How to Marry a Millionaire (but he's not rich yet...)

[Red]

It's way easier for a attractive women to con a wealthy man into a relationship for money or material wealth as opposed to the other way around.

This exemplifies what you don't see. It's a TWO WAY ROAD. Both individuals are using someone for personal gain & (typically) don't really give a crap about the other. You use words like "con" and "lure" the poor, poor unsuspecting 80-yr-old crypt keeper that can't, for the life of him, figure out why Anna Nicole is sitting on his lap. Really? You men aren't stupid. And neither are the ladies. As far as I'm concerned, they're taking each other out of the gene pool and that's one less jackass for me to stumble over. Works for me.

The next time I'm chillin' at happy hour and see the guy in the Ferrari toss keys to the valet & then wait to retrieve them back so he can oh-so-subtly place them at the bar by his drink (horse side up), I'll think of you and how it doesn't work that way... I don't know where you tend to fish, but the pond in Scottsdale works pretty damn well for his endeavors.

All I'm saying don't burn one party at the stake and pity the other. There are no victims in that scenario, only people who choose to turn a blind eye to a reality they don't want to accept.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Anon3587x]

To tell you the truth Red this discussion doesn't even apply to most (if not all) of the members participating in it.

Has anyone here married for money?
Has anyone here been divorced and burned by a male or female gold digger?

We are just commentating on other peoples stupidity for material wealth, from both the male and female side.


All of us can do best for ourselves by avoiding these shit head people. Only befriend like minded individuals.

Thats what I think.

 

[camski]

All of us can do best for ourselves by avoiding these shit head people. Only befriend like minded individuals.

Thats what I think.

If you dont mind a little advice from someone a little longer in the tooth than you. You will learn more from people who dont think like you than those who do.

 

[Russ H]

While I disagree with you Russ, I'm posting this because I love to hear your thoughts on things like this:

Russ H
Some posters here often comment that sexy women are cheaper to "rent"-- further sexism/objectification. To me, this is not a relationship. It's a business arrangement, aka prostitution.

None of these posters have been banned for their questionable moral values, to my knowledge.

But both of these posters are doing something that is ethically and morally reprehensible.

Is it though? Is it really morally\ethically reprehensible?

Is there really anything wrong with 2 people going into anything with the notion it's a purely physical, or even a purely mental "pursuit". Yes, it may not fancy you, but does that make it morally or ethically reprehensible for others to do?*

*Assuming they aren't doing this behind someone else's back. Anything done that would piss off someone if exposed, given that you lied to give them a reason to believe something else is wrong.

My bad-- meant to say "some consider morally reprehensible"-- I was in a hurry to get out the door, and didn't catch it.

My main point is/was: If you find whoring/prostitution reprehensible, then both the prostitute and john (guy who's paying for services) should be considered amoral/reprehensible, IMO.

I can see in re-reading that I did not make that point very well. Apologies.

FWIW, I spent most of my late teens, all of my 20s, and most of my 30s engaged in relationships for pleasure-- many of which were based on/initiated by physical attraction. So I'm not going all holier-than-thou on this-- I AM that "morally reprehensible" guy!

Sorry I didn't make that more clear. /

-Russ H.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Russ H]

If you dont mind a little advice from someone a little longer in the tooth than you. You will learn more from people who dont think like you than those who do.

Legendary post.

-Russ H.

 

[Runum]

Hey Red, looks like we got the redheaded temper stirred up. I thought you weren't red anymore though?

I will admit, you have this guy stumped. I am not sure of what your point is. Would you have me advise this 18 yo girl to go into porn or prostitution? Would you have me tell her to marry the guy?

I wouldn't advise anyone, male or female, to go into either industry. I also wouldn't advise anyone, boy or girl, to marry under those conditions.

Can you talk real slow and with a Texas accent so I can understand how you would have handled it differently?

 

[NHS]

I keep wanting to reply to this topic then realized I just don't give a shit and am just not gonna have an opinion on it.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Icy]

Interesting that you don't find that of value. When my kid is out in the world and it's kicking her butt or she is just uncertain of herself, an I Love You and You Rock, from a loved one, goes a long way.

