Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users

Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
 Fundamental lifestyle change

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Oct 15, 2001
I've been thinking about how I run my life lately, and I have come to realize that something is lacking. Things have been pretty much the same for the better part of a decade now. I'm ok on the emotional/spiritual end, and my narcissism has kept me quite content in that regard over the years. What I feel I am missing is more tangible. I think I need more disposable income.

More diaries by zikzak
My espresso machine is broken
Art House/Indy Films: Going too far
Gin and CHiPs
Talkin 'Bout My Generation
Old Friends
Shapes, colors and textures
What am I supposed to do with all of this?
Oh blech.
The evening ended...
A thought from today's activities
Confessions of an editorial tyrant
I'm bored
Trouble with my thumbnail
Weight Loss
Sad realization
A request (and warning) to our readers
Time for festive Holiday tunes!
Further adventures in late night television
Just curious
Exciting new diary
Saying Goodbye
Breaking News
Spikey-Haired Asian Chicks
Who are we?
There's always the old tried and true path to having more money - thrift, hard work, blah blah blah. Truth is, I'm too lazy to go that route. I rather enjoy not having any stable income and being financially irresponsible. However, this is where my true epiphany came in, and I figured out how to raise my standard of living with just three simple words:

Dual Income Household

Yup, I've decided to take the plunge and acquire myself a mate. The way I see it, the cash I save on rent alone will more than make up for having to share the bathroom. I can cut the utility bills in 1/2 as well, not to mention that there will be someone else around to clean up once in awhile.

More money, more free time... what's not to like about this? I'm amazed it took me this long to figure out why people hook up. It's just simple economics.

So I am now taking applications from women who feel they are qualified to fill this role for me. Below are the required qualifications for the position.

  • Age: Irrelevant
  • Appearence: Irrelevant
  • Religion: Irrelevant
  • Astrological Sign: Irrelevant
  • Income: (Very Important!) No less than US$50,000 per year
  • If you meet the above qualifications, please mail me at You can include a photograph or personal letter if you like, but what I'd most like to see is a scan of your most recent paycheck stubs.

    I will be accepting applications for the next 7 days. The person with the highest annual income (or the largest personal fortune) will be awarded the position, to start immediately.


    Caution! (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by moriveth on Mon Oct 15th, 2001 at 10:25:42 PM PST
    I'd suggest contractually stipulating that your business relationship not extend past kissing goodbye each morning (and even going that far carries risks). If you wish to engage with carnal relations with your mate, make sure she is either old (55+, to be safe) or totally okay with abortion (put it in the contract, too). Otherwise, all your hard economic logic will be torpedoed.

    Take it from me, child support is a killer. That, and an ex-wife with "needs" like Anna Nicole Smith.

    take my advice (5.00 / 5) (#2)
    by osm on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 12:47:12 AM PST
    women are vile, evil swine. discard this plan at once and take up a respectable side trade like drug dealing.

    you have to understand the thought processes of a woman. mostly they just want your money, so your plan wouldn't work anyway. if you need to get laid, go find a prostitute. at least they're honest about being whores.

    you cannot get a break (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 03:45:43 AM PST
    women are vile, evil swine. discard this plan at once and take up a respectable side trade like drug dealing.

    Drug dealers attract women like kurobots attract 1 ratings on adequacy.

    yeah (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by osm on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 04:12:09 AM PST
    it's the money thing. fortunately, women are the lowest member of the food chain and soon will be replaced by the rat.

    Oh the genetic complications... (none / 0) (#9)
    by hauntedattics on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 09:01:43 AM PST
    of man-rat mating. I thought you were over this debilitating and worrisome disease, my friend.

    trollop (none / 0) (#11)
    by osm on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 10:31:05 AM PST

    Mutant (none / 0) (#17)
    by hauntedattics on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 01:05:00 PM PST

    Be careful (none / 0) (#5)
    by westgeof on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 06:05:54 AM PST
    I wouldn't exactly go so far as to call them evil. Some women actually mean well, but they still mange to find ways to seperate you from your income in a heartbeat. It doesn't even matter is she makes more money than you do. You need to remember the golden rule of marriage: What belonged to the man now belogs to both. What belonged to the woman is none of your business.

    And they have the nerve to complain about sexism....

    As a child I wanted to know everything. Now I miss my ignorance.

    you poor slob (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by osm on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 06:16:45 AM PST
    you are under a spell. i pray for your soul.

    well... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by poltroon on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 12:26:06 PM PST
    the obvious solution to that problem is to not have an income. Then you can't very well be separated from it can you? In fact, you should have no posessions at all. You just need to bleed charisma.

    Then they're absolutely perfect (none / 0) (#15)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 12:44:11 PM PST
    candidates for a gender role-reversal of the "Four-F" club, wouldn't you agree? But still not a reason for holy matrimony in my book, all things considered.

