Should Powerful Men Not Get Married?

I also want to know why the opposite is not also true?

Why aren't men making themselves “sexually available” to powerful women?

Well, I guess even if they were, the women are probably too exhausted to care.

What? Only the women who marry poor men do it for love?

i'm a wife swapper, therefore i have no comment.

Interesting…so what does that say about my new marriage? My hubby is not poor…

Is that a serious question?

I have this crazy feeling that no women – rich or otherwise – has a problem finding men who are sexually available.

also correct.

Yeah, and check the fact that Rush Hindenburg is snagging some blonde Ann Coulter clone. What's this, his fourth? You can't tell me she finds him infinitely sexy and companionable. If he was a Walmart greeter, women sure as hell wouldn't be tossing themselves at him.

Back to the original question though, even if rich men never marry — Jack Nicholson springs to mind, even though he was married for a short time a hundred years ago — they generally get involved in long-term relationships at some point, and those women feel the same sense of betrayal when they're cheated on.

Shalom Amber,

I do not think the qualifier ought to be power, but rather success. Those at the top of their profession get that way by working 90-hour weeks, by devoting their every waking moment (and a of their sleeping moments) to their professional endeavors.

That makes for a lousy home life.

Interestingly enough I made much the same comment to Councilwoman Jill Miller-Zimon upon her victory in last month's election. One person can't do two jobs in an excellent manner. Time restraints — we all get the same 23 hours, 59 minutes and 56 seconds per day — prohibit any other reality.

B'shalom,

Jeff

Shalom Amber,

When I use the word successful, I mean top 5 percent in the world successful, I mean Olympic medalist successful, I mean the kind of success where if someone mentions your area of expertise, your name is going to come up.

I mean that level of success where you have access to the power the command the response you desire.

Compared to my own abysmal performance on the golf course, anyone on the PGA tour is a successful golfer. Compared to Tiger Woods, those other golfers aren't. That's the difference we're talking about when we look at people like Oprah Winfrey. Have you ever considered why it is that she and Steadman have never married? She is both successful and powerful in every sense of the words that matters.

B'shalom,

Jeff

Well, Oprah has managed to have long-term relationships with Steadman and with Gayle! Sounds successful to me

I think rich/powerful/successful guys have more opportunities (or you can call them “temptations”) than “normal” guys; it's the nature of how humans work sexually. The only other difference between guys like Tiger and some guy on my street is that fewer people care about some “average Joe's” infidelity. We're all human, and susceptible to giving in to temptation, I think the rich guys are just tempted more often than anybody else.

I mean, let's be honest here – I'm a married middle class guy living in a middle class neighborhood in a non-descript job. I don't have extras from Nip/Tuck making themselves obviously sexually available to me. Hell, not even the cute undergrad girls we usually have interning at the office send up any flags.

Of course, people are individuals, and individuals often deviate from “average”. So it's no surprise that there are rich and powerful men who are committed family men, and deadbeats who cheat like crazy.

As for the question of why we don't see the same pattern of behavior as frequently in women… I think a large part of it goes back to the differences in the patterns that matter to men and women on a biological level when selecting mates. As a gross generalization, there's more incentive biologically for women to be monogamous than men, largely because the biological investment required by women to pass on their genetic code is much much larger than that for men. A woman is unable to reproduce for a long time after conceiving, so it pays to be selective (even if it's not a part of the conscious thought process), while that is not at all the case for men. Again, obviously people are individuals, and there are situations where having multiple sexual partners is biologically advantageous to women… usually when the 2nd partner is a “better provider” than the 1st.

This is always a touchy topic, because it's difficult to talk about biological influences on sexual behavior without people interpreting your statements to be sexist (“women are all gold-diggers who only select mates based on their ability to 'provide' and 'protect'? How dare you!”), despite the fact that what those arguments imply about the “average” male isn't particularly flattering either (we prefer young curvy women because they will be more fertile, and tend to be philandering in order to maximize the distribution of genetic code).

Just my take on it.

good one!!!!!!!

Men should not marry at all. Especially men with money. Women are nearly always the ones who file for divorce because they always get the assets, his money and his children, and hence the gravy train. Men, if you love someone, then live with them, but don't make any agreement (like a marriage) which binds you but not her. And under no circumstances give an American woman children; the chances are better than even that you will not get to raise the children for whom you pay, while they are poisoned against you. This is the way it works most of the time. Don't do it guys, just don't do it.