Not all people are the same, some do need that constant validation. Hang around with any large group of kids or teens and you will easily identify those that need it and those that don't. Some say that those that need it are weaker. I think it is what it is, not right or wrong, just different.

Idk, it's probably just a weird part of my family, but typically refrain from expressing things like that with words. Instead we simple act on it, and show it rather than telling the person in words. In all honesty, I think it'd be weird if my parents, or any family said anything even something like "I love you". Probably think they're just saying it to be "normal". I still know how they feel regardless of whether they say it, so all is good.

Tends to mess with me in the "real world" where, at least in my experience, people seem more eager to say, than to show feelings. haha

My bad-- meant to say "some consider morally reprehensible"-- I was in a hurry to get out the door, and didn't catch it.

My main point is/was: If you find whoring/prostitution reprehensible, then both the prostitute and john (guy who's paying for services) should be considered amoral/reprehensible, IMO.

....

Sorry I didn't make that more clear. /

No worries. I definitely agree with you that both, not one of the people need to be considered immoral if you believe even one of them is acting immoral.

I keep wanting to reply to this topic then realized I just don't give a shit and am just not gonna have an opinion on it.

Atleast you still got your reply in though. :smxB: haha

 

[wallstreet]

This exemplifies what you don't see. It's a TWO WAY ROAD. Both individuals are using someone for personal gain & (typically) don't really give a crap about the other. You use words like "con" and "lure" the poor, poor unsuspecting 80-yr-old crypt keeper that can't, for the life of him, figure out why Anna Nicole is sitting on his lap. Really? You men aren't stupid. And neither are the ladies. As far as I'm concerned, they're taking each other out of the gene pool and that's one less jackass for me to stumble over. Works for me.

The next time I'm chillin' at happy hour and see the guy in the Ferrari toss keys to the valet & then wait to retrieve them back so he can oh-so-subtly place them at the bar by his drink (horse side up), I'll think of you and how it doesn't work that way... I don't know where you tend to fish, but the pond in Scottsdale works pretty damn well for his endeavors.

All I'm saying don't burn one party at the stake and pity the other. There are no victims in that scenario, only people who choose to turn a blind eye to a reality they don't want to accept.

I'm sorry but the both parties getting used equally is bs. Gold diggers are leeches of society and should never be considered anything more then scam artist. My uncle did the same thing to older women. He's just a leech and no one respects him either.

Red you seem to be presenting what I refer to as "badboy" syndrome. Pick the shady creep at the bar and somehow pick out all these great qualities that everyone else is just to "narrow minded" and "ignorant" to see. Then a few months down the line when the situation blows up, and everyone involved takes easily avoidable damage, society is to blame.

hope MPM musters up her own strength and tells each and every one of her nay-sayers to go F*ck themselves[/I]. (can't wait for the first comment about how that's not lady like) Because it's exactly what I had to do. And the opposition along the way just fueled the fire.

In her case that's like owning a pizzeria and telling her customers to go make their own pizza. Her net revenue would get cut in half.

 

[kwerner]

I would also disagree that anyone on this thread really tried all that hard to encourage her to go in another direction and gave her any risk/reward analysis and outlined any flaws in her business plan. No we just called her a whore and banned her.

For what it's worth, I was going to reply to MPM's comments with a summarization of Matthew 7:24-27 (of which I happened to read that same day), relating it to building her moral foundation upon a rock rather than sand. But I declined to do so because I figured that she would either resent or ignore the comment, as it seemed her mind was already made up.

In my opinion, sometimes it just isn't worth the breath to try and talk someone out of what they're doing or trying to talk to them about the consequences of their actions. Sometimes you just have to let them live and learn for themselves and hope / pray they'll turn an open ear and an open heart to you when they're ready.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Red]

*facepalm*

I'm done, I'm out, I concede. Throwing in the towel.

Runum, I'll PM you.

 

[Runum]

Looking forward to it Red. I'm out too.

 

[Russ H]

Sorry, Red.

FWIW, your comments made complete sense to me.

I never saw you playing the gender card.