    A marriage of convenience, 'eh? (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 07:44:46 AM PST
    You'd better have something going for you, zikzak, that keeps her interested beyond the cost-savings factor. Aside from having someone else around to pay half the bills, what exactly makes you optimal for this kind of arrangement? What's the laignaippe (the "little extra") that's supposed to inspire us womenfolk to sell out for your benefit?

    Also, do you live in a "community property" state in the US (or another place that recognizes the marital assets as being jointly held, regardless of who's sweating blood actually resulted in the gain)? If so, then I have two words of advice for the women who respond to your solicitation: prenuptual agreement. You may not think you need it, ladies, but it's better to be safe than to be sorry after the fact.

    Huh? (4.00 / 1) (#8)
    by zikzak on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 08:03:23 AM PST
    I'm not sure I understand what you mean. The woman who is accepted for the job gets to live with me. I thought that was obvious.

    The prenuptual is a good idea, though. Unfortunately, there are people out there who would marry me just so they could get 1/2 of my collection of rare Velvet Elvis paintings in a divorce.

    Thick as a brick, are you? (none / 0) (#10)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 10:28:27 AM PST
    As in utterly dense (and not well-endowed), if you had any doubt...

    You need to spell it out, zikzak, really -- why would any reasonable female-type wish to share your quarters? Expiring minds want to know. See, we can have the option of finding actual roommates if we simply desire to split the rent and utilities.

    And the tax advantages of marriage? They're really negligible if you have no intention of producing loinfruit, when compared to all of the other headaches and humiliations the state of matrimony often introduces into the equation. For instance, a married woman in the US ceases to have her own identity, particularly when it comes to the IRS and potential creditors. For the past three years, I've filed a joint return with my spousal unit with my name and SSN listed first on the form -- and yet, despite this obvious attempt at reminding the powers that be of who really matters in this union, my tax records for the past three years are associated with his name and Social Security number (I've called the IRS to check this -- I cannot give them my SSN to review my own filing information for the past three years!). Two years ago I decided to lease a car; as a married woman, it would have been damn near impossible to do this in my own name -- it is now considered an obligation of our "marital community" despite my best attempts (and he benefits with an improved credit rating thanks to my obsessiveness about paying bills on time). These are the kinds of situations that tempt me to advocate for the abolishment of marriage in general (let alone my own peculiar stupidity/weakness when it comes to choosing beautiful flakes/C++ programmers as mates).

    RE: the prenup -- you can keep your velvet Elvises; my advice to the womenfolk is to cover their own future assets when considering marrying. I have a female cousin in rural Pennsylvania who was recently successfully sued for alimony by her soon-to-be-insignificant-other wimp of a husband (I'd never have known that rednecks could survive that far North if my cousins didn't keep marrying them). All because she, oh, had a little bit of ambition and decided to work her ass off for a decent career... the gold-digging goes both ways these days, truth be known.

    And why, praytell, are you advertising here? It's not like there are all that many women in the audience here at Adequacy... and I'm already wedlocked, alas. bonne chance, really. ;)

    Oh no! This is the right place. (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by elenchos on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 11:31:56 AM PST
    For example, my girlfriend poltroon would be just the sort of woman zikzak is seeking, if she were not already taken and I were not such a ferociously dangerous man to tangle with.

    Had he gotten to her before I did, he would have found an extremely successful and hard-working mate whose income far exceeds his stated requirements, and will no doubt increase far beyond that in the coming years. Why does she make so much? Because she is a computer professional (not a "hacker"!), a trained artist, and prominent, respected member of the intellectual elite.

    Why is Adequacy the ideal place to find good providers like poltroon? Simple: like most women in the computer field who are in need of a man to support financially, she is fed up with g**ks! Even though women are a minority in technology fields, the ones who are there are absolutely starved for the company of real manly men. Men who know how to take charge and make manly demands. Men who reek of testosterone and are strong enough to let their wives pay the bills, handle confusing legal matters, and fix the roof.

    It is simply amazing to me how many Real Men spend their lives searching for the a proper wife to support them, when there more potential mates than you can count just waiting for the right kind of tough, strong, masculine guy who needs a breadwinner to be complete.

    And Adequacy is a veritable "honey pot" for this kind of woman.

    I can assure you that zikzak will get dozens of good offers in reply to his advertisement here. He'll be engaged within the month and be living the sweet life of a married man before the year is out. Sooner if he wants.

    The only thing that could prevent this is if zikzak were some kind of weak, sniveling girly-boy who doesn't know how to properly demand money and other help from his girl the way a true specimen of manhood does. Flaccid, pathetic boys like are the ones who must humiliate themselves before The Man and beg and wheedle for a "job", and then toil for themselves day in and day out like the sissies they are.

