think that the future husband should be able to save his family. In the answers so far, I read only clichés that have nothing to do with the topic and some imaginary oppositions of the type, if he is not wealthy, then he has failed and my children will die of malnutrition. It seems to me more and more that many women are trying to rationalize (justify in their minds) the attraction to rich men, so if he is not rich, then I doom my children to inhuman suffering. I don't see anything wrong with a woman admitting that she's getting wet from looking like financially wealthy men. This is clearly an instinct and I would not blame her for it. The similar instinct in men to lose one's mind in a young, tight, beautiful woman. But we humans are more than animals precisely because, sometimes, we somehow manage to realize and control our instincts. The endless rationalization with the absurd argument mentioned above does not lead anyone forward. And this is clearly visible. You say "but it's very important, definitely more important than the 'moral'" and the results of that thinking are obvious - you make me repeat myself, which is damn annoying - children aged 12-13 for whom there are no secrets in smoking , alcohol, drugs, sex, nor in television blunting. This is because the figure of the father in the family is missing. N1 thinks that slapping a father is a matter of luxury in behavior, not a father's primary function and duty. Already a mass presence of men and fathers, there are two extremes that you women create by your own choice - or the failed neighborhood drunkard, or the sophisticated, elegant, lucrative, tolerant husband who brings material comfort and is a great social jewel with which to spend on the public podium. One has bruises on his wife, and his children are starving, drunk, and drugged; the other woman finds black palamarks because he still wants to feel what a biological man he is or they rape her, as in Western Europe, and his children are not hungry for him, they are fed up with the ease of life, but also they get drunk and take drugs, with the difference that they are much more expensive and of high quality materials. I don't blame women for all this. You make the choice, but the opportunity to make that choice is given to you by men who are stupid and uncharacteristic.

   Author, don't waste your time explaining to the "modern" woman ... The cause is farted. As one man has already explained, there is a very clear distinction between "generations". The normal woman who grew up with some kind of civilization code like the man is now at least 40 today. Everything under this age is on the "American model". Supposedly greedy for money, comfortable living, comfort, egocentrism. It is also known as the third wave of feminism. Don't be fooled that today's woman, when looking for a "partner", even thinks about her children. Her whole motivation comes from experiencing herself as a princess. This includes, and always being right, which is achieved through social networks and media. Now that the "couples" outdo you (as they will do to me), the princess will express herself as an authority ... at least in her very narrow view of life ... But I am from the middle generation, and I have had relationships with both generations, so they can deceive themselves, but what I have seen and experienced they cannot take away from me ... Advice from me - deeply re-evaluate your concept of family nowadays, because you will suffer a lot, especially if you are younger, and they manage to brainwash you ... And listen to Americans, because they were the first to go through this. Especially blacks, because they were the first to undergo such social modeling. and they manage to brainwash you ... And listen to the Americans, because they were the first to go through this. Especially blacks, because they were the first to undergo such social modeling. and they manage to brainwash you ... And listen to the Americans, because they were the first to go through this. Especially blacks, because they were the first to undergo such social modeling.

   Author, you are not confusing the topic, but your thesis! You do not judge that like everything in this world, material security has dimensions. When you tell women that it was "important for their future partner to be financially secure, or at least with serious prospects, in the name of the survival of the future family," they imagine that you want them to start families with the exact opposite type of men, that is, the man is not financially secure and has no prospect that his family will survive. And the truth is in the middle, at least for most women, they are either married or living with men with normal incomes. 99, 99% of the children you see on the streets are the result of marriage or living together with a man who cannot afford to take his family to Dubai. If the children you see are a reality, then at least 95% of women are not gold diggers, but they liked something else in the men to whom they gave birth to children, and it did not matter to them at all that they would not visit famous destinations and would never ride in a state-of-the-art car. Most likely all these women liked the morals and character in the man next to them and believe me there is no woman in the world who would choose a different father of their children because of a minimal difference in the man's salary, women do not value the man by exact income, if it was yours a colleague who has a higher salary of BGN 100-200 would have had greater success with women than you.

   Men have no pleasure. If the woman could not support herself - she was mercantile, easily looking, blah blah. If a woman can support herself and support the family - she was powerful, she wanted to harass, to manage, etc. Only those men, perfect, perfect, always deserve the best, without any effort to do, then the best will they fall from the sky because they are very cool and the world has been waiting for them to be born ...

   Male, male, number 17, you are global. If a man supports his wife, then she is a parasite, mercantile, etc. If a woman supports her husband - she is a parasite, and he is a host? !! Ingenious logic! A bow!

   Author, I see no point in arguing with you. You've obviously figured out that you're very "moral" and superior to other men in that, because you have no other real superiority over them. And you are angry with the women that they don't appreciate it - it's been said 100 times above that we evaluate something else, but you don't have it and you're deaf. And this nonsense about instincts just broke me - our instincts have evolved for so long in order to survive. If you suppress basic instincts, this does not lead to anything good. Anorexics suppress the instinct for hunger - aww, what a beautiful sight, aww. Besides, I haven't seen a man suppress his instincts to want a beautiful woman and say - no, I will take this 120 kg one, because I am a human being and I can control my instincts! No, whenever we talk about suppressing instincts, it's about how women should suppress their instincts and choose crazy men over cool ones. Well, it won't happen, you know, we'll always prefer the cool ones to the crazy ones. Good luck wishing you to overcome Mother Nature, haha!

   Thanks, # 19, for the great addition! Dirty Daddy

   "I don't blame women for all this. You make the choice," And what does YOUR choice do for you ??

   19, EVERYTHING under 40? !! Aha… thanks for the definitions. You have hardly had experiences with "anything" under 40 to draw such conclusions. I'm tired of some smart people determining who's going and who's not. Black Sabbath

   At 19, the Bulgarian woman in general has nothing to do with the "princesses", except for a few popular people who are in their midst. Women work hard and pursue their tasks. I have lived in Greece and Italy, and if you have to take care of a woman there, you will feel dizzy. And yes, everyone deserves the best for themselves, and has the right to seek it.

   22, you didn't understand anything. Or you seem to understand, but it doesn't get rid of you ...;) Otherwise, by mentioning financial support, if we were a normal society, no adult should, for any reason, support another adult financially. Well, unless it's a sick person. Otherwise, everyone has to support themselves. In this regard, it is high time to cut off once and for all absolutely all benefits for healthy people and for healthy children of healthy people.