How much does money matter?

[TaintedLuv]

I’ve had this reoccurring theme with a lot of men that I’ve dated and it’s almost always an issue that I’m more financially stable and/or earning significantly more than them. For me, I tend to evaluate a person as a whole: how they treat me, their ambitions, common ground, etc. I’m starting to feel like I’m being unrealistic in not being focused on the disparity in our lifestyles. I feel that the only way I’ll be able to enjoy things with someone making a lot less than me is by paying for the things I want to do but I think over time that will bother me. At the same time, if I do focus on money then I’m coined a gold digger so really how do I ever win? Do I need to focus on meeting men that are my financial equals? I feel like that disregards a lot of people.

[Shining One]

At the same time, if I do focus on money then I’m coined a gold digger so really how do I ever win?

You're not a gold digger for wanting a financial equal to share a specific lifestyle with. You're only a gold digger if you expect the other person to finance that lifestyle for you.

[preraph]

It's a problem at times. It's true that even if you pay for stuff, they will eventually have a problem with it.

 

It's important to focus just as much on ambition, someone who has set realistic goals and is working towards them, even if they are not there yet. The younger the person is, the more likely they may improve their situation.

 

It's not always that the person has no money, either. Sometimes they are silent about what they make so you may think they have very little, but they are just not going to spend money and are frugal or penny pinching, in which case it won't matter if they get rich because they won't spend it.

 

Or they may make a decent living but have some habit, alcohol, drugs, video games (they all charge in game fees before you can do well now and it can get very expensive), electronics and man toys, that will keep them from wanting to spend money the way you do.

 

So it's about finding a match in lifestyle as much as anything else. I wouldn't want to be with someone who had something they just bleed money into that I'm not interested in.

 

So look for lifestyle. Try to meet guys at places you like to go that you can afford and that they might not be at unless they could afford them, whether it's a steak house bar or an upscale Mexican restaurant or some game or sport or club.

 

If you're dating online, you can put these type things on there. "I love to eat out and enjoy a big fat steak or some enchiladas." Little hints. I mean, steak is good to use because it's never inexpensive, or rarely at least. You can say, "I love a vacation by the ocean." That says you afford vacations. A lot of people don't. Or you can say, "I love a tropical getaway for two," and that is a subtle message that screams "no kids."

 

Just think about the messages you put out there. You can also put, "I love my career and would like to find someone who also loves theirs." It puts an emphasis there, and someone who is into career will appreciate that.

 

Crap, now I've made myself hungry.

[thefooloftheyear]

Wont say if this is true for the OP, but it is actually true of a lot of woman I know...

 

When it comes to money, its usually "what's hers is hers and what's his is theirs"...

 

If you really think about it, the situation the OP is presenting has been SOP for just about all men since the beginning of time..You would think that with all the progressive movements that have empowered women to earn more and do more, that this situation should not really be anything to worry about...

 

My advice?? The only thing you should be concerned with is if he's a mooch...If he isn't. and is self sufficient, then don't worry about if he can't match your W2...Even today, most women can't come near guys earning power and they don't really gripe about it..

 

TFY

[Shining One]

they all charge in game fees before you can do well now and it can get very expensive

Not to derail, but this isn't true.

[Shining One]

I feel that the only way I’ll be able to enjoy things with someone making a lot less than me is by paying for the things I want to do but I think over time that will bother me.

Can you provide some examples of things you would not be able to enjoy with a lower-earning partner?

[thefooloftheyear]

One thing that I failed to add to my last post is this...

 

I get that a woman who is still in child bearing years(and has thoughts of starting a family) would want a man of higher means...She knows that she may have to pull out of the workforce, either by choice or otherwise and it would be comforting to know that she's with a guy that can pull the weight..

 

When I hear of middle age post childbirth women talking about this, I completely don't get it...Who really cares at that point? Like I said, if the other person is pulling his/her weight then I don't see the issue..

 

TFY

[Ruby Slippers]

It's very important. The ideal for any woman who wants to get married and have children is that the man is financially strong enough to support her through pregnancy, childbirth, and raising young children, at the very least. A marriage- and family-minded man will demonstrate his ability to provide to that extent from the beginning.

 

Even women with different goals are wired to respond to men who are strong providers. It's the same among just about every species on the planet. Females select for the strongest protectors and providers. It could be argued that the two most important functions of men in relationships are to provide and protect.