    But it is absurd to think that an Adequacy stalwart like him could ever have such a lack of spine. He'll do fine.

    I do, I do, I do
    --Bikini Kill

    I'm happy for you, elenchos, really... (none / 0) (#13)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 12:00:02 PM PST
    but I'm still waiting to hear why zikzak views himself as qualified for such an alliance. What can I say? I'm in need of some cheap entertainment at the moment. Amuse me.

    Well, he is an adequacy editor (none / 0) (#16)
    by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 12:57:20 PM PST
    which means he is one of a handful of people in the world gifted and qualified to arbitrate the controversies of life itself. That's a very attractive basket of genes if you are a woman looking to do the right thing by her biological destiny.

    Well, since I'm already sleeping with (none / 0) (#34)
    by chloedancer on Sat Jan 12th, 2002 at 08:15:39 PM PST
    one of the esteemed Adequacy editors, that's an ineffective argument, really. It should also be noted that I have no urge to switch horses at this point 'cause I really should leave some for others to enjoy, no? Finally, I'm a self-identified non-breeder so the "superior genetics" argument holds no power with regard to my partner selection process, alas. C'est la vie.

    Zikzak is not like other men (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by bc on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 01:19:15 PM PST
    Why does he need to 'view himself as qualified' at all? Is he some peacock then, expected to sell himself (ugh) and market himself out to some female bidder? If zikzak is a real manly man, as elenchos says, then he damn well won't give any explanation of his actions or his suitability - he is suitable, he is a MAN! And that is enough.

    Zikzak can wow the ladies by simple dint of his testosterone fueled power. Where other men wear marigolds and humbly submit to naggings, where they hoover the floor and provide stable dual income households, zikzak is like an ancient chieftan, women quiver before him, try to attract his attention with their beauty while he ignores them.

    Wouldn't you kneel before such a man? Wouldn't you kneel and beg to be raped before such masculine power?

    Of course, sometimes the law may try to interfere, with the silly, modern accusations of 'wife beating', 'sexual harassment' and suchlike, but these ruses of the modern, squashed sexuality of latter day man cannot keep our Lord zikzak down, he moves from state to state, and has found in Texas an area that tolerates his refreshingly simple, honest outlook.

    Women don't want some prick with an SUV and stable 40 hour/week job, they want a tyrant! They want pain! They want a Master! And zikzak is pure, simple and unblemished by civilisation. I'm sure many feminists and suchlike would love to live with him, with someone who doesn't fawn over them, stuttering and apologising in advance for every imagined slight, like craven cowards, but with zikzak who would tell them to shut up, maybe with a brisk open handed slap, as soon as they mention feminism or speak out of place.

    Zikzak doesn't tell anyone his 'qualifications'. He is not like other men. You just need to see.

    ♥, bc.

    Just call me "Delilah," then... (none / 0) (#24)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 03:08:11 PM PST
    and know that I remain unmoved.

    Dear Delilah (none / 0) (#26)
    by zikzak on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 05:54:15 PM PST
    I believe bc has been more than adequate in summing up the reasons you requested.

    I still don't understand why you felt the need to ask, though. Remember, the woman I accept gets to live with me! What other reason could anyone possibly need?

    It never would have worked (none / 0) (#25)
    by zikzak on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 05:48:43 PM PST
    While I certainly appreciate your positive support and encouragement, I'm afraid you were a little off base on one thing. I never could have had a successful relationship with poltroon.

    You see, I detected in her a strong (although well hidden) dislike for the masterful works of Thomas Kinkade, Painter of Light. I'm sure she is an absolutely wonderful woman in other respects, but I couldn't bear to share a home with someone who expressed disdain for my limited edition, signed Thomas Kinkade prints.

    Kinkade's paintings lack something... (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by poltroon on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 07:51:46 PM PST
    and after much consideration, I realized that what they are missing is deer. Buffalo, hippos, or heros could possibly suffice as well. I can't think of many more unsettling experiences than beholding a beatifully painterly, expansive landscape which is missing such a vital component. The cottage paintings are, of course, simply too abhorrently cute, so I'll only even bother to acknowledge the maddening shortfall of the landscapes. It's truly sickening to see an entire career so wasted, yet so potentially salvageable.

    Anyway, you should have no trouble landing a bread winner, since your coveted Adequacy editorship obviously places you among the highly desireable, super intellectual elite. Elenchos is still aspiring to such a position, to drag himself out of the overpopulated, mere elite. But he's lucky, I'm fairly patient. And of course, it really doesn't matter where I stand intellectually, since I have bread.

