Untouchable_Fire Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I don't understand why women can simultaneously want a guy to have tons of money, but resent any extra hours or overtime he puts in to make money. I have run into this issue so many times it's mind boggling. My current GF at least understands money doesn't fall from the sky and that it takes time and effort to earn it. However, she wants me to more time with her and earn less. Also... if a guy is busting his hump to make money to pay for yet another set of $200 shoes... how is even remotely acceptable that his GF or wife run out and cheat with another guy. Shouldn't people like that be publicly flogged? Why did we stop using the stockades and other such embarrassing punishments for bad people like that?
threebyfate Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I've had this happen with a couple of men in my life who resented the amount of time put into work. It meant to me that we were incompatible. My husband was killing himself trying to do everything at work, since he's a managing partner. He's since peeled back on responsibilities by delegating more tasks and now has time to stop and smell the roses. He's a far happier man for the better balance although the amount he now works is still considered a lot for most people.
GooseChaser Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 It's about balance. Having a job and making money helps to show that a guy is responsible, self-reliant, able to support others, etc.-- good qualities-- but women also want a guy to make time for them. Money isn't everything. About the shoes, you really don't need to feel obligated to spend an excessive amount of money like that on women. Gifts are a nice gesture, and we appreciate them, but don't let yourself be taken advantage of either. It isn't your job to clothe her. If a woman wants expensive $200 shoes, she can pay for them herself.
donnamaybe Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 OP, you sure seem to come across a lot of unsavory females. What kind of people do you hang out with anyway?
threebyfate Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 It's about balance. Having a job and making money helps to show that a guy is responsible, self-reliant, able to support others, etc.-- good qualities-- but women also want a guy to make time for them. Money isn't everything. About the shoes, you really don't need to feel obligated to spend an excessive amount of money like that on women. Gifts are a nice gesture, and we appreciate them, but don't let yourself be taken advantage of either. It isn't your job to clothe her. If a woman wants expensive $200 shoes, she can pay for them herself.As a thought, why is he dating women who rely on him financially if he resents it? *scratches head in confusion*
Author Untouchable_Fire Posted February 24, 2011 Author Posted February 24, 2011 I've had this happen with a couple of men in my life who resented the amount of time put into work. It meant to me that we were incompatible. My husband was killing himself trying to do everything at work, since he's a managing partner. He's since peeled back on responsibilities by delegating more tasks and now has time to stop and smell the roses. He's a far happier man for the better balance although the amount he now works is still considered a lot for most people. I think it means that particular person is broken, and thus incompatible. Or perhaps that person has lost touch with reality or thinks ignoring cause and effect relationships will make them go away. I love my work. Doing it makes me happy, and the harder I work the more successful I am. Most weeks I work 45 hours. Some weeks it's 32, others it's 90... but I get back almost exactly what I put in. I can see how guys would be annoying about this, especially if they make good money themselves.
Star_Bright Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I don't know. I make good money and understand that that requires a sacrifice. I would like to make less money and have more of an overall balance. Money... or, I guess I should say, financial independence/stability/career "success" etc. used to be very important to me and now it just isn't. (Having a guy that makes the money was never important at all to me... I'm talking about making the money myself. Neither was I ever very materialistic or into "things." However I like to travel and to have fun, which requires spending money. ) Whenever I'm ready for a relationship I would like to find a man with similar values -- balance. I don't want either of us to have to work all the time just for money's sake, but at the same time, it's nice to have a comfortable lifestyle and to able to pursue interests together and have fun without worrying too much about money. Overall, I'd prefer being broke and happy, but that's because I've been rich and miserable. To me passion, work ethic, dedication, and the type of person he is are way more important than how much money he earns. And I hope he feels the same about me. (Whoever/whenever "he" is... I'm talking hypothetically because right now I am happily single! )
Sanman Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 Well, I have dated women with very different relationships to money and it has played a large factor in how compatible we have been. I've dated a woman who was into the $200 shoes and the Dolce & Gabbana dresses. I have also dated a woman who was very t-shirt and jeans tomboyish. In my experience, their relationship with money was very different. I found the latter to be quite responsible despite making less money while the former was constantly broke and had trouble paying bills. Through these experiences, I have realized that I prefer women who don't want such lavishes and prefer to spend their time with me rather than Donna Karan, Calvin, or Giorgio. It was actually gotten to the point where the dolled up girls I see walking around with the $1000 designer outfit is kind of a turnoff. I am in a career field where I will make good money, but never great money. I prefer to find someone who is also financially stable, but finds it important to land in a career where we have time together and we aren't spending our lives at work. As a side bar, this is why I like it when women go dutch on dates. I know this is an often debated topic, but that offer gives me an idea about her relationship with money and how our relationship may go. The woman who is okay with me paying for most or all of the early dates is more likely (in my estimation) to go buy those $200 shoes without looking at the bills or bank statement. The one who shows concern about my wallet now will likely be responsible with our combined finances later. Again, just my opinion.
