there's definitely something sus going on here. i think maybe everyone's not giving this crafty bitch enough credit. take this line for example: "with neither party being obligated to complete the transaction".
this might just be the best advertising campaign going. i'm sure a few people have been exposed to this ad just on it's quirk factor alone. shit, we all have, and i'm also sure if someone offered to buy the house for say $750,000, sans blonde she'd sell in a heartbeat. likewise if some rich, old industry magnate wanted the blonde without the hassle of buying a property she'd be the next anna nicole.
basically she's advertising two commodities without paying for either. now that's business!
Niobe said:
Fuck though I think she is hot. She looks a lot like Kate Hudson. I'd do her. But I wouldn't pay. I'd need a test drive first. And I'm a chick. I don't know if that takes me out of the running. Darn.
A good photographer can do amazing things man, I wouldn't expect her to look that "good" normally.
wait, so some guy is going to pay 600,000 dollars for the house, the furnishings in the house and the woman? and if they marry, it doesn't work out and they divorce, who gets the stuff??? she's asking the GUY tp pay for EVERYTHING, so he'd naturally get everything upon a split up, right? she's totally setting herself up to be screwed. and there's no way she can get him to sign a pre-nup, if he pays for everything, he owns everything, he'd never sign one. i dont get this.
I'll be interested to hear how this all pans out...
I find it interesting that so many people felt the need to refer to this woman as a "bitch," a "wench," a "psycho" or any number of other things, simply because she wants to find a companion and is getting creative about it.
Newsflash, people: This woman is the CEO of a fucking company. She's a busy professional who obviously makes a lot of money (she hired a PR firm to help her get a date, for Christ's sake, she can't exactly be low on cash), and probably does not have the time nor the patience to find dates through the typical channels. The house itself is quite likely a summer or vacation home - her company is based out of New Mexico and she still has a New Mexico address - which means that whoever takes her up on her offer will still only own half of their combined assets pre-marriage (she owns one house, he owns the other).
The subtext here seems to be that she is a successful woman who wants a relationship with a man who is as business-minded and financially capable as she is. I find it odd that so many people find that offensive.
amaz0nmatchu said:
I find it interesting that so many people felt the need to refer to this woman as a "bitch," a "wench," a "psycho" or any number of other things, simply because she wants to find a companion and is getting creative about it.
Newsflash, people: This woman is the CEO of a fucking company. She's a busy professional who obviously makes a lot of money (she hired a PR firm to help her get a date, for Christ's sake, she can't exactly be low on cash), and probably does not have the time nor the patience to find dates through the typical channels. The house itself is quite likely a summer or vacation home - her company is based out of New Mexico and she still has a New Mexico address - which means that whoever takes her up on her offer will still only own half of their combined assets pre-marriage (she owns one house, he owns the other).
The subtext here seems to be that she is a successful woman who wants a relationship with a man who is as business-minded and financially capable as she is. I find it odd that so many people find that offensive.
Cecelia said:
wait, so some guy is going to pay 600,000 dollars for the house, the furnishings in the house and the woman? and if they marry, it doesn't work out and they divorce, who gets the stuff??? she's asking the GUY tp pay for EVERYTHING, so he'd naturally get everything upon a split up, right? she's totally setting herself up to be screwed. and there's no way she can get him to sign a pre-nup, if he pays for everything, he owns everything, he'd never sign one. i dont get this.
I'll be interested to hear how this all pans out...
amaz0nmatchu said:
I find it interesting that so many people felt the need to refer to this woman as a "bitch," a "wench," a "psycho" or any number of other things, simply because she wants to find a companion and is getting creative about it.
Newsflash, people: This woman is the CEO of a fucking company. She's a busy professional who obviously makes a lot of money (she hired a PR firm to help her get a date, for Christ's sake, she can't exactly be low on cash), and probably does not have the time nor the patience to find dates through the typical channels. The house itself is quite likely a summer or vacation home - her company is based out of New Mexico and she still has a New Mexico address - which means that whoever takes her up on her offer will still only own half of their combined assets pre-marriage (she owns one house, he owns the other).
The subtext here seems to be that she is a successful woman who wants a relationship with a man who is as business-minded and financially capable as she is. I find it odd that so many people find that offensive.
Being successful grants immunity to craziness? She can be successful and still be a crazy bizzo. Maybe she's a total ballbreaker and drives all of the guys away. Ballbreakers can be SPECTACULAR businesswomen.
Just because she is a CEO and probably leads a very busy lifestyle doesn't mean she never gets out of the house. I don't think anyone finds the idea "offensive", but you have to grant that it certainly is bizarre.
thestral said:
How the hell does an attractive and successful woman like her not have guys lining up to date her? She must be crazy and drive them away or something.
Or maybe she's trying to find a quirky soul who's affluent enough that she knows he isn't marrying her just to get a free ride. This seems like a pretty effective, if unorthodox, way of finding one.
thestral said:
How the hell does an attractive and successful woman like her not have guys lining up to date her? She must be crazy and drive them away or something.
Or maybe she's trying to find a quirky soul who's affluent enough that she knows he isn't marrying her just to get a free ride. This seems like a pretty effective, if unorthodox, way of finding one.
what does the article say generally?
The gist of the article (since it's probably moved into the Times archives by now) is that a lot of men are intimidated by high-powered career women and would prefer to be involved with women who earn less than they do and work in less prestigious occupations. The article is an excerpt from a full-length book, and the sections in the article are mostly anecdotes plus a brief survey of recent movies showcasing the phenomenon as "romantic." As a result, highly accomplished women can find it hard to get stimulating relationships and some women who have the education and potential to get top-flight jobs are deliberately choosing to adopt what Dowd refers to as the Stepford life.
I have a few quibbles with Dowd's supporting evidence, but since it's an excerpt of a longer work, maybe they just cut to the most provocative parts and left out all the boring support stuff. Hell if I know. Anyway, I felt it was appropriate to a thread where people were criticizing a woman who, for all I can tell, might be going through just the phenomenon Dowd describes.
I meet so many women my age ( I am 45 and a single father, raising my 6 year old son) who so do not have it together when it comes to personal fiscal responsibility that this woman is truly a breath of fresh air. Why the assumption that she is psycho? Could she just be an extremely competant/confident, successful woman who has determined she wants it all(success, security, love, companionship, great sex life) and is willing to go the extra mile to get it? Of all sites, I would expect Suicide Girls to rise en masse and applaud. Perhaps there is a bit of schadenfraude (spelling?) going on in some of the posts.
I believe the part about having to sell the house to the man is a bit of an attention grabber only. She does not appear to be in dire straits for the money. But, if the house is worth $600,000, and she owns it free and clear, I see nothing wrong with her desire for a partner who is at least has the ability to participate on an equal level with her financially-keeps away the golddiggers. If nothing else, a pretty imaginative personal ad. Kudos
RockyBoulders
Australia
July 2005
NOV 07, 2005 02:09 AM