Women Dating For Money

[gregb]

What I find truly interesting about all the opinions on whether or not women are only interested in men with money is that very few people even try to take an objective view. There have been so many studies over the years which show that both men and women will state one thing about what they want in a mate, but when presented with choices in a study designed to test this, almost invariably fall back on the old clichés. Men want physical beauty, women want financial security. You can not trust what anyone says when they talk about what they are looking for in a mate.

The recent study by Nettle and Pollet in 2008 (Natural Selection on Male Wealth in Humans) is probably the most recent and thought provoking of these studies. They basically found that throughout history and across all cultures, including modern day England, there is a natural process that selects strongly for wealthy males (the effect so strong that it easily cancels out the tendency of educated men to have fewer children.) At the same time, the mate selection process strongly favors low income females. This is not difficult to understand either, as men are basically not concerned with their partner's wealth, and tend to choose physical attractiveness instead. Since there is a larger pool of attractive poor women than attractive wealthy ones, you get a negative bias towards wealth.

One inescapable truth is that women always have, and still do, favor men with money. If you show a group of women (this study was also conducted in England) the same man sitting in an expensive car, and then later show him sitting in a rusting, used car,(this has to be done in such a way that the women forget the previous picture) study after study shows the women rate the same man as more attractive when sitting in the expensive car. This is biology at work. The cues being acted upon are not conscious, and we don't even know we are acting upon them when making judgements. But the bias is there.

When I hear men complaining all women want is money, or women complaining all men want is youth and beauty, each forlorn that nobody tries to make judgements on their preferred set of factors, I just have to shake my head. Accept reality. Women will be attracted to wealth, and men will be attracted to beauty. (That doesn't mean this is the only point of attraction, just that it is one that is easily tested for and is highly weighted.) This bias will remain throughout the relationship. The real challenge in a relationship is to make sure that whoever you choose as your partner is also your best friend, so that even if these factors should change, the sense of loss over losing your partner is so great as to render the relatively shallow bias regarding mate selection unimportant.

This is true in every culture. Thailand is no different from England or the USA when people leave their personal biases at the door and conduct blind studies. So yes, women date for money. Some more than others, but most women do it to some degree. There is no point in complaining about a simple, biological fact of life. I don't like the fact that I need to sleep a third of my life either, but it is hardly worth my time to complain about it.

[BangkokHank]

Brilliant, GregB!

Your post provided the missing link to fill the gap in my thinking: namely, evidence of a disparity between (the usually politically correct version of) what people SAY they want - and what they really choose.

In the end, reality is reality - and my life got a whole lot better when I recognized that it is cash that women seek in a man rather than character, intelligence, bla bla bla. If I had known this when I was younger, I would have been married - divorced - and lost half of my assets by now. On second thought, perhaps it's better that I didn't realize this until recently.

[MAJIC]

So they might not be surprised to learn that researchers reckon a housewife's work is worth £30,000 a year.

They broke down the costs according to the average wages paid to professionals for tasks such as getting children dressed and ready for school, feeding them, helping with homework and getting them ready for bed.

A nanny working the same hours would earn £36.40, based on an average hourly wage of £8.

And adding up the value of tasks that would be carried out by chambermaids, accountants, chefs and mystery shoppers, the study came up with a total of £29,771.56 - several thousand above the national average wage.

Read more: http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz1EeW3oNRJ

This silly calculation,has been going the rounds for several decades!

If this is fact ? then all I can say is the partner who goes to work, is getting a raw deal struggling to achieve a £30,000 salary in most cases,and much less in the majority of cases.

So you are correct, it is above the National Avererage,thats what makes it silly,and grossly over calculated.

Edited February 23, 2011 by MAJIC

[ELCata]

£30 000 per year is a very generous salary in the UK. Apparently £25 000 is the average, but I don't know where they get that from either. A starting wage for a teacher, social worker, nurse or policeman is less than the average wage. How much is an immigrant Polish / Filipino 'au pair' paid per year? I know first hand that nursery nurses / cleaners are paid the minimum wage.

Also, what about the unpaid jobs that men do? How much would an 'on call' Gardiner, Electrician, Plumber, Painter & Decorator, Taxi driver etc be paid a year? About £100 000 I suspect.

