Rich women only date rich men (Going to end up political)

[rgraham666]

I read this line a couple of days ago. And my first thought was, "That's right. They never go near men lower on the economic scale than themselves."

I also recalled that column of Maureen Dowd's several years ago, where she decried the shortage of suitable men. After reading it I noticed that she was limiting her search by keeping entirely within her economic class.

So, do you think this is the case? Do women only form intimate relationships with men at the same or higher level? And if so, why do you think this is the case?

(Wanders off to put on his asbestos underwear.)

 

[TheeGoatPig]

Well, I can only go by people I know, and people I see on TV. Most of the people I know are all in the same ecconomic situation anyway. So let us look at pop stars. There have been a great many that have fallen for their backup dancers, and they are decidedly below the singers as far as earnings go.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Generally speaking, women marry UP, men marry DOWN.

 

[Guest]

Generally speaking, women marry UP, men marry DOWN.

Which did you do?

 

[Liar]

K-fed.

But yeah, if we talk about averages, and exclude that there will of course be exceptions, there might be something to it. There's probably a habit for women, due to a few hundred generations of society norms, to look for the "provider" when searching for a partner, intentional or not. Same way, many men get uncomfortable in a relationship where they're not the "breadwinner".

 

[rgraham666]

Not sure celebs count, Thee. There aren't many of them and I'm not sure they can be used to draw a general conclusion.

Myself, I've rejoined that dating site recently. And they have a weekly gathering at a bar near where I live. And I've been going every week.

I've noticed that a barrier goes up between me and women I try to chat up the second I mention my financial situation. Due to my extreme poverty I'm pretty much at the bottom of the heap. And women lose interest when they realize this.

Shrugs. Their problem, not mine.

So again. Is this a general thing? And if so, why?

 

[shereads]

I think your premise is flawed here, Rob. If rich women only dated rich men, we would not have the word "gigolo."

Seriously, I'm sure there's classism in dating. But if there is a prejudice for rich men among women of the same economic status, it's equally true that some men feel threatened by women with incomes higher than their own. Could it be that some of these wealthy women have had learned from experience that it's less awkward to be involved with men who are able to fill the traditional "provider" role?

 

[cantdog]

Besides, there are always famous men.

 

[rgraham666]

I think your premise is flawed here, Rob. If rich women only dated rich men, we would not have the word "gigolo."

I'm not sure women use gigolos for anything other than getting off. They certainly don't mean to have them as permanent partners in their lives.

Besides, there are always famous men.

I think my objection to Thee applies here. Are there enough famous men forming relationships with famous women to form a conclusion?

 

[shereads]

It may have something to do with how you bring up the topic of your financial situation. If a woman senses that you're feeling defensive about it, or that you're expecting her to reject you, she's smart to cut her losses and move on before she gets involved in a mutually destructive relationship.

I have a number of women friends who are professionally and econimcally successful, and I can honestly say that when they avoid men who are less well off, it's not because the women care who picks up the tab for dinner. It's because the men care.

If a woman gets a promotion or a raise, she can tell her women friends - or her platonic male friends - without being concerned about how they'll take it. Telling her boyfriend or husband opens up a whole different can of worms. There are a few men who will be honestly and openly elated on the woman's behalf. Those men are the exception, and they are rare gems.

 

[Liar]

I've noticed that a barrier goes up between me and women I try to chat up the second I mention my financial situation. Due to my extreme poverty I'm pretty much at the bottom of the heap. And women lose interest when they realize this.

I remember someone else in a thread not too long ago, who had a similar problem when mentioning his unemployment.

So I ask what I asked him: is it your financial situation, or how/when/that you bring it up, that is off-putting?

I've been, from time to time, church rat poor. And I'm very far from wealthy right now. Can't see that it is a dealbreaker with ladies I meet. I guess it's partly because I don't make it or other less attractive traits of mine (and trust me, I have a handful) the centrepiece of my identity. Niether for how I view myself or what I project to the world.

 

[Liar]

I think your premise is flawed here, Rob. If rich women only dated rich men, we would not have the word "gigolo."

Isn't a gigolo a male whore? I don' think renting a piece of ass constitutes dating.

 

[shereads]

Ahem...

I think your premise is flawed here, Rob. If rich women only dated rich men, we would not have the word "gigolo."

Seriously, I'm sure there's classism in dating. But if there is a prejudice for rich men among women of the same economic status, it's equally true that some men feel threatened by women with incomes higher than their own. Could it be that some of these wealthy women have learned from experience that it's less awkward to be involved with men who are able to fill the traditional "provider" role?

 

[Oblimo]

Isn't a gigolo a male whore? I don' think renting a piece of ass constitutes dating.

There's also the "kept man," which still has negative connotations but less-so than "gigolo."

 

[Oblimo]

Oh, and I should say that my wife makes over 20K more a year than me, and I think it's wicked-awesome.

 

[TxRad]

There's my problem. I kept going for the love and not the money

 

[rgraham666]

It may have something to do with how you bring up the topic of your financial situation. If a woman senses that you're feeling defensive about it, or that you're expecting her to reject you, she's smart to cut her losses and move on before she gets involved in a mutually destructive relationship.

I have a number of women friends who are professionally and econimcally successful, and I can honestly say that when they avoid men who are less well off, it's not because the women care who picks up the tab for dinner. It's because the men care.

If a woman gets a promotion or a raise, she can tell her women friends - or her platonic male friends - without being concerned about how they'll take it. Telling her boyfriend or husband opens up a whole different can of worms. There are a few men who will be honestly and openly elated on the woman's behalf. Those men are the exception, and they are rare gems.

