CrystalCastles Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 I don't agree that "we all know" that. Yes there are women who think that guy would be below them because of his job. The FOOL poster said, though, that he was "everything she wanted in a man." Evidently that does not include high career aspirations, or else he would not have been everything she wanted. Not only women, but men as well are often drawn to others who have similar feelings about work and career as they do. It's like a socio-economic level of compatibility. It doesn't mean that a woman necessarily thinks the street sweeper is "beneath" her. (though she might). It could be a basic incompatibility. Many guys with exciting careers and good earning potential would not feel that a maid at Motel 6, no matter how hot, would be a good choice of mate, as well. Some of them would think she was beneath them, but others would just be more captivated by women who had a similar kind of drive to what they had. Agreed. Especially with the bolded. A man making 100+K isn't going to date a McDonalds burger flipper. Why would he? He can probably do way better than that. Which is why I explicitly said that I don't know of what circumstance would allow me to meet a city sweeper and date him. Its not realistic for someone like me. I'm hoping to become a university professor with my own research lab. How on earth would I meet a city sweeper? My social circle will include other academics, but city sweepers no. Also that's why I said that more information would be needed. Its not a "PC response" because I don't have enough information to give a concrete answer. There are far too many qualities I need to consider before making a final decision. If a man is a city sweeper because its a stepping stone to something better, then I have no issues with it. I know many people who are going to school and working minimum wage jobs to pay for their education. That is nothing to frown upon. Someone whose career is a city sweeper and he has no other aspirations would not be compatible with me anyway. Because he doesn't have the kind of determination and drive and push I'm looking for. And finally, the thing that annoys me the most about these kinds of questions. Nobody needs to take on a charity case. Dating is not charity. I don't need to date someone who makes 45K when I can date someone who makes the same amount I do (provided all the other "dream man" qualities are there). Money and careers do matter, because of the society in which we live. Its not realistic to say money doesn't matter and a career doesn't matter. It does. I don't know why people like SerenityNow get their panties in a wad if a woman who is well established and makes good money wants a man who does the same. And likewise, I cannot fault a man with a good job who wants a woman who is the same. Men date these women who have low wage earning jobs and skyscraper expectations and then whine that there are "too many gold diggers". Its because you're dating the wrong women. Link to post Share on other sites
CrystalCastles Posted December 15, 2015 Share Posted December 15, 2015 Please don't do that. Plenty of men care about the income of the women they date. As they should. That should matter to both men and women, at least on some level. If you get married to someone who makes nothing, or next to nothing, you are now financially responsible for them. You'd have to pay alimony in divorce. If that doesn't suit a guy, why on earth would he not consider things like a woman's career when he's dating her? It seems to me that the men who have the biggest problem with this are men who likely married or dated a housewife and then divorced and had to pay alimony. Or maybe they tend to date housewives/low income earners and are bothered by having to pay for dates. If that is such a problem, then why not date a successful career woman instead. Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 As they should. That should matter to both men and women, at least on some level. If you get married to someone who makes nothing, or next to nothing, you are now financially responsible for them. You'd have to pay alimony in divorce. If that doesn't suit a guy, why on earth would he not consider things like a woman's career when he's dating her? It seems to me that the men who have the biggest problem with this are men who likely married or dated a housewife and then divorced and had to pay alimony. Or maybe they tend to date housewives/low income earners and are bothered by having to pay for dates. If that is such a problem, then why not date a successful career woman instead. I agree. Men should care about how much money a prospective mate makes. I would say less men care about that than women on average. But I do think the trend is starting to equalize between the genders. Link to post Share on other sites
RedRobin Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) Look, like I said before, there are women who would NEVER accept a cup of coffee, much less a dinner or a gift from any man, ever, or allow one to put air in her tires. One is posting in this thread. They may be hard to find, but you CAN find them since it seems to be of utmost importance to you! For better or worse, it remains part of our culture that men traditionally express their interest in women by generosity and "grand gestures." That's why diamond engagement rings even exist - I think it's stupid, I am engaged and do not have an engagement ring. But when my fiancee wants to give me a gift or do something nice for me that I don't prefer to do for myself, I don't refuse or indignantly throw it back in his face. That would be ungracious of me, and he would hate it - as would I if the tables were turned. It's not all about gender, it's about the way different people show that they love and care. If they learned it by observing their father or mother, that is not necessarily a reason to abandon it if it works well for them. GOOD relationships are very reciprocal even if it might not appear that way to the outside observer. Anyway, people who want things outside the "norm" like absolute 50/50 finances under all circumstances are more unusual, but like attracts like. I do hope