 

Even women past childbearing age, widows, etc., select for strong providers and protectors.

 

Social engineering has convoluted these simple truths in the minds of many, but that doesn't change the simple truth.

 

Since I just ended a relationship with a man in a weaker financial position than I - the first time I ever dated such a man - I read up a lot on the subject. I found that according to many different studies, in general, the majority of women do not respect men who earn less, and don't find them desirable for long-term partnership and marriage. It's generally much easier for women to find romantic companionship than men, so we tend to be much more sensitive to the risk of losing our assets if a marriage goes awry - for good reason, in my opinion.

 

When a man is struggling financially, he feels like a failure and his woman gets scared - all perfectly natural, according to our biology.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Ruby Slippers

[OatsAndHall]

IMO, this is a relative subject. If you're really into someone who's financially stable and responsible but doesn't have the same financial means that you do, you'll have to decide if the disparity in lifestyles is worth calling things off. If you want to continue to enjoy your lifestyle, you'll end up paying their way more often than not.

 

 

 

I'm a teacher so I'm not exactly financially well off but my income exceeded those of the last two women that I dated seriously. We hit it off, I enjoyed their company and I accepted the fact that I'd be paying for things, more often than not. I did have to establish financial boundaries at times but it wasn't a huge deal.

 

 

 

And, there were times when my hobbies took a financial precedence over the relationship. I love to fish and spend my as much time out on the water as I can. This isn't necessarily a cheap hobby and there were certainly occasions where money for dinner and a movie was replaced with boat gas and bait. Both women were invited to join me but neither enjoyed fishing much so it was what it was.

[chillii]

Yeah , always seems to be the women worrying about this stuff , as tf said , it's always fine if it's him but vise verse , ha , look out, amazing how the tables turn.

Mind you , men also seem very wary of this stuff too these days l must admit, sign of the times and how screwed they can end up these days if shyt hits the fan.

Even l wouldn't have given a shyt once , but l'm wary these days.

 

Another thing l don't get is how there could even be a problem for women in that most men have at least done alright for themselves been working all their lives, most l know are very very comfortable. And it's not like there's any shortage of very smart men out there, in very good positions.

Edited May 17, 2019 by chillii

[TaintedLuv]

Wont say if this is true for the OP, but it is actually true of a lot of woman I know...

 

When it comes to money, its usually "what's hers is hers and what's his is theirs"...

 

If you really think about it, the situation the OP is presenting has been SOP for just about all men since the beginning of time..You would think that with all the progressive movements that have empowered women to earn more and do more, that this situation should not really be anything to worry about...

 

My advice?? The only thing you should be concerned with is if he's a mooch...If he isn't. and is self sufficient, then don't worry about if he can't match your W2...Even today, most women can't come near guys earning power and they don't really gripe about it..

 

TFY

 

Totally missed my point. I don’t care if my partner earns less but when we can’t do things unless I have to pay 100% of a trip or whatever else then I think my apprehension is valid. I constantly seem to end up in this situation. Perhaps I need to be more selective. That’s in addition to men that belittle my accomplishments and run around calling me fancy or other (IMO) derogatory things.

Edited May 17, 2019 by TaintedLuv

[Shining One]

I don’t care if my partner earns less but when we can’t do things unless I have to pay 100% of a trip or whatever else then I think my apprehension is valid.

With my recent ex, I earned significantly more than she did. When I treated her to a "dinner and a movie" night, it was generally around $200. When she treated me to a "dinner and a movie" night, it was around $50. I was okay with that arrangement. Are you okay with a partner who treats you within his means while you treat him within your means? It certainly wasn't equal, but I didn't resent her for it. Only you can determine what you find acceptable.

[Highndry]

Wont say if this is true for the OP, but it is actually true of a lot of woman I know...

 

When it comes to money, its usually "what's hers is hers and what's his is theirs"...

 

 

Yep. My ex is a perfect example. She loved spending my money but when it came time for her to spend she was the cheapest person in the world. I will only date women with a higher net worth than me from now on. Otherwise, I'm just having a physical relationship. Call me jaded.

[Gaeta]

Totally missed my point. I don’t care if my partner earns less but when we can’t do things unless I have to pay 100% of a trip or whatever else then I think my apprehension is valid. I constantly seem to end up in this situation. Perhaps I need to be more selective. That’s in addition to men that belittle my accomplishments and run around calling me fancy or other (IMO) derogatory things.

