Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (30068)	1/26/1999 8:34:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>YooHoo. Johannes. More men want to marry a 35 year old woman with 10 million in the bank than one that has no assets. Its just a fact. Do you dispute that?< Well this really does not nail the thing. If the two 35 year olds are precisely the same physically/intellectually/sexually, etc., then of course the woman with material assets will win. But this is quite another argument. You essentially argue for materialism, claiming THIS is where a woman's power lies. You propose here a circumstance that to the average man is extraordinary. Most men, let alone most women, will never have 10 million sitting in the bank during their youth. Material wealth is not a natural asset of humanity. Genes are. So to posit fabrication of a world wherein women as a rule foreswear their genetic sexual attributes and attractions to acquire 10 million dollars is simply unreasonable. But to argue the principle of your point, this is precisely what you must do. On this level to see the thing clearly we must match weapon for weapon. You argue for materialism, I argue for sexual attraction controlled by genetics. Here we assume complete marital faithfulness. To make all things equal we must strip your 10 million dollar woman of all lovely genetic assets and have her rely exclusively upon your power of materialism. This woman has no redeeming qualities that would attract a man, save for her money. This means she also cannot have sex. Now as for her competition, genetic assets are in abundance (about 10 million dollars worth). She is extraordinarily beautiful, with a lovely face, beautiful hair, firm breasts and long shapely legs. She is slender and has mastered the feminine arts. For the right man, she promises decades of sexual bliss and friendly companionship. She is a remarkably intelligent Queen of a woman with no material assets. Now we see the thing clearly, weapon for weapon. Unless most men are celibates, I think I have pretty much won this debate.