Money VS Happy

. Heck I figure I can supplement my retirement making $$$ off of WTF on the golf course. Originally Posted by OneHotMale

You gonna supplement your retirement by washing my balls?

For those of us who are 30+ in age, would you give up your current career or financial stability to start over with the one you truly love? Originally Posted by Nicole Preston

Fuc No!

Love affects the brain just like a drug. Would you quit your job for some drug? Now if I hated my job, I would quit the fucer when I found something better. I suspect that might be the case in this industry after a point.

Love don't pay the bills.

I believe that I might know where you're coming from but if one is seriously in love, then why WOULD they have to give up so much for this person?

I'm thinking of all of the escorts that I know who are just remarkable individuals who feel that if they fell deeply in love with a man, that they would automatically feel like they had to give up "this" to keep his affection. OR, the partner gives the escort an ultimatum.

I don't see a female telling a man that he must give up the work that he enjoys and making a living that is doable in order to make her happy. If she did do that, why? What would be the point?

If there is a love in existence, then there is also an intangible quality there between the two people. Obviously. Part of that "something" that cannot be explained and sacrifices have to be made in some areas.

But if it's a sacrifice that one has to make which means completely changing your lifestyle to bow down to his needs and wants? Hell no.

Did that once. Would never do it again. I could live in a trailer park for love if that was the option. I'm not that proud and well, as long as we were warm and able to eat and have comfort, that would be fine.

But I wouldn't make these sweeping changes to appease someone's desire for "us". That is just too much of a sacrifice for "love" and there shouldn't be that issue to begin with. Changing location? Well, sure. That's fine.

Elisabeth

P.S. I've known a handful of women who have quit "this" in the name of love and it's never panned out. I sincerely believe once you hang up your escorting shingle that having a healthy relationship is about 99% impossibly anyway. So I'm not in favor of dramatically changing a lifestyle choice for a relationship. Not sure if that was the underlying reason for the query but that's sortof what I read into it. Hugs.

I don't see a female telling a man that he must give up the work that he enjoys and making a living that is doable in order to make her happy. If she did do that, why? What would be the point?
Originally Posted by ElisabethWhispers

Men do not give up jobs they like...nor do women. Makes you wonder about all this nonsense about some of these ladies saying how much they like the job. I suspect they likethe freedom the job affords.

Question if you fell in love with a hitman, would you ask him to quit it?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yld9sqRLCRs"]YouTube- The Matador trailer[/ame]

I sincerely believe once you hang up your escorting shingle that having a healthy relationship is about 99% impossibly anyway. . Originally Posted by ElisabethWhispers

Healthy relationships are a rare breed.

Certain jobs do not lend themselves to healthy relationships.( Check out the divorce rate of deployed soliders) This is probably one of them. I see no reason though why once out of the biz it would be a hindrance to a healthy relationship..

You gonna supplement your retirement by washing my balls?





Fuc No!

Love affects the brain just like a drug. Would you quit your job for some drug? Now if I hated my job, I would quit the fucer when I found something better. I suspect that might be the case in this industry after a point.

Love don't pay the bills.





Originally Posted by WTF

You can be cynical at times; but you know, you have a point.

You can be cynical at times; but you know, you have a point. Originally Posted by NicholetteM

cynical.... a product of worldly experience.













using the word 'worldly' loosely

This topic tugs at both sides of my personalities...yes I have more then 1 "cukooo cukoo" .

It plays with my hopeless romantic side which believes that love conquers all. That TRUE sustains all things. It will survive all dilemnas, financial burdens, daily tribulations and stresses. It is probably best stated even if your not relgious in 1 Corinthians 13:4-13

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

So TRUE PURE always has hope, always survives.

The realist side of me (although depresses me sometimes), sees that love can get us into trouble. We unfortunately don't let love survive. Because daily stresses, financial obligations, etc disrupts the love we have for our loved ones and especially the significant other.

So the question is that if your in love and you let outside factors effect your love, is it true pure love? I guess if you use more bible references. It would be that as mortals we are uncapable of true pure love. It doesn't say that but hear me out. We are imperfect beings always going to make mistakes, sins, lies, deceit, etc. So we can strive for pure love, however we are imperfect beings and therefore incapable of pure love. Thus our love, as much as we may try will not conquer all, because we ourselves defeat it with our own imperfections. I told you my realist side will depress my hopeless romantic side.

With both sides being weighed, I would still go for love. Sometimes the journey is more important then the end. Of course easier to say for me since I am single and without kids and have less to sacrifice. Just because we are incapable of true love doesn't me you give up on it. "Better to have love and lost, then never have lost at all." Shakespeare is wise indead.

Sometimes the journey is more important then the end.

Originally Posted by xperiment

Depends on who you are and where you are in your life. Maslow's hierarchy of needs place love somewhere in the middle of one's growth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow'...archy_of_needs

cynical.... a product of worldly experience.













using the word 'worldly' loosely Originally Posted by WTF

I can't fault you for that. Life circumstances can make one either bitter or better.