 

 

If you can afford it then what?

 

 

My brother married a doctor, she can afford 3-4 weeks trips around Europe each spring, my brother is a regular guy with a regular job at the government, he cannot afford this type of vacations so of course she pays for both of them, she doesn't mind it's not a scratch in her budget, heck she doesn't need a budget. My brother is a good man, a good husband and a good father to their child. He's a hard working man with many qualities. She doesn't loook down on him because he's not wealthy, actually she has a lot of respect for him for his intellect and so on.

 

 

 

So my question is , so what if you pay?

[preraph]

^ The problem is I'm going to say most men, that makes them feel inferior and causes problems. It did when I was younger. I didn't have much money, but it's all relative.

[divegrl]

Hi!

 

Yes, your apprehension is valid. If it bothers you, then you should be more selective of men based on their financial status.

 

Have a beautiful day my friend!

[some_username1]

It's very important. The ideal for any woman who wants to get married and have children is that the man is financially strong enough to support her through pregnancy, childbirth, and raising young children, at the very least. A marriage- and family-minded man will demonstrate his ability to provide to that extent from the beginning.

 

Even women with different goals are wired to respond to men who are strong providers. It's the same among just about every species on the planet. Females select for the strongest protectors and providers. It could be argued that the two most important functions of men in relationships are to provide and protect.

 

Even women past childbearing age, widows, etc., select for strong providers and protectors.

 

Social engineering has convoluted these simple truths in the minds of many, but that doesn't change the simple truth.

 

Since I just ended a relationship with a man in a weaker financial position than I - the first time I ever dated such a man - I read up a lot on the subject. I found that according to many different studies, in general, the majority of women do not respect men who earn less, and don't find them desirable for long-term partnership and marriage. It's generally much easier for women to find romantic companionship than men, so we tend to be much more sensitive to the risk of losing our assets if a marriage goes awry - for good reason, in my opinion.

 

When a man is struggling financially, he feels like a failure and his woman gets scared - all perfectly natural, according to our biology.

 

And that is nothing but a fairy tale for most, at least here in the UK where a mortgage on an average 2 bedroom house is predicated on two people's incomes, so the man has to earn the wage of two people to be able to afford the mortgage payment + provide food, clothing and bills expenses for 3+ mouths. Bear in mind also that the average wage is around £25k so a man who can shoulder such a load is more of an outlier than the norm.

 

The world has certainly changed since the stay at home mum was a viable archetype for most families and it's mostly women entering the workforce that has caused that as mortgage companies spotted an ideal opportunity to make people pay double for what used to cost 4 * a man's annual salary.

 

To bring it back to the OP's point this is a problem that men have had to suck up for many years. It all comes down to what sacrifices you feel willing to make to make your dating pool as deep as it can possibly be. Personally the landscape has changed irrevocably in terms of female achievement and earning potential so that it is a necessary evil that society has to let go of the norms of the past and expect the man to be the main provider when women are out-performing men in education and out-earning them as a result. Its the ultimate paradox that on the one hand women complain about equal pay, the glass ceiling etc yet on the other demand that that there still more men than they can shake a stick at that will out-earn them and thus give them a huge dating pool to select from. Simple maths dictates that in order for women to be winners in the workplace there has to be losers- ie the men.

[alphamale]

gold-diggers are usually attractive women who have nothing else to offer

[FMW]

I’ve had this reoccurring theme with a lot of men that I’ve dated and it’s almost always an issue that I’m more financially stable and/or earning significantly more than them.

 

In what ways is it an issue?

 

If it's your feelings about it then yes, focus on men who make at least as much as you do. As was mentioned, you aren't a gold digger unless you are looking for them to pay your way as well as their own.

 

If it's because they seem to feel uncomfortable just in general making less money than you, then in that situation they are just not a good match for you.

 

If it's because you want to regularly do things for which they cannot pay their way (expensive hobbies like golf, traveling, etc.) then you have to figure out if you're willing to not be able to share all of those activities with the guy you're dating (instead doing some with friends) or if you're willing to pay his way, maybe reducing how many of those activities you engage in so you don't feel resentful about how much you're paying for him.

 

Your financial success is a reality in your life that you'll have to learn to integrate with your romantic life.