All I saw/read were you trying to point out the hypocrisy in some of the comments made in this thread, and some others on these forums.

(sigh). Sorry I wasn't more help here.

-Russ H.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Red]

FWIW, your comments made complete sense to me.

Thanks, Russ I appreciate that.

 

[Icy]

Sadly, it's usually the people that disagree that respond with "feedback" when someone voices an opinion. I wouldn't worry about it too much, seems to only be coming from one person. While they're entitled to the opinion bare in mind there are probably many more here that agree with your side, but it usually seems unnecessary to respond with "I agree" without adding to the discussion.

 

[valuegiver]

I think the original poster is a troll.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[DeletedUser394]

I think the original poster is a troll.

For a screename like "valuegiver", I'd estimate that 90% of your posts are "one-liners" that don't provide much value at all.

Why not post an introduction and tell us a little about yourself?

In the posts that you do give advice, you are very sure of yourself, almost in an authoritative manner (you give very specific advice). That leads me to believe that you are quite successful in whatever it is you do. (I'm guessing something to do with eCommerce). I'd love to hear about your success.

 

[Fermovian]

Sorry, Red.

FWIW, your comments made complete sense to me.

I never saw you playing the gender card.

All I saw/read were you trying to point out the hypocrisy in some of the comments made in this thread, and some others on these forums.

(sigh). Sorry I wasn't more help here.

-Russ H.

I don't understand if people are trying to give honest feedback or are working out their issues with male and female gender roles. If a man were in the exact same situation I don't think most people would be treating him very differently. Just because it is a stereotypically male role doesn't mean positions couldn't be reversed. Most people have the same scorn for gigolos as they do for gold-diggers, if not more.

 

[Russ H]

I think the original poster is a troll.

Interesting comment, Valuegiver.

I like your short, and sometimes informative posts regarding web stuff.

But when it comes to women, you are the kind of guy I was referring to earlier (quote below from another thread, where MJ stepped in and asked them to keep discussions to business):

I think if you hang around quite a bit on PUAHate.com then you will see Tyler's gf. She is not hot at all. Her face looks like a tranny. And if you think this guy is getting hotties, think again. He is not teaching you real world stuff as what you think. He is teaching you keyboard jockey stuff. Oh by the way, you can also see the pic of his ex gf on PUAHate which he rated 9 out of 10. She is more like a 5 to me (and I am known to be generous with rating). And Papa his business partner never gets laid. And Jeffy was dating a chubby (read:fat) girl. She just dumped him.

-Russ H.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Russ H]

I don't understand if people are trying to give honest feedback or are working out their issues with male and female gender roles. If a man were in the exact same situation I don't think most people would be treating him very differently. Just because it is a stereotypically male role doesn't mean positions couldn't be reversed. Most people have the same scorn for gigolos as they do for gold-diggers, if not more.

My comments are not towards gigolos-- they're towards guys who make comments about women being used for sex.

Note that there is a difference here between making love/having sex w/someone-- and *using* them for sex. The first implies a meeting of equals. The second ("using") implies the woman is just an object to be f***ed.

The point made earlier that it's OK for men to be whores b/c it's evolutionary is a case in point:

The difference is that we might want to sleep with lots of women and all of that as part of our fastlane goals but we don't respect those women. It's why men want to protect their daughters from people that just want to use them for sex, whereas they are perfectly fine with using other men's daughters for their sexual gratification. It's contradictory, I know, but it makes sense in evolutionary terms.

Men have been genetically conditioned to want to sleep with lots of women so that they can spread their genes around and have more surviving offspring. Women have been conditioned to have a single partner who can provide for them and their offspring rather than multiple men because it's more stable and the male will know that the baby is his, so he'll want to take care of it.

Yikes. Maybe I've been living on the left coast too long. I had no idea there were people out there who still justified screwing around (only for guys, not for girls) as being OK, b/c it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint.

Killing off the weak or ugly also makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint, but I hope we've moved past killing off people who have harelips, limps, Down's Syndrome, epilepsy, depression, bad hair, etc.

Geesh.

-Russ H.

