Seems as though some people did not like my previous post. Yes, it was blunt and to the point, but it is true. The truth hurts? Let me explain myself in more detail.
You see, in the past (thousands of years ago) women were attracted to physically fit men - you know, v-shaped back, legs of steel, broad shoulders, pecs, "guns", abs, etc. Why? Because a strong man was capable of raising the family - ie: build a house, farm the land, protection, work for food/supplies etc. (and yes, women played a major role in the family as well). Remember life was very difficult and physically demanding so being strong was crucial to survival. Over the course of human evolution women have "evolved" into chosing their mates accordingly.
NOW, in the 21st century physical strength is not so important. Why? Because we live in a technological world where many tasks, which once required considerable physical labour, can now be accomplished by the press of a button .... OR even easier ... with $$$$$$.
This is the rationale behind my "dollar sign" post. There is nothing wrong with women being attracted to wealthy men (or financially stable). It's just a product of the improvement of our standard of living and evolution. Makes you wonder what this will develop into in the future...
I realise there are other reasons for women chosing a specific partner (love, personality, chemistry etc), but this is a major point i had to explain (re: my unpopular post).
What are men attracted to in a women, you now ask? Well there are evolutionary reasons for this as well but I'm out of time today.
The live and achievements of polishcanuck.
What? I've been living in canada since the age of 2. I've never worked as a dishwasher (even on a part-time basis during school).
tut tut, Im surprised at such a generalisation off you.
You know what i'm talking about.