[chillii]

Totally missed my point. I don’t care if my partner earns less but when we can’t do things unless I have to pay 100% of a trip or whatever else then I think my apprehension is valid. I constantly seem to end up in this situation. Perhaps I need to be more selective. That’s in addition to men that belittle my accomplishments and run around calling me fancy or other (IMO) derogatory things.

 

 

 

 

Not really , your missing his point and mine too.

When it's the guy that's all just fine and most of us would've been in that position and not given it a second thought.

But these days when it's her in that position , it's a whole nother ball game.

[chillii]

Threads like this disappoint me. As a man, I never even give this sort of thing any thought. If I am with a girl and I care about her, I am not concerned with her finances. If I want to take a trip, I bring her. I don't worry about whether or not she is paying for anything.

 

If you want a guy to earn a certain wage to be with you, then be upfront about that sort of thing. Let guys know how much your money means to you so they can decide if you are right for one another.

 

 

 

 

Yeah , me too and it's still amazing how so called equality is so selective.

Funny , l read your post after l posted the last one, but yeah , my thoughts and observations too exactly

[TaintedLuv]

Threads like this disappoint me. As a man, I never even give this sort of thing any thought. If I am with a girl and I care about her, I am not concerned with her finances. If I want to take a trip, I bring her. I don't worry about whether or not she is paying for anything.

 

If you want a guy to earn a certain wage to be with you, then be upfront about that sort of thing. Let guys know how much your money means to you so they can decide if you are right for one another.

 

I’m not concerned with his finances. I’m concerned with supporting myself then adding someone else to the equation and not making ends meet or having to change my lifestyle to do so.

[Simple Logic]

Traditionally men earn more than women and date women that earn less. Men have to set the boundaries on what is financially acceptable within the bounds of the financial future they desire. So are happy with a stay home mom earning nothing, some want at least a woman who can meaningfully contribute. Use the same for yourself.

[thefooloftheyear]

I’m not concerned with his finances. I’m concerned with supporting myself then adding someone else to the equation and not making ends meet or having to change my lifestyle to do so.

 

: This is hilarious...

 

What? you mean like most men have done for eons??

 

I have legions of stories of men who have given up just about everything they liked and "changed their lifestyle" so that their woman could be happy....Have the house she wants, drive the car she wants, live the life she wants..etc...legions of stories..

 

You said in previous post that you didn't want to "pay 100%" for a guy in a relationship....Well...Unless you pick up a drunk from the gutter, then that wont likely ever happen...

 

And here is something else to consider, depending on age...Most guys after spending years as a donkey, don't want to start doing that shyt all over again with another woman.. And with another woman that they will never have kids with or build lives as a nuclear family...It just kills me when I hear of women at middle age or above that are still looking for donkeys..

 

Quite frankly, I am actually surprised women don't do what men do that are good earners...Think about it....No longer do you have to pick the dolt with the paunch and dull personality because you need at least an equal to your pay grade, instead because you can afford it, get the edgy guy with the lunch pail job, but with the good looks and great physique.....He'll appreciate not having to be the "be all end all" and it will be more fun for you.

 

TFY

[Ruby Slippers]

^ Most men I've had relationships with are simply high earners and they don't have to be a "donkey" to do it. They're smart, hard-working men who are good financial planners, grew up with bread-winning dads and mostly stay-at-home moms, just like my parents, don't seem to view the provider role as a burden, but a natural thing.

 

There are tons of traditional couples just like this today, probably the most stable, successful couples out there. My latest fixation is financial planner Dave Ramsey, who talks a lot about his wife staying home with their kids and why it's a good thing to support that as a man.

 

For some reason on this forum, most people act like this is a foreign concept.

 

I'm 42 and still want kids. Yes, I realize that by now it's a long shot and plenty of men wouldn't try that with a woman my age. But I have several sisters who had healthy babies in their mid to late 40s, and my mom didn't enter menopause till her 50s, had 5 healthy babies herself. I've met plenty of men in their late 40s who delayed fatherhood for various reasons, can go either way on it, and are open to trying with someone my age. My typical date before I met my recent ex was late 40s making six figures. I could have "settled" for a few of them - but I'm still going for true love, and yes, I fully accept I may not find it and may pay a price for it. I accept that. I can't and won't "sell out".

 

I've never pursued a man in any way, but take a receptive/feminine approach, let them come to me and select the ones who seem to match best. The pool is smaller than it used to be, but the quality, the relevance, is improving.