you both make a lot of money so you can hire a staff if you decide to have children, though - otherwise one of you will have to stop earning and start parenting and how would they pay their half? And if your wife has to take a couple of weeks off work just to squeeze the baby out and get back on her feet, will she be required to make financial restitution to you? Now you just sound ridiculous. There is no one on this thread that is saying they wouldn't allow a man to inflate their tires or buy them a cup of coffee... ... I just don't EXPECT it... and when that man decides to show his appreciation in whatever way is comfortable for him, I am grateful. I show my gratitude by offering to help. Do my part. Show that I am his partner, not a free loader. It's not that hard. Really, it isn't. I expect the same from the men I am romantically involved with. He cooks, I do dishes. I cook, he does dishes. Why is that so hard to grasp? If he made $200k and I made $50K, it means that we have different levels of disposable income... and we negotiate together what our life would look like. Spenders vs savers is where it usually breaks down. I took the factory worker I was dating who wanted me to move to Vermont (so that he could make $2.50 more per hour) to Denmark... for instance. That's not an opportunity he would have had otherwise. It wasn't a big deal to me. We aren't together anymore... after his gig in Vermont, he moved overseas... he contacted me out of the blue to join him there. Sweet, but that ship has sailed. I have pleasant memories of our time together. He was a talented musician. He fixed my acoustic guitar that I was struggling with (the action was too high!), and we had a great time harmonizing together. I'm an ok singer Long story short... Life opens up in a totally different way when you let go of your gender constructs. Everyone does their best. Everyone pitches in... and no one feels like they have a noose around their necks that some cultural expectation put there. It's pretty nice. Regarding the baby thing... no one... men or women... can afford to be totally dependent on their spouse financially for long. The job market is way too fluid and dynamic. It's a wise survival strategy for everyone to make sure their job skills are current. Not a gender thing. Best to find someone who has a strong work ethic, and leave it at that. Edited December 16, 2015 by RedRobin 3 Link to post Share on other sites
clia Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Ok fair enough....but please try to answer this question honestly... Lets say you make 100+K and have a good job...But its a salaried position and some weeks you will be putting in 60 Hrs... You meet a guy and he's everything you can want in a man...He runs the street sweeper machine for the local town...Makes 45K and gets home by 4PM.. Does that work for you? TFY Nope. I wouldn't date a guy making $45k a year. I make way more than that, and I want a guy who can keep up so we can have fancy dinners, a phenomenal house, great vacations, and early retirement. $45k doesn't get that. I make 6 figures, so I expected the same out of a guy who I was dating. Just being honest. (But I am older; as a 22 year old, $45k would've been fine, as long as it was going up on the corporate ladder. Not a guy who was pretty much stuck at $45k for life.) I also wouldn't date a guy shorter than me. My preference. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Nope. I wouldn't date a guy making $45k a year. I make way more than that, and I want a guy who can keep up so we can have fancy dinners, a phenomenal house, great vacations, and early retirement. $45k doesn't get that. I make 6 figures, so I expected the same out of a guy who I was dating. Just being honest. (But I am older; as a 22 year old, $45k would've been fine, as long as it was going up on the corporate ladder. Not a guy who was pretty much stuck at $45k for life.) I also wouldn't date a guy shorter than me. My preference. Hooray for honesty! I truly get this. I don't make six figures, but I do pretty well. Earnings potential continues to increase. I want a woman who's in the same position and can keep up. My last girlfriend couldn't, and it was a factor in our relationship ending. As for not dating short guys, that's perfectly fine. I'm not tall, but not short...kind of "smedium". Some women have rejected me because of it. That's cool...I've rejected women for weighing more than me. We all have our preferences. Link to post Share on other sites
jay1983 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Nope. I wouldn't date a guy making $45k a year. I make way more than that, and I want a guy who can keep up so we can have fancy dinners, a phenomenal house, great vacations, and early retirement. $45k doesn't get that. I make 6 figures, so I expected the same out of a guy who I was dating. Just being honest. (But I am older; as a 22 year old, $45k would've been fine, as long as it was going up on the corporate ladder. Not a guy who was pretty much stuck at $45k for life.) I also wouldn't date a guy shorter than me. My preference. This is what those red pill guys call hypergamous. Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 This is what those red pill guys call hypergamous. Totally wrong. Hypergamy: the action of marrying a person of a superior caste or class. Seeking someone in your class does not qualify. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
jay1983 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Totally wrong. Hypergamy: the action of marrying a person of a superior caste or class. Seeking someone in your class does not qualify. I thought it was equal or higher? Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 I thought it was equal or higher? Nope. Only higher. Link to post Share on other sites
MidwestUSA Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Nope. Only higher. It depends whose definition you read. Some say 'equal or higher'. And I thought it meant having both a hunting AND fishing license. 5 Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 It depends whose definition you read. Some say 'equal or higher'. And I thought it meant having both a hunting AND fishing license. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy Anyone who says "equal or higher" is blatantly incorrect. Hypergamy is marrying up. Marrying laterally is not the same thing. Link to post Share on other sites