 

[camski]

Yikes. Maybe I've been living on the left coast too long. I had no idea there were people out there who still justified screwing around (only for guys, not for girls) as being OK, b/c it makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint.

-Russ H.

Russ, this made me laugh. I feel like you and I are on the same side of the fence on this one. Not that we are endorsing or agreeing with anything MPM was saying but just that we both noted some hypocrisy going on. What is funny about your statement is that I know you are from MI and I am from IN, so I dont think the left coast thing comes into play here. It is funny to me because the older guys from the midwest are the ones kind of sticking up for the womens side of this.

Not sure if you would agree with this or not, but I think our age comes into play a little bit here. Having a few years on some of the guys here, weve made our share of mistakes, sins and failures and now have the wisdom to be a little less judgmental and a lot more forgiving of people. That is why I dont begrudge the people calling MPM a whore and the guys who are talking about hot women as objects to be "gotten". Twenty years ago I would have probably been on the other side of my own posts in this thread.

No light will shine any brighter on the ignorance of our youth more than wisdom.

 

[biophase]

Late to the party as usual.

I did not see the original post but read Runum's summary. As I started reading from post to post I saw nothing wrong with what OP had written. Are we saying that we never take into account the financial potential of a future partner?

Have you seen this chart? It's from a dating site called OkCupid. Notice the nice column of green indicating that an overwhelming majority of men making $100k+ get more messages from females.

View attachment 2226

Are gold diggers, stealth gold diggers?? Both parties know exactly what's going on.

The guy I bought my Benz from was 68. He clearly had alot of money. He also had a couple 18-22 year old girlfriends in multiple homes. In fact purchasing the car was an interesting day. First I signed the papers at his home where he had to call upstairs to let GF1 know that he had company so presumably she didn't come downstairs inappropriately. Then on the way to the dealership GF2 called and couldn't make rent so we stopped at the bank where he deposited $1200 into her checking account, and he didn't even know her last name. It was funny watching the teller ask him if the name was correct and he didn't know.

He told me that these girls would call him whenever they needed help and in return, well you know. I'm sure these girls understood the arrangement too.

My experience with the other side. I know a few wealthy single women and I fear that they would meet gold digger guys. We know that they are out there too.

One girl told me that if she loves a person, her money is his money. The day that they get married all the money is joined. What brought up this conversation is that her ex-boyfriend was getting pissed because he paid for almost all the dates and dinners when they were dating. I agreed with the guy and said that the girl should pay sometimes.

She could not understand why. I think she was looking at that actual dollar amounts, not the representation of the money. She told me that he got mad because he's paying $40 a meal or $20 for movies. But in her mind, the day they get married he basically gets her millions of dollars, so why would he sweat the small amounts.

Anyway, I know I'm rambling a little, its 2am. I may have to reread this and edit it in the morning.

Just my 2 cents.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[wallstreet]

I don't consider their finances, however I guess that's because I'm male, 23, and avoiding marriage like the plague to avoid the terrible laws in the first place. Though I think the majority of men don't consider finances either beyond the point of being able to support yourself.

Ps. The graph you posted is golden, I'm sending it to my buddies once the market opens.

 

[NHS]

Interesting graph. As luck would have it I used to date alot of girls on OK Cupid. I loved the site. Got tons of a$$ and met some really terrific women. In fact I met the girl I am marrying in May on that site.

I was never very good at meeting girls in the real world. I seem to gravitate towards the wrong kinda girl.


Money is part of a relationship and it's funny that so many spend so much time saying it's not important including the pastor thats performing our ceremony, right after he said most people fight over money and get divorced over money. I laughed at him a bit and said "So money is very important in a relationship." I make way more then my fiance does. Maybe 8-10 times more. But she understands that I reinvest that money and she doesn't see it as an excuse to go spend 5k on shoes. Have to be on the same page and understand even if you have 100k in the bank doesn't mean we can go buy a new porsche tomorrow.

 

[Red]

ok, I lied about being out. Here is my final post of trying to lay out my point. I've been able to settle down, collect my thoughts and articulate what is being missed by the masses...


******************************************


Men generally place a high value on physical beauty & sex in their hierarchy of needs/wants (security & stability typically fall lower on their list of priorities).