On a more serious note, men in the UK, especially working class men, have lost their 'raison d'etre' as the main provider. The state has now become the provider for women (with children) who would otherwise be 'forced' to form a relationship with a man in order to provide for them; note the high suicide rate of men aged 18-24 in the UK.

The irony is that most taxpayers are men, who are de-facto paying for the upbringing of societies children, without the sexual / emotional benefits of a relationship.

Women have been allowed to enter the larger 'workforce', resulting in a large inflow of workers into the economy, thus depressing wages; fact not sexism. I sometimes wonder if feminism, driven by a militant minority, has somehow backfired; resulting in both men & women having a lower standard of living & 'happiness'.

[sbk]

I repeat. Guys who find themselves with women solely after their money need to take a good hard look at themselves as to why they can't find any other women rather than assume all women are the same. last I heard there are about 3.5 billion women on the planet and somehow I doubt they are all exactly the same.

[SantiSuk]

As I think I said in a previous thread, money cannot buy you love but in my experience it certainly does increase the size of the available interested population from which you can start your quest! And no, I do not find that all women only want me for my money (though some find it an added bonus) and I'm pretty sure I am not a controlling asshol_e.

Personally I find having a lot of money absolutely great and most of the guff that people speak about rich men to be just that - guff!

[Boo]

the op asked for views of the women posters to comment on the premise that so many men on thaivisa like to categorically state that ALL women are only after money. the point of the thread was to disprove these bitter rants against women & how they are having to "pay for it" all the time.

I think the replies from the women so far have proven that this isn't the case. what other women do is up to them, the fact remains that not ALL women are looking for a wallet.

[Boo]

£30 000 per year is a very generous salary in the UK.

the study was not to comment on how generous the salary was but a reflection of the amount & range of work a stay at home parent will normally do in the course of a year. it has nothing to do with what teachers are paid & all to do with how much a cleaner, cook, chilminder & housekeeper would cost to employ for the same amount of work.

[tonititan]

the op asked for views of the women posters to comment on the premise that so many men on thaivisa like to categorically state that ALL women are only after money. the point of the thread was to disprove these bitter rants against women & how they are having to "pay for it" all the time.

I think the replies from the women so far have proven that this isn't the case. what other women do is up to them, the fact remains that not ALL women are looking for a wallet.

Yeah, and I'm not going to waste my time arguing with guys who are still convinced that it's true. They are welcome to go find the girls who do only want money. I know what important to me.

You're right - I wanted to hear from other women, so I appreciate the ladies who have taken the time to reply.

[sbk]

Could have told you from the start, but we all live and learn

Neither one of my sisters married for money, in fact, both are the major earners in their families but neither they nor their partners have an issue with that.

[canadiangirl]

I've been on a lot of dates with guys where they drone on and on about their money, their cars, their whatever, in the hope of impressing me. If you're interested, like me, in having an equal, loving partner, and not some daddy moneybags, that s* is boring as hell and does the opposite of impressing me: it makes me think a guy has nothing else to offer than money and is insecure about himself. A golddigger would see things differently, I'm sure.

[Wallaby]

Could have told you from the start, but we all live and learn

Neither one of my sisters married for money, in fact, both are the major earners in their families but neither they nor their partners have an issue with that.

Ask them again when they get divorced and find the 'poorer' guy gets the lions share.

[sbk]

Could have told you from the start, but we all live and learn

Neither one of my sisters married for money, in fact, both are the major earners in their families but neither they nor their partners have an issue with that.

Ask them again when they get divorced and find the 'poorer' guy gets the lions share.

Well that can't happen can it Wallaby, because if you believe what all the men here tell you, she will get what little pittance remains of his money

But, all joking aside, no I don't see the older sister getting divorced after some 30 years happily married and the other sister has kept her major assets separate after her first husband snorted all her money up his nose--live and learn. No, the issues I was referring to were relationship issues given that they make more money. Both of them are with men secure enough in themselves that its not an issue.

[BangkokHank]

I suppose our local ladies will suggest that this article should read "...except for the case of farang women in Bangkok."

http://www.dailymail...ds-careers.html

Women 'want rich husbands, not careers': New survey claims drive for gender equality is a myth

By Eleanor Harding

Last updated at 11:05 AM on 4th January 2011

• Comments (156)
• Add to My Stories

Marrying up: European women still aspire to wedding financially successful men, a report has claimed

Woman still want to 'marry up' and naturally choose husbands who earn more than themselves, a report suggests.

