That wasn’t a separate statement from how I interpret it. You said a man’s wealth status is indicative of his character and health.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFKt1z7cHAY[/youtube]
I know this wasn’t directed at me, but this is one of those cases where we get to say: it has nothing to do with you being a woman (AFAIK). It has to do with you being… Australian! 
Gib wrote:
How so? unless you have been refused entry. 
OOOH SNAAPP!!!
No I didn’t say that. Common sense will tell you that not all men of wealth are of honourable character and some have the ‘love’ of money which then renders it useless.
Money is a necessity today in this society and without it misery prevails.
Mr Micawber’s famous, and oft-quoted, recipe for happiness:
"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen [pounds] nineteen [shillings] and six [pence], result happiness.
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."
Charles Dickens, David Copperfield
Interestingly, the inspiration for this quote is attributed to Dickens’ own father, a perpetual debtor who eventually wound up in the Marshalsea debtor’s prison. This period of time for Dickens, who was only 12 years old, had a profound effect on him.
.
Hey Shieldy,
I think I’m gonna leave this conversation as it stands.
Money is a necessity, not only in today’s world but since time immemorial. I always wonder though: can that be equated with love?
Well I hate to see a good man go, but if I may add the words of my own noted but mostly unheard of poet-dad, to quote,-:
‘Money is mostly funny’.
And another very famous chanteuse , ‘what has love got to do with it’'?
Money is equated with peace for without it there is only struggle.
I agree that sloppy tenths applies to men also. Only men push the idea that women desire male [Edit: slutdom rather than] whoredom.
Money doesn’t make the world go round, but it oils the wheels.
What is “male whoredom”?
Oh yeah? Check this out: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=189596&hilit=conveyor+belt&start=75#p2585290
That would be a male gigolo, but what I meant were male sluts, male slutdom. My apologies, correction made.
I recently asked a man in his 60s what percentage of men frequent different prostitutes beds [ie. men who have intercourse with more than one prostitute] and he answered a whopping 50% have slept with more than one prostitute. Really? Shockingly high.
What would explain this difference is simple. Men are visually aroused which is easily provided by women in most public places with curve hugging outfits, revealing outfits, flawless makeup, etc. Women on the other hand need more mental stimulation and verbal intimacy which isn’t easily accessible in public places. So men are always becoming aroused and women aren’t.
Cool! How long did it take you to find that old post? 
My HS history teacher said that and I just happened to remember. Something about this thread loosened the gears in my head 
So what’s a male slut? Is that like a male whore who doesn’t get paid?
^ In other words, an ordinary guy?
And you believed him?
^ Your insight into the differences between men and women is impecable, Wendy.
^ I’m sure you have a lot of gears in your head.
Too bad they’re connected with loose screws
HS = High School. He was a helluva guy. He issued history books with the instruction to put them under our beds until the end of the year because he didn’t need a book to teach us history, but the state required they be issued.
I searched Carleas’ history for “human” and was told I can’t use that word. Then I tried “obviously human” and got 9000 results. Been trying for two days to find where I’m sure I saw that he lifted the moderator approval requirement for someone who was “obviously human” who posted about it in meta.
Is Most Published Research Wrong?
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q[/youtube]
Within a few minutes I can pick apart most studies (group too small, biased sampling, leaps to conclusions, etc, etc). One must really study studies.
Hey thanks! “clearly human” not “obviously” lol No wonder I couldn’t find it. How did you find it?
I really wish our values as a society were the other way around. I remember the feminist complaint used to be that women are shamed for being sexually permiscuous while men are congratulated. Now I’m seeing more and more slut shaming towards men. But why? I mean, sure, that makes things equal (I guess) but why not less slut shaming towards women? Why not lift the stigma from both sexes rather than put it on both?
Wouldn’t that be something, Wendy? Sexual freedom for both sexes? No stigma? Just sex, sex, sex everywhere. At work, in the park, at the food court in the mall. Just a bunch of sucking, and fucking, and licking, and thrusting, and cumming, and squirting… all day long, everywhere you go. 
Around 32.65% last survey I conducted.
No, in fact I don’t. “Believe” is a problematic word for me. I’m an anti-epistemicist, which means I don’t think we actually know 99% of the things we think we know. When I read an article, my first thought is: how the hell do they know? Then it’s: are they just fabricating this? ← I usually don’t get answers to those questions, so it kinda just sits in my mind as “unknown”. That’s not to say I dis-believe it, just that 99% of the stuff I read or hear never gets through the screening process in my mind, the screening process whereby information gets qualified as knowledge.
Yes, it is. I wasn’t being snide. I was serious. It’s a good insight.