All I see is that she is a super hot model looking to do more modeling work. Why are there all of these blogging geeks out there that are quick to assert that women are whores who will fuck for a thousand dollars because they spend a lot of time trimming their bodies and doing hair and makeup.

Keep blogging about the girls who “do it for you” that you will never meet, because having that kind of “money can buy hot women, money can buy women who stay fit and express themselves in beautiful ways” attitude will certainly keep you from meeting any real women.

Steve goes on to explain how today’s women have many more opportunities to find mates, with the internet, myspace, mobile communications, adult dating sites and such that are available today, we have a lot of options and we no longer need to sit around and wait for a boy to call in our small home town like women of so many past generations. With this post feminist mindset and all this communication technlogy we have become material girls who are more interested in playing the field looking for men with money, and more men with money. Some girls I know do take this too far, but who am I to judge? I’m sure there are those who silently judge me.

Is this true? Are we more like men now? Playing the feild, always looking for better and better partners? I suppose this could have something to do with the first time in history that we have more unmarried women in this country than married. I also think we have turned the tables on men finally with the whole “why buy the cow when you get the milk for free” thing. You know that saying means something like “why marry the girl when she’s giving you the pussy already?”

Yep, I know I have turned the tables. Why settle down and be expected to cook and clean for just one guy when I can get nice presents and dinners and dancing from several? Ha ha, bet they never saw this coming. Madonna was on to something, material girls get expensive things, married girls, well I know one that got a new TV, so her hubby can watch football on a big screen.

I have friends who say they have lived in area where people just had more and more babies in order to qualify for additional monies both from baby daddies and government programs, so I think of that.

The fact that the article mentions a law tha tprohibits the selling of babies brings more questions to mind. I would hope this article may spur some additional discussions about economics. It is truly sad to think that people could be swayed into bringing new babies into the world for surch a small amount of money, and the fact that such a small amount of money may actually get people to consider making babies for adoption is even more sad. When will we all stand up and say enough is enough. Why we spend billions on some things and yet teachers, babysitters and moms have such little opportunity for a lifestyle that gives them the liberty to make choices that are not overruled by finance.

The article from Reuters:

NEW BRAUNFELS, Texas (Reuters) – A Texas legislator has proposed that pregnant women considering abortion be offered $500 not to end their pregnancies.

Republican State Sen. Dan Patrick, who also is a conservative radio talk show host, said on Friday the money might convince the women to go ahead and have babies, then give them up for adoption.

He said during a legislative conference in New Braunfels, 45 miles south of Austin, there were 75,000 abortions in Texas last year.

“If this incentive would give pause and change the mind of 5 percent of those woman, that’s 3,000 lives. That’s almost as many people as we’ve lost in Iraq,” Patrick said.

Patrick has filed legislation to make the payment state law, but the legislature has not yet voted on it.

His proposal calls for giving any woman going to an abortion clinic the $500 option, to be paid no more than 30 days after the baby is born and given up for adoption.

Critics say the proposal would violate Texas and federal laws against buying babies, which Patrick rejected as “the typical ridiculous criticism.”

Heather Paffe, political director of Planned Parenthood of Texas, said Patrick’s proposal “is very cynical and insulting to women and their families.”

“It’s insulting to think women would make that kind of decision so easily,” she said.”

 

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

51% of women live without spouse
Shift reflects trend toward later marriage, staying divorced longer or never wedding

For what experts say is probably the first time, more American women are living without a husband than with one, according to a New York Times analysis of census results.

In 2005, 51 percent of women said they were living without a spouse, up from 35 percent in 1950 and 49 percent in 2000.

Coupled with the fact that in 2005, married couples became a minority of all American households for the first time, the trend could ultimately shape a range of social and workplace policies, including the ways government and employers distribute benefits.

Several factors are driving the statistical shift. At one end of the age spectrum, women are marrying later or living with unmarried partners more often and for longer periods of time. At the other end, women are living longer as widows and, after a divorce, are more likely than men to delay remarriage, sometimes delighting in their newfound freedom.

Well then, I think it’s a good thing. What do we really need them for anyways? LOL! The story goes on to talk about the amount of people living with boyfriends and stuff, but there is much more to it than that. Marriage and living together seems to ge tougher and tougher as society creates more ways to communicate faster I think people see so many options today that people never had in the fifties. Could it be that the new temporary expiring marriage that is getting press in the middle east may be a sign of the future times? Could it be that it’s time for new laws and religous instutions to find more ways of making a marriage a happier place rather than all of these “work for your marriage: seminars we hear about?

It’s an interesting time to live in.. I wonder why the article did not delve more into what it’s like for all those unmarried men to take care of themselves these days. Who would have thought men couldmake it on their own as much as they today? LOL!

]]> http://www.stephaniesexton.com/chrono/2007/01/more-american-women-live-without-a-husband-than-with/feed/ 1