Women generally place a high value security & stability in their hierarchy of needs/wants (physical beauty & sex typically fall lower on their list of priorities).



Many men are willing to seek out a woman based on the pretense of physical beauty & see what develops from there (or, sometimes, just outright use someone for it).

Many women are willing to seek out a man based on the pretense of financial security & stability & see what develops from there (or, sometimes, just outright use someone for it).



Many men explain/justify their actions as "it's just the way I'm wired, it's natural/genetic coding/etc" (which it is, to a point).

Women are given no such leniency, justification or defense but are immediately scorned as shallow, self-serving & unscrupulous, even though we are acting on the same "genetic coding" that's ingrained in us. Our "genetic coding" just happens to be different from a man's priority drive (physical beauty & sex vs. security & stability) so it's looked upon as purposefully devious & underhanded (because men, for the most part, don't understand the differences in the priorities of the needs/drives of the sexes -many men just assume we're all the same).

Is that making sense? That was my whole point -I was addressing the men in saying, Guys, just because a woman's natural desire/genetic coding for security is not your same natural genetic coding for physical attraction & sex, doesn't mean it's any different of a natural drive & therefore acted upon just like your drive compels you. That being said, if a woman is acting on her natural genetic coding (seeking out a priority of security), you cannot lambaste her for following her genetic coding & simultaneously let yourselves off the hook for doing the same exact thing when you seek out beauty/sex, even though what you, as the man, are seeking out, is different. It's the same natural response to an ingrained need/drive. A woman's ingrained needs/drives are simply different than a mans.

That was all I was saying, don't judge one gender and justify the other when they are doing the same thing (pursuit of a mate/partner/person) but with different targets (either sex or stability) in the crosshairs.


Did that make sense? That is the most succinct way I can think to sum up the point. Different need, same drive. Same natural pursuit but for different targets.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Russ H]

Late to the party as usual.

I did not see the original post but read Runum's summary. As I started reading from post to post I saw nothing wrong with what OP had written. Are we saying that we never take into account the financial potential of a future partner?

Have you seen this chart? It's from a dating site called OkCupid. Notice the nice column of green indicating that an overwhelming majority of men making $100k+ get more messages from females.

View attachment 2226

Are gold diggers, stealth gold diggers?? Both parties know exactly what's going on.

The guy I bought my Benz from was 68. He clearly had alot of money. He also had a couple 18-22 year old girlfriends in multiple homes. In fact purchasing the car was an interesting day. First I signed the papers at his home where he had to call upstairs to let GF1 know that he had company so presumably she didn't come downstairs inappropriately. Then on the way to the dealership GF2 called and couldn't make rent so we stopped at the bank where he deposited $1200 into her checking account, and he didn't even know her last name. It was funny watching the teller ask him if the name was correct and he didn't know.

He told me that these girls would call him whenever they needed help and in return, well you know. I'm sure these girls understood the arrangement too.

My experience with the other side. I know a few wealthy single women and I fear that they would meet gold digger guys. We know that they are out there too.

One girl told me that if she loves a person, her money is his money. The day that they get married all the money is joined. What brought up this conversation is that her ex-boyfriend was getting pissed because he paid for almost all the dates and dinners when they were dating. I agreed with the guy and said that the girl should pay sometimes.

She could not understand why. I think she was looking at that actual dollar amounts, not the representation of the money. She told me that he got mad because he's paying $40 a meal or $20 for movies. But in her mind, the day they get married he basically gets her millions of dollars, so why would he sweat the small amounts.

Anyway, I know I'm rambling a little, its 2am. I may have to reread this and edit it in the morning.

Just my 2 cents.

Wow, I wish I could write as well at 10 am as you do at 2am-- lots of amazing insights.

I am enjoying this thread, but it took me a while to figure out why:

1. Why is it that the "troll" threads bring out the best/beast in all of us? I think it's b/c they stir up strong feelings. And b/c they take us out of our comfort zones/things we talk about every day. I also think it's b/c these feelings and discussions cover things that are important to us-- at our core-- but we don't necessarily talk about here w/each other.

