Girlfriend Has Changed Her Mind On Every Important Issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

This. I was frugal when I was single and also now that I am married. Would not meet exacting standards for "hotness" because that costs a lot of money in just clothes and upkeep.

OP, you have a choice: high standards for what you consider feminity (costing you $$$ once you get married) or a frugal woman whose goal is to also save money. The two are not compatible.

The OP just said he dated a feminine woman who was frugal. But keep on preaching this drivel.

Women saying you need money to look good and feminine are either lying, nor feminine and lie to themselves, or lazy. I lived on a frigate budget of $30k I’m a major city when I was in school. I didn’t have a money for super fancy things or designer brands, but I had a good skincare regimen, worked out and ate healthy, and dressed nicely. You have no idea how taking good care of your skin, working out and eating healthy, and dressing nicely will make you look good and look feminine. My husband and I have a high HHI but I still never buy a bunch of designer clothes, handbags, or jewelry. Many traditional women are Christians and they don’t wear a ton of makeup or jewelry and still look feminine. I never had issues attracting men in my frugal days. Many women in low income areas still manage look feminine and attractive. Stop with the nonsense that you need a ton of money in order to take care of yourself or look feminine.

I grew up around traditional Christian women who know how to stretch a dollar and prioritize femininity and looking pretty and staying fit. They would all, absolutely and without exception, expect their boyfriend/fiance to pay for every date and would not offer to pay (one thing OP says bothered him about his ex). They would also expect to stay home and if their DH made $400k/year and bragged about having $2M put away, would expect a "showplace" home - and I don't just mean the purchase price, although that too (another thing OP says bothers him about his ex). They would spend a huge amount on decorating and making sure each kid has a themed bedroom and being in the right kind of car for their social circle (the particular make/model varies by region, but none are Hyundais). They might not all want a big rock, but a very good chunk of them do. The thing that's strange about OP's complaints is that the only thing that's objectively objectionable and that actually makes her look materialistic happened before he proposed, and didn't throw him off. Wanting to invest more in a house is not materialistic, especially since they're in their 30s and talking about kids right away. Wanting to stay home and raise kids is not materialistic. Disagreeing about a housing budget before you've even started looking is par for the course and usually gets sorted out by seeing what's on the market.

This board jumped to "OP's ex is a terrible materialistic whore" but actually she seems to be exactly what he was asking her to be. Pretty, great in bed, traditional gender roles, wanted to marry him and stay home to raise his kids. Until he realized that it wasn't just "I'll be fine with a SAHM in the vague future" and it was on the verge really happening. He'd actually have to spend the money he says he's been saving for just this purpose, pretty soon. And the idea of doing that freaked him out so much, he asked for premarital counseling and then the ring back in what, a 6 hour interval?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

This. I was frugal when I was single and also now that I am married. Would not meet exacting standards for "hotness" because that costs a lot of money in just clothes and upkeep.

OP, you have a choice: high standards for what you consider feminity (costing you $$$ once you get married) or a frugal woman whose goal is to also save money. The two are not compatible.

The OP just said he dated a feminine woman who was frugal. But keep on preaching this drivel.

So he found the ideal type of woman and is not currently with her. Why? OP should think about this.

My initial observation was that he seemed more compatible with the previous ex as well but OP didn't delve into too much details other than she looked amazing and was thrifty.

OP did talk about her. He said they dated for two year and he planned to marry her. She tried to make herself want kids because that’s what her family was pushing, but she decided she didn’t want to have kids. OP does want kids and things ended. He said she is married to a guy who doesn’t want kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

OP here. I’m fine with this. I’ve dated feminine women who were frugal. You don’t need an expensive budget to take look good. I live frugal because I wanted a good future for myself and to provide a comfortable lifestyle for my future wife and kids, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to live frugal forever. We will have a budget like any family and consult each other on major purchases, but we do not have to live by a strict budget.

At what point in your life do you plan to stop living frugally?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he found the ideal type of woman and is not currently with her. Why? OP should think about this.

My initial observation was that he seemed more compatible with the previous ex as well but OP didn't delve into too much details other than she looked amazing and was thrifty.

OP did talk about her. He said they dated for two year and he planned to marry her. She tried to make herself want kids because that’s what her family was pushing, but she decided she didn’t want to have kids. OP does want kids and things ended. He said she is married to a guy who doesn’t want kids.