The idea of most women wanting to be financially independent is a myth, according to Catherine Hakim of the London School of Economics.

Despite years of equality campaigning, more women are choosing to marry wealthy men than in the 1940s, the expert claims.

In her report, published by the Centre for Policy Studies think tank, she suggests men dominate the top positions because women simply do not want careers in business.

She criticised David Cameron for backing the idea of quotas to ensure that leading companies appointed more women to their boards.

'Women's aspiration to marry up, if they can, to a man who is better-educated and higher-earning persists in most European countries,' she said. 'Women thereby continue to use marriage as an alternative or supplement to their employment careers.'

The research, which drew on existing data drawn from Britain and Spain, showed that 20 per cent of British women married husbands with a significantly better education than their own in 1949.

By the 1990s, the percentage of women deciding to 'marry up' had climbed to 38 per cent – with a similar pattern repeated in the rest of Europe, the US and Australia.

The report concluded that equal roles in the family, where husband and wife shared employment, childcare and housework, was 'not the ideal sought by most couples'.

Dr Hakim added: 'It is thus not surprising that wives generally earn less than their husbands, and that most couples rationally decide that it makes sense for her to take on the larger share of child care, and to use most or all the parental leave allowance.' Her report also suggests that many women do not want to admit they want to be a housewife – even to their partners.

'It has become impossible to say, "I wouldn't mind being a housewife," she said.

'It is so politically incorrect that a lot of women don't want to admit it.'

The study comes after a series of measures announced by the Coalition intended to decrease the pay difference between women and men.

Working mother: Dr Hakim's report claims many women do not aspire to balancing a career with raising a family

Dr Hakim also accuses feminists of peddling a string of myths and manufacturing 'political ammunition for a war that has ended'.

She says: 'Women today have more choices than men, including real choices between a focus on family work and/or paid employment.

'Despite this, many politicians and feminists appear disappointed with the slow pace of change in women's attainment of top jobs.

Sex differences are treated as self-evident proof of widespread sex discrimination and sex-role stereotyping rather than the result of personal choices and preferences.

'Demands for further change rest on faulty assumptions and dated evidence. The latest research shows that most of the theories and ideas built up around gender equality in the last few decades are wrong.

'Despite feminist claims, the truth is that many men and women have different career aspirations, priorities, and life goals.

'Policy makers should therefore not expect the same job outcomes.'

The report is scathing about EU plans to offer pregnant women 20 weeks of maternity leave on full pay.

It says that so-called 'family-friendly' policies 'generally reduce gender equality in the workforce, rather than raising it'.

Critics argue that generous maternity provisions make employers wary of taking on women of childbearing age.

[sbk]

So because women are marrying men who make more money than they do that suggests that they dont' want a career or they only look for rich men? its her conclusion and not one based in any kind of survey data, if you actually read the article.

And forgive me my poor math skills here but can you also explain to me how 38% = all or even most?? Somehow, it seems to me to represent a bit more than 1/3. Which, as far as I am aware, is not a majority by any stretch of the imagination.

And all that proves is that 38% of those surveyed marry men who make more money than they do. The survey does not seem to include data about whether the wife is also working (just concludes from this number that they don't want to) or anything other than the fact that 38% marry men who make more money than they do.

[Boo]

yeah I wondered at the 38% mark too.

my bff is a stay at home mum with 3 kids whose husband earns more than double she did when she left work 7 years ago, the purchase & subsequent paying off of their first 2 properties enabling them to be mortgage free at 30 was from HER work bonuses & salary raises as she was at the time the main earner. That in turn allowed her to stay home with their kids. I have no doubt that if she had decided to carry on working she would be on a comparative level as her husband in earnings but it was a choice they made. Not many people in the world anywhere are as fortunate to have that choice but I think what a lot of men (posting on tv) don't understand is that for many women the reason high income males are not a major priority is because we have options & choices. A lot of women don't & therefore would probably look at money as an attraction but I would much rather WANT my partner for who he is rather than need him for WHAT he has. And that is a very important freedom I am incredibly grateful to have.

But anyway, as we are posting minor percentage as 100% fact......

Thirty-five percent of the people who use personal ads for dating are already married.