2. I feel, in many ways, like this whole community is one of friends. It's more than respect-- there is a familiarity here amongst many of the posters. I "know" more about many of you than I do friends I've known for decades. And I think that's the reason I wind up pushing and challenging closely held beliefs in threads like this-- as an old fart (me), I have the benefit of hindsight. I know that I was an insensitive dweeb in my 20s-- I was still trying to sort out the whole "how to be an adult" thing (as well as the girl thing). I'm still sorting all of that out-- but I can pass on what I've learned-- or the things that I see now, that I didn't see back then.

3. There are times when this thread almost gets too painful for me, or others. So why do I keep on going/pushing? It's because I have faith in the strength of our relationships w/each other. And because I know that growth-- real growth, or becoming aware of parts of yourself you've never seen-- can be incredibly painful. But these epiphanies make you a better person-- they make you more self-aware.

Back in the day (the 90s and early 00's), I was on top of my game in a fairly small industry. As a celeb of sorts, I was accustomed to lots of people deferring to me-- I pretty much took it for granted. So it was the times that someone actually called me on my sh*t that I remember most. In most cases, they were gentle-- almost hesitant-- to tell me about some fatal flaw I had. In most cases, I was at first disbelieving (ie, I thought the other person telling me was full of sh*t).

But as I thought about it, I realized that if others saw me that way-- that I *was* in fact that way, even if I didn't feel that way myself.

Example: I am a know-it-all (big surprise). But I had no idea this was a personality trait of mine, until someone I cared about and valued told me. I was flabbergasted (I know, hard to believe, right?). But I'd just never seen myself this way.

Other character traits my friends shared w/me over the years, that took me by surprise and forced me to see myself as not the guy I thought I was: Being conceited, elitist, pompous, and (big surprise) prejudiced/ intolerant.

Mind you-- this feedback was coming from people I knew, loved, and trusted. I valued their opinions/thoughts.

Had it come from someone I did not respect, I would not have given this much thought.

So if any of you have been hurt by my points or observations (or challenges), that is not and was not my intent.

I'm trying to show you that others may see you differently, based on your comments, than how you see yourself.

And that, for me, is one of the great reasons for a forum like this:

To learn more about who you are.

-Russ H.

 

[wallstreet]

ok, I lied about being out. Here is my final post of trying to lay out my point. I've been able to settle down, collect my thoughts and articulate what is being missed by the masses...


******************************************


Men generally place a high value on physical beauty & sex in their hierarchy of needs/wants (security & stability typically fall lower on their list of priorities).

Women generally place a high value security & stability in their hierarchy of needs/wants (physical beauty & sex typically fall lower on their list of priorities).



Many men are willing to seek out a woman based on the pretense of physical beauty & see what develops from there (or, sometimes, just outright use someone for it).

Many women are willing to seek out a man based on the pretense of financial security & stability & see what develops from there (or, sometimes, just outright use someone for it).



Many men explain/justify their actions as "it's just the way I'm wired, it's natural/genetic coding/etc" (which it is, to a point).

Women are given no such leniency, justification or defense but are immediately scorned as shallow, self-serving & unscrupulous, even though we are acting on the same "genetic coding" that's ingrained in us. Our "genetic coding" just happens to be different from a man's priority drive (physical beauty & sex vs. security & stability) so it's looked upon as purposefully devious & underhanded (because men, for the most part, don't understand the differences in the priorities of the needs/drives of the sexes -many men just assume we're all the same).

Is that making sense? That was my whole point -I was addressing the men in saying, Guys, just because a woman's natural desire/genetic coding for security is not your same natural genetic coding for physical attraction & sex, doesn't mean it's any different of a natural drive & therefore acted upon just like your drive compels you. That being said, if a woman is acting on her natural genetic coding (seeking out a priority of security), you cannot lambaste her for following her genetic coding & simultaneously let yourselves off the hook for doing the same exact thing when you seek out beauty/sex, even though what you, as the man, are seeking out, is different. It's the same natural response to an ingrained need/drive. A woman's ingrained needs/drives are simply different than a mans.

