If not, then what qualities does he have that caused you to overlook this deficiency?

[hamster-bamster]

how are those two issues related?

When you talk about inability to provide shelter, you talk about not being financially stable, right? I understand that...

When you talk about protection from other males, I am completely lost. Maybe you can clarify.

[Confusedinomicon]

I stay with my boyfriend because we both emotionally fulfill one another.

I think emotional fulfillment is more important, myself.

[growlycat]

I don't have males around who are a threat. No need for protection I guess?

A strong emotional connection is more important to me than a guy who can kick sand in another guy's face.

I'm referring to the original, anachronistic basis for attraction. It was explained to me that females were attracted to males who could provide shelter and protection from other males.

Originally Posted by Yoda

I don't know if that answers your question or not but that is my experience with men. Now I'd rather have a loyal dog than another man.

I read your entire post.

It seems to me that you might have done well to get the 2nd man off meth. That's not to suggest that you didn't try. In fact just the other day I was talking to a man who said his only mistress these days was Lady Heroin. And he was very faithful to her. So I can certainly think of a recent example of drugs getting in the way of human relationships.

As to why I ask.

Whenever I see a couple together I am reminded of the hard-headedness that is seemingly required of men in order to be in a relationship with a woman. A man with a woman is a man who has his **** together. This is what I relate to 'able to provide shelter'. A man who has his own place, a car, etc. Not that women can't provide that for themselves these days, but that doesn't stop them from seeking it in their partners.

Also, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but if I see a male-female couple, I assume that the man is pretty tough and that if I so much as double glance at his partner he is capable of becoming angry and physically assaulting me. This is what the 'protection from males' factor reminded me of. I assume he is a lot more possessive and protective than his female partner.

Problem is I have neither of these attributes. The first one I can probably work on. I do want to be somewhat successful, so it's not like I'll only be doing this is order to secure a partner in the future. The second I am not so sure about. I only get violent when I'm really pissed off. Most of the time I am very laid back.

To be honest I'm kind of a wimp. And sometimes I come to tears pretty easily.

One time when I was 18, a 14 year old kid pulled on my tie and made it so tight I could barely untie it. I was almost in tears. It's either tears and weakness or murderous rage and violence.

[hamster-bamster]

Originally Posted by Illegal Toilet

I'm referring to the original, anachronistic basis for attraction. It was explained to me that females were attracted to males who could provide shelter and protection from other males.

I can see the need for shelter, but fail to see the need for protection from other males. The show of superior abilities to fight other males is a way of competing for the female, to the best of my understanding.

[growlycat]

I'm more impressed with a guy who can cook, do his own laundry and has a job or is going to school. The ability to bully other males is yawn inspiring.

[Trippin2.0]

Originally Posted by growlycat

I'm more impressed with a guy who can cook, do his own laundry and has a job or is going to school.

This ^ right here is why I think my bf is impressive.