Conclusion: All married people use personal ads for dating

Percentage of Americans who say that God has spoken to them: 36%

Conclusion: All Americans say that god has spoken to them

Percentage of Americans that eat at McDonalds each day: 7%

Conclusion: All Americans eat Mcdonalds every day

Thirty percent of men said they would give up sex if it could mean they'd always have a full head of hair.

Conclusion: All men would rather have a full head of hair than sex.

[rockyysdt]

the op asked for views of the women posters to comment on the premise that so many men on thaivisa like to categorically state that ALL women are only after money. the point of the thread was to disprove these bitter rants against women & how they are having to "pay for it" all the time.

I think the replies from the women so far have proven that this isn't the case. what other women do is up to them, the fact remains that not ALL women are looking for a wallet.

Although there are many who do, to say that all women are attracted to men only for money is a gross generalization.

Since mankind's beginning there has been an attraction between men and women.

In general terms this facilitates the continuation of our species.

Since primordial time, generally speaking, women have been attracted to tall strong men with hunting prowess, who were capable of defending and supporting them during their vulnerable gestation and nurturing period in the wild.

Developed through natural selection over milenia, the characteristics a woman finds attractive in males continues, but earning capacity has replaced strength and hunting ability in our modern society.

Naturally women do fall in love, but generally speaking, a subconscious driver is to be attracted to a partner who is successful.

Unfortunately "madly in love" only lasts a couple of years, perhaps just enough time for the off spring to survive their most vulnerable stage in a cave man setting.

After this, either a deeper kind of love and mutual respect develops, or the couple eventually separate as seen in worldwide divorce rates.

Interestingly, the following is a list of a womans duties in marriage according to Buddhist writings.

1. To do domestic work (or to have it done) well in time,

2. To please the relatives of both her husband and herself by treating them with affection and by sending presents, messages, etc. to them,

3. To abstain even from thought of misconduct with another man,

4. To take good care of whatever has been earned by the husband, and

5. To have skill and zeal for whatever she may have to do.

Edited February 26, 2011 by rockyysdt

[ELCata]

And forgive me my poor math skills here but can you also explain to me how 38% = all or even most?? Somehow, it seems to me to represent a bit more than 1/3. Which, as far as I am aware, is not a majority by any stretch of the imagination.

And all that proves is that 38% of those surveyed marry men who make more money than they do. The survey does not seem to include data about whether the wife is also working (just concludes from this number that they don't want to) or anything other than the fact that 38% marry men who make more money than they do.

The results of the survey simply show that 38% of women surveyed in the 1990s express a preference for a partner with 'significantly better' education than their own, compared to 20% of women surveyed in 1949; nothing more, nothing less.

Leaving my disdain for survey data aside...this information was then filtered through the 'think tank' followed by the tiny brain of the Daily Mail (likely humanities educated) science correspondent, to be regurgitated as a big pile of speculative shit.

I could go off on one about the Daily Mail's horrendous record on science reporting, but I'm moving to Thailand next week & I don't want to get there in a bad mood.

[LaoPo]

.....OK...my post and I'm out of here....

Andrea Doucet

Professor; Author, 'Do Men Mother?'

Posted: February 25, 2011 02:47 PM

Women Breadwinners: Why We Must Be Sensitive to Our Slower-Moving Husbands

I belong to one of the couple types that Hanna Rosin described in her recent piece on breadwinner wives in Slate magazine -- the one where the "woman is a born workaholic and the man lives a slower pace." Although it is more complex than those labels, I have nevertheless lived a version of that story for about 20 years. I'm a professor, researcher and author; my husband is a naturopathic doctor/acupuncturist whose work schedule goes up and down depending on the economy. We have raised three children together (one is now 20, and the twins are 16 years old).

I have also spent 20 years researching and writing about the changing stories of breadwinning mothers and primary caregiving fathers (www.breadandrosesproject.ca).

So I read Rosin's piece with interest. This is an important issue that requires alternative viewpoints and good debate. I share Rosin's interest in understanding the current social and emotional geography of breadwinning wives. I like the way she points to asymmetries between statistics on women's rising earning power and some evidence of their preference for part-time work. Our approaches are different: hers is more on power dynamics between breadwinning wives and men; mine on the constantly shifting relations around work and care for breadwinning mothers and caregiving fathers.

But beyond this, I have two main responses to Rosin's piece: a concern about her "relationship survey" and surprise at her depiction of men.

The "Relationship Survey"

Full story:

http://www.huffingto...s_b_828285.html

LaoPo