MidwestUSA Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy Anyone who says "equal or higher" is blatantly incorrect. Hypergamy is marrying up. Marrying laterally is not the same thing. You rely only on Wiki? Hypergamy | Definition of hypergamy by Merriam-Webster Merriam-Webster › dictionary › hyperga... Definition of HYPERGAMY. : marriage into an equal or higher caste or social group. I'm as blatantly incorrect as Merriam-Webster. I'll accept that company. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 You rely only on Wiki? Hypergamy | Definition of hypergamy by Merriam-Webster Merriam-Webster › dictionary › hyperga... Definition of HYPERGAMY. : marriage into an equal or higher caste or social group. I'm as blatantly incorrect as Merriam-Webster. I'll accept that company. Merriam Webster is incorrect. Sure, bash wiki. That's fine. At least with wiki we get an historical and social context of the word. We don't from Merriam Webster. I'm not saying MW is bad. They just have this word defined incorrectly. Link to post Share on other sites
jay1983 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Hypergamy: definition by MidwestUSA Having a hunting and fishing license. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
sambolini Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Hypergamy: definition by MidwestUSA Having a hunting and fishing license. "One who enjoys gathering and consuming wild game". I'm on board with that! Venison is taaaasty... Link to post Share on other sites
MidwestUSA Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Merriam Webster is incorrect. Sure, bash wiki. That's fine. At least with wiki we get an historical and social context of the word. We don't from Merriam Webster. I'm not saying MW is bad. They just have this word defined incorrectly. No, they don't. They aren't the only one defining it this way. And not bashing wiki, but it is written by the people, for the people. It once reported Danny Amendola as going out with a fractured penis while with the STL Rams. Even this football widow knows it was a dislocated clavicle, and had to send in the correction. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
PrettyEmily77 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Ok fair enough....but please try to answer this question honestly... Lets say you make 100+K and have a good job...But its a salaried position and some weeks you will be putting in 60 Hrs... You meet a guy and he's everything you can want in a man...He runs the street sweeper machine for the local town...Makes 45K and gets home by 4PM.. Does that work for you? TFY These kings of issues only come up when doing OLD, IMO. When you don't use OLD you are more likely to meet guys within your social or professional circle, and therefore within the same salary bracket. As an example, I'm a medic and have mostly dated guys in my field, because that's my social/professional circle (no OLD for me). As an aside, I've known a few high earners crippled with debts and / or stingy as anything, and I also know of people (both men and women) who know how to hold a budget regardless of whet they actually earn - that, coupled with a generous / don't mind sharing spirit, is a far better proposition than the stingy higher-earning type. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
loveflower Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Looks like OLD is not the way to go....It's like an exchange, no wonder all these problems occurred. Link to post Share on other sites
edgygirl Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 You're projecting. I am not even close to the below. When did I say I was a feminist? Also, yes, I want a guy on my level. Sorry if that bothers you so much for some reason A guy earning under 6 figures is light years from dead weight, much less a guy who isn't the top ten percent earning bracket like you claim. Do you realise how ridiculous and entitled that sounds? You won't have to work triple time if you end up with a guy earning $70,000 a year. You are nothing more than entitled and a money chaser. Winding around it doesn't sugar coat it. You say you want someone equal to you yet want a man paying for your dates? How is that equal?!? Equal is the literal meaning not equal with an asterisk following it. Real feminists, the ones who value true equality between HUMANS would vomit their guts out reading a supposed top ten percent earner stamping her feet for a guy to pay for her. You seriously gotta be kidding yourself there Link to post Share on other sites
edgygirl Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 I am so sorry but after spending almost 10 years in University, I don't want to be with a welder or a cop. I want a man who is intellectually and socially on my level. Bash me however you want people. I have the right to choose. As for men not caring about what women earn... this is not news. It's the story of the universe! As is women caring about what men earn. Men don't usually care about women's income. Most care about other attributes. Who are we fooling here exactly? Ask any psychologist... most women feel uncomfortable being with a man who is either socially or financially below them. I hate to be the one bringing the bad "news". Before I say what I am going to, please understand that I personally have no issue what you, or anyone else does...Heck, I have some requirements that most women would think are absolutely ridiculous....So I understand... That being said, why would, say, a welder or cop that makes like 75K/yr be not enough to support a lifestyle-if you were combining incomes? And this may be another area where there really isn't "true" equality... Most(all?) guys I know, especially those of us that are high earners, really worry about what will happen if we lose the capability to earn and having to be carried by a partner..They certainly wouldn't go into a relationship with that logic...Never seen it... There are millions of guys that work long hours and carry "dead wood" women that don't have the capacity to earn big money..They don't necessarily get resentful, because they love the other person dearly and don't see that as a detriment... Maybe the wildcard there is kids...I think some women feel on some level that even if they don't see themselves as mothers or SAHM's at the time of making the decision to choose a partner, that at least they want that option...If they have a guy that cant carry that type of lifestyle than they may see themselves as "trapped" into the breadwinner role and don't like it, even though guys have been "stuck" in this role for eons.. .02 TFY 1 Link to post Share on other sites
