carhill Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 Gold-diggers are more interested in easily liquidated or transportable/transmutable assets like cash/securities/contraband, etc. IME, cash is king, especially a stream of it guaranteed by a steady and secure job or retirement. I've found it's pretty easy to fly under society's radar by investing in illiquid assets and living conservatively. Many of my business colleagues, far more successful than I, do the same. Once in awhile an extraordinary example comes along and susses out a path to personal success, but mostly they move on to more obvious targets. Also, power, like popularity or politics, is a definable currency and often attractive. The ability to glean support from others has a value all its own. I've seen a number examples of couples like this. Very compatible. Formidable too. Interesting world.
donnamaybe Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 What? So you don't require a man who HAS money... you require a man who WILL HAVE money. Just admit you are digging for gold the same as the others. If the guy was motivated to community service and didn't get paid... suddenly his "motivation" would not be enough.Um, I don't recall her saying her man had to lavish her with expensive toys, jewels, cars, etc. Maybe all she wants is someone with a job better than delivering pizzas or flipping burgers.
shayan Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 no offcourse it doesn't, but if you buy into all the societal bull**** then it can. You define yourself, you, you, you, nothing external to you even though it may feel that way.
missdependant Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 What? So you don't require a man who HAS money... you require a man who WILL HAVE money. Just admit you are digging for gold the same as the others. If the guy was motivated to community service and didn't get paid... suddenly his "motivation" would not be enough. Considering I've already graduated from a university, YES, I require a man who will have money and a decent education. I don't feel that it is my job to pay someone else's way through life unless it's my child. I don't care if that sounds shallow, I want to be able to retire with a large 401k, I want to be with my husband and buy some land and build a house from the ground up. I want my husband to be as adamant about my child's education and future as I am. But that doesn't mean I want to be the only one paying for it, nor should he be the only one paying. We should BOTH be able to contribute to our household and help create a stable home. I don't want some poor loser who lives in a box and does crack all the time or can't find it in himself to make something of his life. Way to assume that I'm "digging for gold."
sally4sara Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 My husband was raised in monetary excess. I firmly believe if he had not often been at odds with his father to the point of preferring to be homeless for a period rather than under his thumb, he would be someone I would not find appealing. I see evidence of it in some of his relatives. After the last time we accepted an invite to one of his uncle's country club parties, I swore I'd never go again. The conversation around the table nauseated me. Why are so many wealthy people amused by those who have little?
carhill Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 We make plans and then life happens. It's a really good lesson in living to hold the hand of a dying person and reflect upon how money has defined one's life. Me, I'm going to die broke with a smile on my face. I'll define my life by how many hands I've held upon that journey. Hands which feel the honest labor and care in my own. Quiet, loving hands. Extremes are for those who believe in them. I'm more of a 'middle' person. It fits.
donnamaybe Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 We make plans and then life happens. It's a really good lesson in living to hold the hand of a dying person and reflect upon how money has defined one's life. Me, I'm going to die broke with a smile on my face. I'll define my life by how many hands I've held upon that journey. Hands which feel the honest labor and care in my own. Quiet, loving hands. I SO *heart* you Carhill!!!
carhill Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 A person is in my thoughts today. A man who has the definition of success in all the ways which society defines it. Today, right now, he holds the hand of a woman, his sister, as she prepares for brain surgery to treat her cancer. No matter his money, it will never define his loved one's life today, right now. So, with the hands which have earned his success, he holds hers. He's my best friend. Like I said, we make plans and then life happens. OP, TBH, I think value is relevant to person, rather than gender, and its definition relevant to the perception of the person making the valuation. Perhaps, in the past, money did define 'men' primarily, but, increasingly, it is, in all its connotations, an 'equal opportunity' valuation. I recently heard in real life, comments similar to those made by some posters in this thread, and I nodded my head in agreement. They want what they want, in this case a man as or more 'successful' than they. That is their path. I wish them well on it.
Hopeful30 Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 It depends. Money defines a man in certain aspects. He doesn't need to have lots of money, but if he always pays when he takes a girl out, that means he is a gentleman. Even more so if he can't afford it but makes the effort. Some men can have tons of money but it's all inheritance. In this case it doesn't define the man at all. If the man wanted to be successful to one day support a large family, and worked his way to the top of the corporate ladder (which is reflected in his wealth) then yes, it will define him to an extent. It will show his motivation, his intelligence, and his willingness. That is not to say that a man without money is stupid or incompetent, but again it depends on the circumstances
yah Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 Yes, money and/or earning potential is very important. Not having it is a deal breaker but having it doesn't guarantee my love either. It goes both ways. I would think my partner has the same expectations too.
jenifer1972 Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Personally, I would never be dependant on another person for money. I want someone who can support himself, but am very wary of very rich men. They are often workaholics who then if you add power into the mix, feel entitled to hoochie on the side.. Too many examples in the media to list. But there are also many gold digging bimbos more than willing to accomodate them - they deserve each other.
musemaj11 Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 I have no interest in dating an investment banker who gets six-figure bonuses. Yeah, right. :rolleyes:
donnamaybe Posted January 6, 2011 Posted January 6, 2011 Yeah, right. :rolleyes:You know, why does ANYONE think they know what is going on inside someone else's head? Perhaps you have been able to only attract gold diggers, but don't blame that on the LS women.
Recommended Posts