I can't fault you for that. Life circumstances can make you (not you in particularly) who you are (bitter or better). Originally Posted by NicholetteM

There is a fine line between love and hate and..... between bitter and better.

Depends on who you are and where you are in your life. Maslow's hierarchy of needs place love somewhere in the middle of one's growth

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow'...archy_of_needs Originally Posted by WTF

My mind is failing me on this. Can't remember the reasoning on this or the source so forgive me if I am inaccurate. There was another theory as well on that triangle, or needs to survive. Don't think it was based on phillosophy so point of view is different. Basically it had the similar triangle idea. I think it was more based on human survival however. At once it was that food, water, shelter was more important. But as civilization evolved, they were second nature and wasn't as important for survival. It got moved up the triangle. I think feeling needed, desired, friendship loved, became the base. Once again I'm going from long term memory but without these feelings our desire to live goes down and we perish be it mentally, physically, etc.

Now that being said, I am not an expert on Maslow's hierarchy, just from what I see here on Wikipedia. Its a hiearchy of needs yes but a "Theory of Human Motivation". So is the ultimate goal here to get self actualization or finding happiness. Are we saying that self-actualization is happiness and is hand and hand? If it does I have some doubts about that.

You gonna supplement your retirement by washing my balls?





Fuc No!

Love affects the brain just like a drug. Would you quit your job for some drug? Now if I hated my job, I would quit the fucer when I found something better. I suspect that might be the case in this industry after a point.

Love don't pay the bills.





Originally Posted by WTF

Damn you are on a roll today huh? I figure I can make enough $$$ off of you playing golf to supplement my retirement. Heck afterall I do realize that most of your golf balls will either be in the water hazard or in some jungle that we will not even look for them.


Now as far as leaving a job that you dearly love then yes it can happen if you have other interests. Heck I love my job and have worked my azz off and have been fortunate in many aspects but I have many other interests that I want to pursue and I am still young enough to do this. But alas if love came knocking at my door then yes I would certainly be open to the idea of my life changing in some aspect. She would have to settle on the fact that WTF would be paying for her Jimmy Choo shoes from his financial loss on the golf course.

I tried the trailer park thing in the name of love. That didn't last too long. I would certainly choose love over money if it meant less luxury, but live in a camper / trailer? Never again. Trust me, you'll never have a good hair day again. Originally Posted by Lovely Victoria

I guess I didn't answer directly enough. For a man, I probably wouldn't live in poverty, for my children (ones I love) I would live in a cave if that's what it took.

I'm guessing Becky would live in less than perfect surroundings if it was the only way she could keep her dog. (Sorry, can't think of his name right now.)

So for my loved ones, I would want them to have "it all" when it comes to the comforts of life; but for me, I would give up everything for them.

I think it was more based on human survival however. At once it was that food, water, shelter was more important. But as civilization evolved, they were second nature and wasn't as important for survival. Originally Posted by xperiment

Food water and shelter are always number one. We might take it for granted but that does not change the pecking order.

I am not an expert on Maslow's hierarchy, just from what I see here on Wikipedia. Its a hiearchy of needs yes but a "Theory of Human Motivation". So is the ultimate goal here to get self actualization or finding happiness. Are we saying that self-actualization is happiness and is hand and hand? If it does I have some doubts about that. Originally Posted by xperiment

I'm sure as hell not an expert. . .


It just tries and state the order. It is like saying you can not get to the top floor without there being a bottom floor. If the bottom floor is pulled out from under the building while you are on the top floor then finding that bottom floor becomes priority number one. The top floor becomes secondary. It will stay secondary until until the first floor needs are met.

You can be cynical at times; but you know, you have a point. Originally Posted by NicholetteM

The cynic says "Don't bother, it's gonna end bad, anyway", while the realist says "Let's face it, the cynic is right."


http://www.michaelteachings.com/cynic_attitude.html


-Respect is a big issue with Cynics. They do not give it automatically — it has to be earned, and for a high price at that. One of the best traits of Cynics is that, because they anticipate things will go wrong, they try to see the alternative that has the least chance of failure.-

Nicole,

Great question. My answer is yes. It is something I am contemplating. Money can buy a lot but happiness is more fulfilling. I've been broke before. I can say I was happier then than I am with my current financial success. I lived a simpler life and found joy in small things in life. Money was my gateway to happiness. However, you can only buy so many toys and hobby so much. Eventually it no longerfills the void. I'd give it all up to be truly happy in life again. The house, cars, money, and career are things I can walk away from. I have a good education and even in these tough economic times still get companies asking if I'm interested in joining them. To me, the freedom and joy of life outweighs the material goods I currently posses.

Nicole, you should just get a deadbeat loser boyfriend and still work. I know just the guy to fill that position.