threebyfate Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I can see how guys would be annoying about this, especially if they make good money themselves.Actually, one guy believed that my money was for our mutual pleasure. After explaining the facts of life to him whereby he apologized like crazy, I still dumped him like a hot rock. /dislikes gold diggers.
xpaperxcutx Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I hope you are aware that when you get into a relationship, it requires time and energy put in. If you can't find a balance between seeing your gf and work, then you're better off being single. A relationship is not a light switch, you certainly can't turn it on and off. If expectations are really that different then you find someone more compatible. Nobody put a gun to your head to put up with a demanding girlfriend.
tigressA Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I didn't grow up with a lot of money, therefore I have no desire to live with a lot of money. I appreciate the fact that time and work have to be put in to accumulate wealth, but I would be incompatible with men who put such an importance on financial success that it would impede upon our relationship, so I don't enter into relationships with them expecting that they'll change their priorities.
Star_Bright Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 Actually, one guy believed that my money was for our mutual pleasure. After explaining the facts of life to him whereby he apologized like crazy, I still dumped him like a hot rock. /dislikes gold diggers. This has happened to me. I have had guys--both while in a serious relationship and while casually dating them--joke about having me as their "sugar momma" or refer to me as "my lawyer girlfriend." It is such a turn-off. I don't expect anyone to support me and I am certainly not going to support anyone else.
Star_Bright Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I didn't grow up with a lot of money, therefore I have no desire to live with a lot of money. I appreciate the fact that time and work have to be put in to accumulate wealth, but I would be incompatible with men who put such an importance on financial success that it would impede upon our relationship, so I don't enter into relationships with them expecting that they'll change their priorities. This is an interesting perspective. I grew up without a lot of money, too, but for some reason, perhaps because my mom was a rather unhappy stay-at-home-mom who had to depend on my dad for her financial security, it made me want to make a good living/more money than my dad made, so that I wouldn't have to worry about money (and also so that I would be financially secure on my own). I guess it's all about balance and can be taken overboard because now I just want to be comfortable and would rather be broke and happy then working so hard for money all the time. It feels like the more money I have/make, the more I worry about it! Everything is so relative. I'm glad that your experiences have made you realize what's important and not important. Mine have too, but it feels like it took me a lot longer to get to this line of thinking than would have been ideal. Untouchable- if you like to work a lot, that's cool. It's good to be happy in your job. IMO it's way better than not liking your job, which is more common (no matter how much it pays). You might just need someone more compatible. There are plenty of women who like to work a lot too or have other interests whereby they don't mind if their husband works a lot. At this point in my life if I am going to get into a relationship than I want to value the relationship/time together than work or money. But many other women are different. I used to be at one point in my life too... and I guess that could be problematic, if one partner's values start to change... but that's a discussion for another thread!
sally4sara Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I've often wondered similar about men who want their wife to serve them a steady diet of meat and starch but expect her to stay slim and trim. Or guys who want 3 - 4 kids, the slim trim wife, and offer little help with parenting.
Author Untouchable_Fire Posted February 24, 2011 Author Posted February 24, 2011 OP, you sure seem to come across a lot of unsavory females. What kind of people do you hang out with anyway? It's more a function of what's out there. I'm sure it's the same for women trying to date men. I think most of my guy friends are not worth dating, but they get TONS of women. On the other hand some of the best guys I know really struggle to just get dates. However, I blame the guy because they fail to be hyper aggressive. I hope you are aware that when you get into a relationship, it requires time and energy put in. If you can't find a balance between seeing your gf and work, then you're better off being single. A relationship is not a light switch, you certainly can't turn it on and off. If expectations are really that different then you find someone more compatible. Nobody put a gun to your head to put up with a demanding girlfriend. That is crazy thinking. You want to just date a trust-fund guy who doesn't have to work for money? If you want a guy who has money, you have to be willing to let him work for it. Sometimes that means there will be some weeks where he is busy. Why is that such a big deal? There are plenty of times later. Why does there have to be a man providing constant attention to keep a woman like this happy? Why is it unacceptable to wait 2 weeks. Why do we allow wives or husbands of military members to run around cheating the moment the SO gets shipped off to war. Why don't we stand up as a society and punish their bad behavior?