    Couldn't customers paint in some deer? (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by elenchos on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 11:26:56 AM PST
    Or maybe you could have a sort of aftermarket for Kinkade fans, selling stickers to stick onto your prints to make them look nicer. You could have deer, dogs (Irish Setters, pointers, retrievers, etc.), heroes (John Wayne, George W. Bush, etc.) to stick in the cottage-region, or exotic wild animals like raccons or dolphins, which are quite desireable as well. You want a leaping blue whale -- people love that one.

    Of course many Kinkade prints lack water, obviously. You'd need stickers for that too.

    Some sort of image-processing would be popular too. For example, we know that the Chinese market prefers warmer colors -- reds and yellows in their art, whereas the French lean towards the greens and blues, and the USins like blue all the way. Some sort of color correction process would fix it up very well.

    Can you imagine how much art collectors would love these products? It would be like adding wings or neon lights to your Honda Civic Del Sol, or putting on one of those rad mufflers that makes the sound go "b-b-b-b-b-b!"


    I do, I do, I do
    --Bikini Kill

    In re-reading this thread I've decided (none / 0) (#29)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 09:44:21 PM PST
    to tackle the challenge of construction workers the next time 'round. When the ask what I do for a living, I'll mumble something vague about "administrative support responsibilities" or "office ornament" and smile oh-so-mysteriously (camouflage now seeming essential for ensuring my future survival, if I'm not mistaken).

    In considering the alternative, I think I'm finally beginning to see the light -- the stereotypical "Neanderthal with good hands" is looking more like the optimal relationship circumstance with each passing moment, if only because "big and stupid" isn't nearly as invidious by comparison.

    Hmmm... (none / 0) (#20)
    by em on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 01:20:01 PM PST

    This is a word in which language? French?
    Associate Editor,

    Cajun patois, actually. (none / 0) (#23)
    by chloedancer on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 02:15:43 PM PST
    "La(i)gniappe" derives from New World Spanish la apa, "the gift," and ultimately from Quechua yapay, "to give more." The word came into use within the rich Creole dialect mixture of New Orleans and where it then acquired a French spelling. It is still used in the Gulf states region, especially southern Louisiana, to denote a little bonus that a friendly shopkeeper might add to a purchase. By extension, it may mean "an extra or unexpected gift or benefit."

    It's one of my favorite words, truth be known.

    Haha (none / 0) (#33)
    by em on Sat Oct 20th, 2001 at 04:24:28 PM PST
    "La(i)gniappe" derives from New World Spanish la apa, "the gift,"

    Hah, I knew it.

    "Gift" is not quite a good translation for the spanish word, though. Actually, your explanation of its meaning in southern Louisiana works for spanish perfect.

    J'en dirais plus, mais j'aprs aller mon bureau.
    Associate Editor,

    Lagniappe? (none / 0) (#21)
    by twodot72 on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 01:25:56 PM PST
    Hmm, you must be from Louisiana. Never heard anyone else use that word :-)

    Fascinating (none / 0) (#18)
    by hauntedattics on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 01:10:14 PM PST
    Zikzak, I find your proposal fascinating and I do actually fit all of your requirements. I would need to know, though, what my hard-earned money is paying for, in specific terms. You can post the detailed proposal, along with scope of work, approach, estimated budget and timeframe on adequacy.

    Keep in mind, however, that if osm ever gets over himself and goes back to recognizing the other half of the species, the RFP will be withdrawn.

    wait a minute (none / 0) (#22)
    by osm on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 01:36:15 PM PST
    you're not Natalie Portman, are you?

    just checking.

    D'oh! You found me out. (none / 0) (#31)
    by hauntedattics on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 09:47:22 AM PST
    I am actually a 17-year-old boy named Kyle, and I live in Sheboygan, Wisconsin.

    Either that or I'm Natalie Portman.

    This is tricky (none / 0) (#27)
    by zikzak on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 06:01:19 PM PST
    I would be delighted to accept your application, and I might even try to provide you with a better job description, but something makes me nervous.

    I detect a bit of tension between yourself and that most trusted of men, the namer of SID's, and (most importantly) the keeper of the Natalie Portman Poster, osm. This alarms me, and I am uncertain what to do at this stage.

    I shall defer judgement on whether or not you are suitable until I have received advice from osm.

    phhhh (none / 0) (#30)
    by osm on Tue Oct 16th, 2001 at 10:23:36 PM PST
    a) i think "hauntedattics" is really a pimply-faced teen boy with weird sexual issues that i don't even want to begin to try to understand.

    b) if "hauntedattics" is a female, it would cease to follow me around like an annoying puppy (i'm a cat person) and forget my existence the second i started treating it decently.

    c) whatever "hauntedattics" is, it is certainly no Natalie Portman.

    d) in any event "hauntedattics" doubtful lives anywhere near kansas city.

    e) all of that given, i seriously urge you to forget about women. they're worthless.


    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 The name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to