How to save many £1000s and hundreds of hours

elphaba

I'm surprised people are still replying to this sexist idiot. Any time someone brings up a good point it's just met with "sorry you don't understand the context of my posts." It's better to just leave this clown in his miserable misogynistic world.

popadom

lightSwitch wrote: »

I SAID each side must do their bit.
It is amazing that you think I'm sexist. Calling the role of the genders as they are makes you spit your dummy out. You sound like an unthinking feminist. If a man said it must be wrong. Open your mind

No, if i woman said it id think the same,

popadom

lightSwitch wrote: »

My mother did the same thing when my dad was ill. It doesn't change the fact that he was always the provider.
It is just the natural order of things. Women in this country are voting with their feet to go back to their traditional roles. I didn't say that the media have been saying it.

Anyway, this argument has moved away from my original post which is about women who use "men provide for women" societal practise to fleece unsuspecting men. Like i said, men that do it for sex are not fleeced because they are counting the cost of sex with a prostitute and decide this is cheaper or less sleazy.

It is so simple.

How was he still the provider if your mother was caring for him?

elphaba wrote: »

I'm surprised people are still replying to this sexist idiot. Any time someone brings up a good point it's just met with "sorry you don't understand the context of my posts." It's better to just leave this clown in his miserable misogynistic world.

I THINK hes doing it to wind people up as he ahs nothing better to do with his life..

lightSwitch_3

hollydays wrote: »

I would like to hear details of the birthday present incident,as it seems key.

Which birthday incident?

lightSwitch_3

elphaba wrote: »

I'm surprised people are still replying to this sexist idiot. Any time someone brings up a good point it's just met with "sorry you don't understand the context of my posts." It's better to just leave this clown in his miserable misogynistic world.

If you are too thick to read and understand the posts and diatribe is all you are left with then who's the clown.

hollydays

lightSwitch wrote: »

That is the problem. If you are decent the gold diggers hone in. You are doing the right thing whilst they have ulterior motives. Like I mentioned, you discover them when they start having hissy fits, usually over presents, that's when you pack their bags and put them in the front garden and save yourself 1000s!

..............................................................................

lightSwitch_3

rgay1992 wrote: »

How was he still the provider if your mother was caring for him?

He built up the business, she couldn't wait for him to get back to work to release her.



I THINK hes doing it to wind people up as he ahs nothing better to do with his life..

rgay how old are you?
And do you just read individual words and have a hissi fit over them or, do you actually read ALL the words in my posts?

trumpton

Oh dear. I started off feeling a bit sorry for you, OP, because you had obviously been badly hurt by someone. But now the bitterness at the unfairness (justified probably) of it all is making you talk nonsense.

What you call 'men providing for women' (ie wife stays home and looks after the kids) is simply the arrangement that suits most partnerships when men, on average, earn more, and childcare cost £500 a month. Usually they have both agreed - it's not women sponging off blokes.

The whole experience has left you very bitter it seems, but your attitude isn't going to help you meet someone else and many even put off some decent women who might otherwise be interested. You need to put it down to experience and move on.

lightSwitch_3

trumpton wrote: »

Oh dear. I started off feeling a bit sorry for you, OP, because you had obviously been badly hurt by someone. But now the bitterness at the unfairness (justified probably) of it all is making you talk nonsense.

What you call 'men providing for women' (ie wife stays home and looks after the kids) is simply the arrangement that suits most partnerships when men, on average, earn more, and childcare cost £500 a month. Usually they have both agreed - it's not women sponging off blokes.

The whole experience has left you very bitter it seems, but your attitude isn't going to help you meet someone else and many even put off some decent women who might otherwise be interested. You need to put it down to experience and move on.

I have to respond to this one.

You definitely haven't read my posts in full. I have never said that married women or women in a normal relationships are sponging off men. Never said that. Please make a effort to read my posts if you want to add to this thread.

This thread is a warning about gold diggers, not decent women.

popadom

lightSwitch wrote: »

rgay how old are you?
And do you just read individual words and have a hissi fit over them or, do you actually read ALL the words in my posts?

Just the right age to be a money grabber...as im younger than you...

I do read the whole thing, and as others have said you have a hissi ffit about one thing and keep saying"your not ready my posts"

trumpton wrote: »

Oh dear. I started off feeling a bit sorry for you, OP, because you had obviously been badly hurt by someone. But now the bitterness at the unfairness (justified probably) of it all is making you talk nonsense.

What you call 'men providing for women' (ie wife stays home and looks after the kids) is simply the arrangement that suits most partnerships when men, on average, earn more, and childcare cost £500 a month. Usually they have both agreed - it's not women sponging off blokes.

The whole experience has left you very bitter it seems, but your attitude isn't going to help you meet someone else and many even put off some decent women who might otherwise be interested. You need to put it down to experience and move on.

TRUMPTON got it right! You dont see two sides!