Star_Bright Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 If you want a guy who has money, you have to be willing to let him work for it. Sometimes that means there will be some weeks where he is busy. Why is that such a big deal? There are plenty of times later. Sure, that's a simple truth. But I thought, unless I was reading your first post wrong, that you were dating a girl who doesn't want a guy with money as much as she wants time with that guy? She wants you to make less money and have more time to be together, right? So she doesn't fit your example of wanting a guy with money but not wanting him to work for it. I think that if she wants a guy who values quality time more than money/work, you're the wrong guy for her. (Which is fine.) And if you want a girl who is okay with missing out on family/weekend stuff etc. because you're working, she's the wrong girl for you. (Which is also fine). It's just a question of values. I don't understand if you're asking a general question about women being hypocritical and wanting it all, or if you're trying to address it to your own situation, which doesn't sound to me like that's the situation at all. ? Why does there have to be a man providing constant attention to keep a woman like this happy? Why is it unacceptable to wait 2 weeks. Why do we allow wives or husbands of military members to run around cheating the moment the SO gets shipped off to war. Why don't we stand up as a society and punish their bad behavior? Wow, I feel like these are a lot of different tangents from the work/time one. Is the woman wanting "constant attention" or does she just value time together as a couple or family or whatever, and the ability to plan vacations and time together and stuff and not have it be ruined by work, more than she values money and time spent working? Look, life is short. If you like to work, awesome, but if the person you're with values time more than work and you don't, you are with the wrong person. That person wants to be enjoying life together as a couple. What is so wrong with that? How is that being equating to "wanting constant attention"? I don't understand. I also don't understand what is has to do with military spouses who cheat when their SOs are at war???
xpaperxcutx Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 It's more a function of what's out there. I'm sure it's the same for women trying to date men. I think most of my guy friends are not worth dating, but they get TONS of women. On the other hand some of the best guys I know really struggle to just get dates. However, I blame the guy because they fail to be hyper aggressive. That is crazy thinking. You want to just date a trust-fund guy who doesn't have to work for money? If you want a guy who has money, you have to be willing to let him work for it. Sometimes that means there will be some weeks where he is busy. Why is that such a big deal? There are plenty of times later. Why does there have to be a man providing constant attention to keep a woman like this happy? Why is it unacceptable to wait 2 weeks. Why do we allow wives or husbands of military members to run around cheating the moment the SO gets shipped off to war. Why don't we stand up as a society and punish their bad behavior? Now you're being accusatory. Who says I want to date a guy with a trust fund? You're mistaken if most women are gold diggers, some don't have problem holding down a job. The problem is you're accusing them of being " demanding" in a relationship asking their SO to be more participating in regards to spending quality time together. A relationship isn't a game, and neither can you expect to put it into a storage bin for your convenience. If you're so busy that you can't even put in time to see the girlfriend at least once a week, you really don't have your priorities straight. Yes, it is stupid to fight over something as " working too much" but I doubt you wouldn't hesitate to cry the same excuse if you switch positions with your gf ( hypothetically, since I'm not sure if this thread even pertains to your own relationship).
sally4sara Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 It's more a function of what's out there. I'm sure it's the same for women trying to date men. I think most of my guy friends are not worth dating, but they get TONS of women. On the other hand some of the best guys I know really struggle to just get dates. However, I blame the guy because they fail to be hyper aggressive. That is crazy thinking. You want to just date a trust-fund guy who doesn't have to work for money? If you want a guy who has money, you have to be willing to let him work for it. Sometimes that means there will be some weeks where he is busy. Why is that such a big deal? There are plenty of times later. Why does there have to be a man providing constant attention to keep a woman like this happy? Why is it unacceptable to wait 2 weeks. Why do we allow wives or husbands of military members to run around cheating the moment the SO gets shipped off to war. Why don't we stand up as a society and punish their bad behavior? Ah UF, just because someone is willing to serve in the military it doesn't mean anyone they're with when they sign up can handle being without them for so many months at a time. LDRs blow up often even when the distance isn't due to something so "noble" as military service. Cheating stinks, but who wants to tell someone in a dangerous situation - over the phone or in an email no less, that they're lonely and met someone new? My brother and his wife both served, I asked him about the high rate of cheating (his ex wife did this) and he said the ones at home are commonly told to keep bad new to themselves so as to not add to a soldier's stress levels. But an enlisted person can get in big trouble if their spouse reports them for infidelity.