DP here. I don’t know why I am so invested in this thread but I agree that it sounded like the previous ex was more compatible except she didn’t want kids. Based on what OP has said about his parents marriage and growing up, he is looking for someone that wants to build with him. It doesn’t mean that they have to contribute the same amount or that they are locked into SAHM or WOHM but rather the discuss how they both work together to achieve whatever that goal might be. One of my relatives that is fairly wealthy now - she was the one that worked the job that had benefits until she had her second child while her DH worked the type of job that really helped to set the family up financially. I also have no doubt that she contributed to the down payment of their first home that was a very savvy investment. While I would never say that she is frugal, she doesn’t live beyond her means and is a partner in the combined goals with spouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women saying you need money to look good and feminine are either lying, nor feminine and lie to themselves, or lazy. I lived on a frigate budget of $30k I’m a major city when I was in school. I didn’t have a money for super fancy things or designer brands, but I had a good skincare regimen, worked out and ate healthy, and dressed nicely. You have no idea how taking good care of your skin, working out and eating healthy, and dressing nicely will make you look good and look feminine. My husband and I have a high HHI but I still never buy a bunch of designer clothes, handbags, or jewelry. Many traditional women are Christians and they don’t wear a ton of makeup or jewelry and still look feminine. I never had issues attracting men in my frugal days. Many women in low income areas still manage look feminine and attractive. Stop with the nonsense that you need a ton of money in order to take care of yourself or look feminine.

Were you as frugal as OP though? Did you save 50-90% of your budget?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I read the description of the ex I think she has Borderline Personality Disorder or is simply one of the smartest women around. Men want women to be pretty and lavish with sex, praise, and attention, and logistical life support. Most women who earn a decent living are unwilling to expend that much of their energy to construct and maintain the "femininity" that keeps husbands happy. Men stay because they don't want to lose joint resources or access to their kids. Few actually prefer equality. OP, your ex will find someone new and it won't take long because women like her are increasingly rare. She knows her value to men like you.

I don't know about the UMC white collar men you know, but the ones I know prefer driven women with thriving careers who can be their intellectual equal.

At no point did I say that there is any conflict between being attractive and sensuous and being a driven person who is an intellectual equal. What most men prefer is a woman who is pretty, lavish with sex and attention AND will have a decent career AND will do the lion's share of the management of housekeeping and childcare. That is why so many women on DCUM are so bitterly disappointed after marriage. Their husbands object to them becoming less physically attractive or agreeable AND expect them to do more with the kids and arounds the house EVEN IF the wives work longer hours or earn more. My point was that OP was hooked by his fiancée because she was the rare professionally vital woman who was willing to present herself as the fantasy of many men: a woman who likes looking pretty for her partner, having sex with her partner, and hanging on his every word. That is exactly what many men desire, whether she works at the Supreme Court or at Target. A woman who obtained a degree from a prestigious university AND is willing to cater to him: even better. I am sorry that men are this way, but most actually are. Women initiate the majority of divorces because they learn this fundamental truth too late.

[Anonymous]

The idea that "looking feminine" requires a lot of money is just bonkers. When I was an intern making 25K I still looked feminine- I had long, thick hair and an hourglass figure. All I needed was some mascara and tinted sunscreen.

Do you all mean it takes more money as you get older to maintain your looks? Because that is absolutely true. But when you are in your 20s and 30s-no. Unless you think women can't "look feminine" without designer bags and shoes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

This. I was frugal when I was single and also now that I am married. Would not meet exacting standards for "hotness" because that costs a lot of money in just clothes and upkeep.

OP, you have a choice: high standards for what you consider feminity (costing you $$$ once you get married) or a frugal woman whose goal is to also save money. The two are not compatible.

The OP just said he dated a feminine woman who was frugal. But keep on preaching this drivel.

Women saying you need money to look good and feminine are either lying, nor feminine and lie to themselves, or lazy. I lived on a frigate budget of $30k I’m a major city when I was in school. I didn’t have a money for super fancy things or designer brands, but I had a good skincare regimen, worked out and ate healthy, and dressed nicely. You have no idea how taking good care of your skin, working out and eating healthy, and dressing nicely will make you look good and look feminine. My husband and I have a high HHI but I still never buy a bunch of designer clothes, handbags, or jewelry. Many traditional women are Christians and they don’t wear a ton of makeup or jewelry and still look feminine. I never had issues attracting men in my frugal days. Many women in low income areas still manage look feminine and attractive. Stop with the nonsense that you need a ton of money in order to take care of yourself or look feminine.

I grew up around traditional Christian women who know how to stretch a dollar and prioritize femininity and looking pretty and staying fit. They would all, absolutely and without exception, expect their boyfriend/fiance to pay for every date and would not offer to pay (one thing OP says bothered him about his ex). They would also expect to stay home and if their DH made $400k/year and bragged about having $2M put away, would expect a "showplace" home - and I don't just mean the purchase price, although that too (another thing OP says bothers him about his ex). They would spend a huge amount on decorating and making sure each kid has a themed bedroom and being in the right kind of car for their social circle (the particular make/model varies by region, but none are Hyundais). They might not all want a big rock, but a very good chunk of them do. The thing that's strange about OP's complaints is that the only thing that's objectively objectionable and that actually makes her look materialistic happened before he proposed, and didn't throw him off. Wanting to invest more in a house is not materialistic, especially since they're in their 30s and talking about kids right away. Wanting to stay home and raise kids is not materialistic. Disagreeing about a housing budget before you've even started looking is par for the course and usually gets sorted out by seeing what's on the market.