If I'm defensive it's at a spot where I can't recognize it. I've accepted that I'm going to be dirt poor for the rest of my life.

So my experience is that my economic status is a deal breaker.

In fairness there are others. What I write isn't something many women are going to think highly of. I smoke, which makes me outright evil in many people's eyes. Even my handle, Romantic Heretic, puts people off. We are a religious society for the most part and heresy isn't thought highly of.

But I'm not going to pretend to be anything else other than what I am. A relationship founded on falsehood isn't one that's going to last.

I can't understand why a man would be upset about the woman he cares about doing well with her life. I know why, many men's delicate egos get hurt when such things happen. But I don't understand it.

 

[ladydrace]

I'd say I've gone more for the 'mindfood' provider than in the economic sense. I married a guy who had even less money than myself (and I'm.. well.. poor), but I feel the richness of our relationship every day.

Yeah yeah, I know I'm a romantic sod...

 

[impressive]

So again. Is this a general thing? And if so, why?

Perhaps it's not entirely a financial consideration. A decent income and comfortable lifestyle can be construed as a sign of reliability. Plus, if someone is wealthy, they will always have a measure of concern about only being desired for their money. A financial equal mitigates that concern.

 

[shereads]

Sweetie, "dirt poor" sounds defensive.

Try saying you don't care much about money, or some such. There are ways, and there are other ways, to bring up the subject of money in a relationship. You sound a little bitter about it in this forum, and if that comes across face-to-face, it's bound to make some women worry that the bitterness could end up directed at them.

I've had to apologize for buying a sack of groceries for a live-in boyfriend who'd become unemployed. We had nothing to eat in the house, but he was angry when he found me putting groceries away that I had paid for. Talk about a no-win situation.

If I'm defensive it's at a spot where I can't recognize it. I've accepted that I'm going to be dirt poor for the rest of my life.

So my experience is that my economic status is a deal breaker.

In fairness there are others. What I write isn't something many women are going to think highly of. I smoke, which makes me outright evil in many people's eyes. Even my handle, Romantic Heretic, puts people off. We are a religious society for the most part and heresy isn't thought highly of.

But I'm not going to pretend to be anything else other than what I am. A relationship founded on falsehood isn't one that's going to last.

I can't understand why a man would be upset about the woman he cares about doing well with her life. I know why, many men's delicate egos get hurt when such things happen. But I don't understand it.

 

[rgraham666]

Perhaps it's not entirely a financial consideration. A decent income and comfortable lifestyle can be construed as a sign of reliability. Plus, if someone is wealthy, they will always have a measure of concern about only being desired for their money. A financial equal mitigates that concern.

I can understand that. I'm not the world's most reliable person.

I'm not sure I'd regard financial status as the same as reliability. There's lots of ways to make money. Some, many of the most successful ones in my opinion, require a very low standard of ethics.

A little story here.

I'd started work at a new place. There was one woman there who was the type, physically, to make me go Sproing! So I started chatting her up.

It became obvious I was going to get nowhere when she stated, "I won't go out with a man unless he makes $60K a year and drives a late model BMW or Mercedes." She wasn't joking.

"I know someone like that," I reply.

Her eyes light up. You can see the hope on her face.

"He's a pimp and a crack dealer," I go on.

For some reason she never spoke to me again.

Sweetie, "dirt poor" sounds defensive.

Try saying you don't care much about money, or some such. There are ways, and there are other ways, to bring up the subject of money in a relationship. You sound a little bitter about it in this forum, and if that comes across face-to-face, it's bound to make some women worry that the bitterness could end up directed at them.

I've had to apologize for buying a sack of groceries for a live-in boyfriend who'd become unemployed. We had nothing to eat in the house, but he was angry when he found me putting groceries away that I had paid for. Talk about a no-win situation.

I'll confess I am bitter. I'm smart and I worked hard. But I was always judged for the things I'm not rather than the things I am. Working on it.

But when I mention it in conversations, I'm light hearted about it. I think. Maybe I'll just leave money out of it in the future.

And I don't care that much about money. I believe a lot of people do though.

 

[cantdog]

I think my objection to Thee applies here. Are there enough famous men forming relationships with famous women to form a conclusion?

You miss my point. A famous man can be much less rich and still interest rich women. If they think you are immortal, you may as well be Midas.

 

[rgraham666]

You miss my point. A famous man can be much less rich and still interest rich women. If they think you are immortal, you may as well be Midas.

Ah. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[cantdog]

Ah. Thanks for the clarification.

Sure. But since we are now being serious here, consider human needs. Security is certainly one of those. Why shouldn't anyone look more hopefully on a potential partner if he or she can provide some? Not just women, but anyone?

If the potential partner can't help with security, then it's bound to be a negative. Not always a deal-breaker, but certainly not a plus. How the various factors line up is a function of the value system of the shopping... woman, in your case. The "over $60K" girl you spoke of was shallow. I think it's a good thing you found out she was, right off the bat.

 

[cantdog]

Sweetie, "dirt poor" sounds defensive.

Try saying you don't care much about money, or some such. There are ways, and there are other ways, to bring up the subject of money in a relationship. You sound a little bitter about it in this forum, and if that comes across face-to-face, it's bound to make some women worry that the bitterness could end up directed at them.

I've had to apologize for buying a sack of groceries for a live-in boyfriend who'd become unemployed. We had nothing to eat in the house, but he was angry when he found me putting groceries away that I had paid for. Talk about a no-win situation.

I've seen that. Asses.