> CP wrote --
>> I've noticed that today, women tend to want to only 'play' for short term
> non-relationships, but now it's the men who want to commit & receive one in
> return
> I have no idea.
> Been out of the dating scene many years.  And no desire to resume.
> But I would imagine its due to women wanting to be equal to men, "if a
> man can do it so can I" attitude in many things.

Yup, that's definitely part of it & no caring if that's an old demon they're  hoisting & flogging, or not. . .

> At one time women were dependent on men.
> They were looking for someone who could provide secuity for them (home,
> clothes, money, etc) since they were generally unable to provide for
> themselves (not allowed to work, etc).

Yup, & the man willing to 'climb the highest mountain'(etc), who is desired,  but has little wealth, shows himself at least willing to sacrifice & work for  her whim/happiness.

> In ancient days daughters were in per-arranged marriages, uniting various
> families.  The daughter often had no say in the matter.  (I'm sure there was
> grumbling by the daughters but they had little say in the matter).

Yup, often these were marriages providing an alliance between families that  ensured a certain prosperity & safety for her parents & younger siblings. . .

Funny thing, some demonisers point to the Bible as proof that this is the only  rioght way, yet the Bible shows the exact oposite, in a daughter choosing her  husbhand, in spite of her father's stated wishes & even the father told her  suitor, "It will depend on her assent, of course."

My wife's first born girl, who lives with the two of us has expressed her  preference that we screen anyone dshe gets seious about, as she recognizes we4  hacve experience with people that's longer than hers &, in such a matter, more  chemically & hormonally objective.

She knows I might be bribed with enough sheep, goats, & oxen, of course! *LOL*



--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-5