That was all I was saying, don't judge one gender and justify the other when they are doing the same thing (pursuit of a mate/partner/person) but with different targets (either sex or stability) in the crosshairs.


Did that make sense? That is the most succinct way I can think to sum up the point. Different need, same drive. Same natural pursuit but for different targets.

I understand your point, however I still have to disagree. You state these "trades" as some kind of equvilant exchange when they are clearly not. Gold diggers aren't worth much in value by todays standards and their assets are depreciating while the mans assets are appreciating. A gold diggers "trade" is their sexual value for the man's "wealth providing" value. The womens sexual value is based on her Net Beauty which = (Genetic beauty + cosmetic enhancemensts- age) and her sexual rarity aka sexual purity. The latter is usualy non-impressive and it ends up being based purely on looks.

If you think sexual rarity is a myth just think about how much some guys would pay for a hooker compared to sleep with a virgin.

Now when we consider that there are more women than men on the planet, gold diggers are a dime a dozen and high value men are scare and rare it becomes apparent this trade is basiclly snake oil.

The gold digger is demonized because she's putting a outrageous premium on something that isn't worth much yet stating it is.

 

[Russ H]

Now when we consider that there are more women than men on the planet, gold diggers are a dime a dozen and high value men are scare and rare it becomes apparent this trade is basiclly snake oil.

Was so ludicrous it made me laugh out loud.

I understand your point about physical beauty being a depreciating asset (so is virility, BTW, that's why they invented Viagra).

And I also understand your point about wealth being an appreciating asset, if well managed.

But both wealth-- and beauty-- must be managed well to last, if only for a decade or two.

There is no guarantee the money will last.

There is no guarantee that beauty will last.

And neither money--nor beauty- is gender based.

While youthful beauty can be extended (Cher and Madonna being female examples that come to mind), it is true: People get old.

I'm guessing that the 20-somethings here can't picture older women being sexy, so for them youth is the only time where this sexual beauty exists, in their eyes.

It may surprise the young bucks here to know that as YOU get older, your tastes may change. You may actually find older women sexier than younger ones.

Hard to believe, I know. And with such great role models as Hugh Hefner and Donald Trump, I'm certainly not going to debate this topic. All I'll say is-- you might be surprised.

My opinion only: The guys here (esp those under 33) who honestly think that women are just going after them for money or their exotic car are heavily deluded. For every reality-TV drunk maiden out there who thinks Kim Kardashian is her role model, or seeks to be the ultimate gold-digger, there are others who are much more interested in establishing a long-term, lasting relationship based on something more than sex. Or money.

At least that's been my experience. I've never flaunted my car, or my $$$, so I haven't met those kinds of ladies.

Never really wanted to.

I think the most disheartening thing about this discussion is just how many guys here think that women are just after money. Correction: That all *hot* looking women are just after money.

Ain't true.

Maybe it's b/c I live in the Bay Area, where, in order to make it out here, you need a 6 figure income, whether you're a man or a woman. So women out here are not all that impressed by a guy with a big
. . .er . . wallet.

Or maybe its' b/c I like to hang around other business-minded women, who roll their eyes and laugh at these sexist views. Because none of *their* girl friends are sitting at home, watching reality TV, either.

They're making money. Getting wealthy.

And many of them are also raising families.

-Russ H.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Anon3587x]

I'm telling you fellas the more makeup the more stupid, I like natural beauties.

I am pretty well known for telling girls who think they are hot shit they need to stop acting like their shit don't stink and get over themselves.

Just gotta keep it real. Beauty only goes so far

lol

 

[biophase]

I understand your point, however I still have to disagree. You state these "trades" as some kind of equvilant exchange when they are clearly not.

I don't know how you can say that it's not an equivalent exchange. If what you say is true then all the rich men who are dating gold diggers are getting ripped off. If that is true, is it not the woman that is the smarter one?

What happens when the woman becomes unattractive? The man leaves for a more attractive woman.
What happens when the man becomes broke? The woman leaves for a more wealth man.

Remember your assumption as that a man who is wealthy gets wealthier as he ages, but this is not the case. Just as your assumption that women get more unattractive as they age. Neither of these are true statements.