threebyfate Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 Translation: All women are liars, cheaters and gold-diggers who look for men with confidence, money and power. Women are bad, men are good. And btw, I have a great job and make good money.
carhill Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 My current GF at least understands money doesn't fall from the sky and that it takes time and effort to earn it. However, she wants me to <spend> more time with her and earn less.Are you OK with that dynamic? Sometimes men look at, if a tradeoff is considered, money being concrete and the love of a woman being nebulous. How do you feel about that? If you scale back work to 'make more time' for your girlfriend, do you believe the value obtained is acceptable to you and a positive force in your life? Why? All I'll say in general is I won't ever get married again without a prenup. I like my lifestyle as it is. Any woman I'm dating will surely be self-sufficient (at our ages) so no real issues for me. Good luck
Author Untouchable_Fire Posted February 24, 2011 Author Posted February 24, 2011 I've often wondered similar about men who want their wife to serve them a steady diet of meat and starch but expect her to stay slim and trim. Or guys who want 3 - 4 kids, the slim trim wife, and offer little help with parenting. Those guys who eat meat and starch are rarely thin themselves. The guys I see like this tend to be super traditionalists, and become more and more rare with each passing year. Of course there will always be jerks. Ah UF, just because someone is willing to serve in the military it doesn't mean anyone they're with when they sign up can handle being without them for so many months at a time. LDRs blow up often even when the distance isn't due to something so "noble" as military service. Cheating stinks, but who wants to tell someone in a dangerous situation - over the phone or in an email no less, that they're lonely and met someone new? My brother and his wife both served, I asked him about the high rate of cheating (his ex wife did this) and he said the ones at home are commonly told to keep bad new to themselves so as to not add to a soldier's stress levels. But an enlisted person can get in big trouble if their spouse reports them for infidelity. Once you sign up for something and make a commitment... why can't we enforce people to honor it? If someone must honor their commitment once they sign up for the military... why can't we also enforce their spouse to live up to a certain code of conduct? As tax payers we shell out huge amounts of money for military spouses. Why can't we cut them off for bad conduct?
Woggle Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 If a person marries for money they should accept the fact that a lot of hard work goes into earning it and it takes away time from the relationship at times. It's similiar to guys who want trophy wives who are arm candy. You are going to have to pay to keep her looking good. If a person knows the circumstances before they enter into a marriage they really can't play the victim later on when things are not what they thought they would be.
Star_Bright Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 Once you sign up for something and make a commitment... why can't we enforce people to honor it? If someone must honor their commitment once they sign up for the military... why can't we also enforce their spouse to live up to a certain code of conduct? As tax payers we shell out huge amounts of money for military spouses. Why can't we cut them off for bad conduct? Well not to get political but then you would be invading in people's private lives and personal goings-on... which is usually way too Big Brotherish for most people to want to enforce. For example it's quite easy to find out if someone has ditched out on their commitment to go to war... he goes AWOL. It's a lot harder to know if someone is cheating or not... it would involve the government poking their nose in people's private business which is usually not cool with most people. Also it's like saying that once someone gets married, they're not allowed to get divorced, because they made a commitment. People get divorced, people cheat, marriages end or reconcile, it happens. Besides, there are a lot of other vows people sign up for when they get married and how is the government going to go around enforcing them all? So, someone doesn't cheat on their spouse but they don't cherish and love them... what are we going to do to them? What exactly are you thinking should be done to people who don't live up to their marriage vows, and by whom?
Star_Bright Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 If a person marries for money they should accept the fact that a lot of hard work goes into earning it and it takes away time from the relationship at times. It's similiar to guys who want trophy wives who are arm candy. You are going to have to pay to keep her looking good. If a person knows the circumstances before they enter into a marriage they really can't play the victim later on when things are not what they thought they would be. Completely agree! I understand this line of thinking but it sounds like OP's girlfriend wants him to work less and spend more time with her. That's an inherent conflict of values that is different from the situation you present here, Woggle. That's what I've been trying to say, is all.
Woggle Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I don't know his circumstances so I can't fully comment on it. I don't think the government should enforce it but cheating on somebody while they are serving is a scummy thing to do. When somebody married a person in the military they know what they are getting into.
Recommended Posts