edgygirl Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Amen. Amen. Amen. You're just attempting to create more invisible rules. The whole point of gender freedom (which is one of the main things that true feminism aspires to) is not 50-50 in all romantic relationships, but rather 100% freedom of choice. If a man wants to support a SAHM and both are happy, yay for them. If a woman wants to support a SAHD and both are happy, yay for them. If a man and woman want to split everything and both are happy, yay for them. Telling people, "You should stop listening to what these people tell you to do and instead do what I tell you to do!" is rather stupid and pointless. What's the point of tearing down a societal norm only to establish one that is equally rigid and unfree? People should just do what feels right to them and hold out for compatible partners, end of story. Link to post Share on other sites
thefooloftheyear Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 I am so sorry but after spending almost 10 years in University, I don't want to be with a welder or a cop. I want a man who is intellectually and socially on my level. Bash me however you want people. I have the right to choose. As for men not caring about what women earn... this is not news. It's the story of the universe! As is women caring about what men earn. Men don't usually care about women's income. Most care about other attributes. Who are we fooling here exactly? Ask any psychologist... most women feel uncomfortable being with a man who is either socially or financially below them. I hate to be the one bringing the bad "news". You aren't telling me something I don't know.. Like stated before.....I respect your stance,....Perhaps I should have used a high school teacher with a PhD as my example...Wonder how that would change the dynamic..?? TFY Link to post Share on other sites
Timshel Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Staying on the topic of feminism.....guys, sometimes you miss the point. There is no reason to be defensive. We do not and will never understand what having a member feels like....because we don't have one. We will try, as a mom to a son, I will try. Of the same accord, member people will not understand what it is to have a vagina or to give birth to another human being. There must be an understanding and respect of these simple truths. Feminism is simply about equality. EQUALITY. Brains for brains, effort for effort. There is nothing in pure feminism that would put a man down. It is something that women have had to fight for, ya know, when we could not vote or choose our husband. There are women still murdered and beaten and stoned and burned and raped all over the globe for being a woman. There is no reason to disregard a woman who says that they have been treated poorly or hurt for being a woman. This is only the truth. There is no attempt in feminism to take from men. We are on the same side...we need and want you and you need and want us. We are wives, sisters, mothers and friends. If you are a man who is not able to appreciate that.....no words then. No soup for you. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
joystickd Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Staying on the topic of feminism.....guys, sometimes you miss the point. There is no reason to be defensive. We do not and will never understand what having a member feels like....because we don't have one. We will try, as a mom to a son, I will try. Of the same accord, member people will not understand what it is to have a vagina or to give birth to another human being. There must be an understanding and respect of these simple truths. Feminism is simply about equality. EQUALITY. Brains for brains, effort for effort. There is nothing in pure feminism that would put a man down. It is something that women have had to fight for, ya know, when we could not vote or choose our husband. There are women still murdered and beaten and stoned and burned and raped all over the globe for being a woman. There is no reason to disregard a woman who says that they have been treated poorly or hurt for being a woman. This is only the truth. There is no attempt in feminism to take from men. We are on the same side...we need and want you and you need and want us. We are wives, sisters, mothers and friends. If you are a man who is not able to appreciate that.....no words then. No soup for you. Those are your words but men see it differently. Also at the same time no man is discounting that a woman has been treated poorly or hurt because of who they are. I'm antifeminist. It doesn't mean I hate women. I just hate the method that has been used to promote equality. On that same token I'm a Black male and hate the method that achieved racial equality. The racial thing is a whole different thread. Anyway I've always seen equality as taking the good and the bad not a pick and choose. Woman complains about making less money then start your own business. It's like when I use to argue on the porn thread. Lots of pornstars are business owners and at the same time are feminists. Enough women have successful businesses then the competition increases for candidates for jobs. The other thing that hurts your cause is the way women treat other women examples sex industry or SAHM. Some feminists look down on them because of what they do. I can ever refer back to post on threads where female users said things about SAHM. I could go on further but I have things to do. I'll finish later Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts