MillionaireMatch.com - the best dating site for sexy, successful singles!
MillionaireMatch.com - the best dating site for sexy, successful singles!

Lennie's bookshelf: read

Choosing Civility: The Twenty-five Rules of Considerate Conduct Blow Me Blow Me Half Broke Horses The Glass Castle Steve Jobs

More of Lennie's books »
Book recommendations, book reviews, quotes, book clubs, book trivia, book lists
Search Lennie's Site
Follow Lennie

Now Available!
For International sales or larger orders, please contact sales@lennieross.com
Lennie's Tweets
Admin Login
« The Top 7 Bedroom Moves That Will Rock Her World | Main | The Morning After »

Which Came First?

A friend of mine has an old style t-shirt - the kind you would buy at Crazy Shirts while on vacation in Hawaii. Only instead of saying ‘Hawaii Hang Loose’ or ‘My parents went to Hawaii and all they got me was this stupid t-shirt’, it has a cartoon of an egg and a chicken in bed smoking cigarettes with the phrase ‘which came first?’

The expression got me thinking – not so much about which came first in regard to chickens and eggs, but which came first in regard to the inconsiderate jerks and gold-digging whores who dominate the Los Angeles dating scene – and from what I’ve heard the dating scenes of New York, Miami, and several other American cities. 

Somewhere along the way, dating has become a very complex, ruthless blood sport with the players of each team trying to get what they want with little to no investment – financial or emotional – on their own part. The men want to get laid; the women want to get paid. But where did it start? What tipped the scales? Who started this war of the sexes and would they please make it stop? 

It used to be that men were the primary breadwinners in relationships. Enter women’s lib to confuse the issue. Now women want to work, feel an obligation to work, are expected to work, but are still faced with many inequalities in the work force. Neither wages nor opportunities are equal. The glass ceiling still exists. While it would be nice if opportunities and wages were equal, maybe men and women are not supposed to be doing all the same things. After all, you don’t see a lot of men getting pregnant and popping out babies, do you? We were designed biologically with different skill sets and different chromosomes. To name just a few physical differences, men have more muscle mass and physical strength and women have more body fat. All this trying to put square pegs in round holes is not working. Maybe we should stick to putting round pegs in round holes (wink, wink), as that seems to be pleasing to everyone. I say this having experienced sexual discrimination and harassment in pretty much every job I have ever had. My life would be easier if I could just assume the role of Betty Draper, put on a pretty frock, throw some TV dinners on the table for the kids, hand my husband a martini the minute he walks in the door, do his laundry and maintain the household. I’d trade my independence for that arrangement any day. Show me where to sign.

Given that I do not fit into this modern stereotype in that I am not a gold-digger, but a hard working woman who loves doting on men and wishes she were born in another era, it is to my advantage in the dating arena as I am evidently something of a rare commodity these days. However, there seem to be few single men who escape the label of inconsiderate jerk, thereby making the odds of my finding a match rather slim.

Dating is supposed to be about courtship, romance and love. Not about opportunity, exploitation and war. While Justin Timberlake may have tried to bring sexy back, I’m endeavoring to bring social graces back. If men and women would simply acknowledge that women’s lib failed, we could all be a little more civilized with one another. Men could open doors for women again without worrying that they might be frowned upon by some radical feminist, and women could be vulnerable and sweet again and drop the trying to be equal façade – and the world would be a better place. Besides, we know we’re not equal. We’ve always been and always will be far superior to men. Why should be have to prove it in the work force?

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (5)

Many opinions can be extracted from certain angles depending on upbringing and education backrounds.I believe there is a projected-inferiority complex factor from w/n that fear of someone else can do a better job no matter what gender,race etc you are,and it just seems like inequity. Unfamilar knowledge breeds ignorance,and only time and dialogue can extinguish .

April 2, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterChritopher W Walters

Men learn manners from there parents don't you think? I know I did.

April 2, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterRaymond L Vigil

I totally get Lennie's point on this. I agree that women got screwed over by the women's lib thing. It confused things. As for manners, maybe our lives are just to busy to be polite anymore. Sad. I have no idea what the first guy is talking about in his comment, but I agree with the second. Manners are learned. So what is it? Are coastal Americans (NY,Miami, LA) just rude. I'm from the midwest originally and men there are awesome. Dorothy said it best, there's no place like home!

April 2, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterhot & single in LA

What is the difference between "gold-digging whore" and the woman who wants to stay home and serve TV dinners and make martinis? Both are relying on a man who has proven he has the resources to support them. Both, this piece seems to suggest, want to give up a work life for which "they're not fit" because their bodies "pop out babies" and have "more fat." Is it the doting that makes them different? If you make your man a martini he can enjoy as soon as he walks in the door, do you get to stand tall and call yourself a good woman while looking down at other women as whores though they want the same things but fail to bestow the same amount of doting on their men?

I find the use of the word "whore" as an insult unfortunate, but even if I didn't, in this context, "whore" is inadequate, as a whore will always tell you what you're getting for what, whereas an inconsiderate lover will simply take as much as they can without giving anything in return. What it really comes down to, I think, is the give-and-take. A good lover -- male or female -- gives back as much as they take. As you mention, the level of investment is paramount. People are having a harder time putting down their defenses to allow any investment to occur.

But I don't think it's appropriate to buy into the idea of the gold-digger as a purely feminine personage. Yes, there are people who take advantage of others financially, but this is not only true of women. The glass ceiling may remain, but there are still women who won't take advantage of others for their financial advancement. I think the language of this post is what fuels the mentality that all women are just after men's money and that's really unfortunate, as it appears that you were trying to dispel the notion.

April 4, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterAV Flox

Dear AV Flox

First off, I have no beef with women who choose to work as escorts as a profession. At least they are honest about wanting money for sex. It's not the oldest profession for no reason. It has a place in society and likely always will. I do not view a sex worker as a "whore". I was using the term "whore" in the contemporary colloquial sense as someone who will do anything for a price...such as take fertility drugs to get pregnant with a wealthy man to secure her future...That is the reference I was employing, as many women in Los Angeles do have a price. I think it's sad to sell out, and think that the escort is wiser than the gold-digging whore, because the escort still has her integrity at the end of the day. But this is not a debate about escorts vs "whores" - in the contemporary, colloquial use of the term "whore".

I think you missed the point. When I said "my life would be easier if I were Betty Draper", I was referring to the fact that in the 50's women had much less pressure on them. Different pressures, but less pressure. It was a different world. There is a tremendous difference between a domestic partner - a "housewife" for lack of a less archaic term- and a "gold-digging whore" who just wants to spa and shop and give nothing in return except her body. Any housewife who reads your post would be extremely offended to hear you lump her in with gold-digging whores. BIG difference. One is willing to take responsibility... the other is simply willing to take.

My mother was a Betty-Draper type - without the pretty dresses. She was not entitled or in anyway a gold-digger or whore. She worked very hard. She maintained the household, raised the children, did my father's bookkeeping, and was his personal assistant in pretty much every regard... she had a full-time job as his wife. My point was merely, that I would rather be a full-time wife/mother than work 18 hours days, 7 days a week, dealing with sexual harassment and the glass ceiling. I would find the role of domestic housewife a pleasant, less pressured career, one that I would appreciate very much. My mother didn't realize how fortunate she was, as she had no reference as to how hard it was to be a single woman in the work force - I have seen both sides, and I would choose her side, given a choice - unfortunately, I am not presently given that choice!

I agree entirely that a relationship should have a mutual reciprocity - or as you say - give and take. But, unfortunately in Los Angeles, and in today's society in general, many people are only takers. They do not think about what they can do for others. I don't feel that the gold-digger is purely a feminine personage at all. My point was not to fuel the belief that all women are after a man's money. Certainly that is not the case. However, it is very much the prevalent belief of men in Los Angeles...as is the prevalent belief of women in Los Angeles that men view women as disposable and are only interested in them for sex. What I am saying is that dating for the most part become a cynical, nasty war of the sexes - and that is unhealthy for society and the future generations.

Thank you for your contribution. I hope this helps clarify my point.

April 4, 2011 | Registered CommenterLennie Ross

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>