This board jumped to "OP's ex is a terrible materialistic whore" but actually she seems to be exactly what he was asking her to be. Pretty, great in bed, traditional gender roles, wanted to marry him and stay home to raise his kids. Until he realized that it wasn't just "I'll be fine with a SAHM in the vague future" and it was on the verge really happening. He'd actually have to spend the money he says he's been saving for just this purpose, pretty soon. And the idea of doing that freaked him out so much, he asked for premarital counseling and then the ring back in what, a 6 hour interval?

+1 to all of this. This is a great post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

This. I was frugal when I was single and also now that I am married. Would not meet exacting standards for "hotness" because that costs a lot of money in just clothes and upkeep.

OP, you have a choice: high standards for what you consider feminity (costing you $$$ once you get married) or a frugal woman whose goal is to also save money. The two are not compatible.

The OP just said he dated a feminine woman who was frugal. But keep on preaching this drivel.

Women saying you need money to look good and feminine are either lying, nor feminine and lie to themselves, or lazy. I lived on a frigate budget of $30k I’m a major city when I was in school. I didn’t have a money for super fancy things or designer brands, but I had a good skincare regimen, worked out and ate healthy, and dressed nicely. You have no idea how taking good care of your skin, working out and eating healthy, and dressing nicely will make you look good and look feminine. My husband and I have a high HHI but I still never buy a bunch of designer clothes, handbags, or jewelry. Many traditional women are Christians and they don’t wear a ton of makeup or jewelry and still look feminine. I never had issues attracting men in my frugal days. Many women in low income areas still manage look feminine and attractive. Stop with the nonsense that you need a ton of money in order to take care of yourself or look feminine.

I grew up around traditional Christian women who know how to stretch a dollar and prioritize femininity and looking pretty and staying fit. They would all, absolutely and without exception, expect their boyfriend/fiance to pay for every date and would not offer to pay (one thing OP says bothered him about his ex). They would also expect to stay home and if their DH made $400k/year and bragged about having $2M put away, would expect a "showplace" home - and I don't just mean the purchase price, although that too (another thing OP says bothers him about his ex). They would spend a huge amount on decorating and making sure each kid has a themed bedroom and being in the right kind of car for their social circle (the particular make/model varies by region, but none are Hyundais). They might not all want a big rock, but a very good chunk of them do. The thing that's strange about OP's complaints is that the only thing that's objectively objectionable and that actually makes her look materialistic happened before he proposed, and didn't throw him off. Wanting to invest more in a house is not materialistic, especially since they're in their 30s and talking about kids right away. Wanting to stay home and raise kids is not materialistic. Disagreeing about a housing budget before you've even started looking is par for the course and usually gets sorted out by seeing what's on the market.

This board jumped to "OP's ex is a terrible materialistic whore" but actually she seems to be exactly what he was asking her to be. Pretty, great in bed, traditional gender roles, wanted to marry him and stay home to raise his kids. Until he realized that it wasn't just "I'll be fine with a SAHM in the vague future" and it was on the verge really happening. He'd actually have to spend the money he says he's been saving for just this purpose, pretty soon. And the idea of doing that freaked him out so much, he asked for premarital counseling and then the ring back in what, a 6 hour interval?

+1. It seems like OP wants to check off “get married” from his list of life goals, but isn’t actually ready to be married mentally or emotionally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

This. I was frugal when I was single and also now that I am married. Would not meet exacting standards for "hotness" because that costs a lot of money in just clothes and upkeep.

OP, you have a choice: high standards for what you consider feminity (costing you $$$ once you get married) or a frugal woman whose goal is to also save money. The two are not compatible.

The OP just said he dated a feminine woman who was frugal. But keep on preaching this drivel.

Women saying you need money to look good and feminine are either lying, nor feminine and lie to themselves, or lazy. I lived on a frigate budget of $30k I’m a major city when I was in school. I didn’t have a money for super fancy things or designer brands, but I had a good skincare regimen, worked out and ate healthy, and dressed nicely. You have no idea how taking good care of your skin, working out and eating healthy, and dressing nicely will make you look good and look feminine. My husband and I have a high HHI but I still never buy a bunch of designer clothes, handbags, or jewelry. Many traditional women are Christians and they don’t wear a ton of makeup or jewelry and still look feminine. I never had issues attracting men in my frugal days. Many women in low income areas still manage look feminine and attractive. Stop with the nonsense that you need a ton of money in order to take care of yourself or look feminine.

I grew up around traditional Christian women who know how to stretch a dollar and prioritize femininity and looking pretty and staying fit. They would all, absolutely and without exception, expect their boyfriend/fiance to pay for every date and would not offer to pay (one thing OP says bothered him about his ex). They would also expect to stay home and if their DH made $400k/year and bragged about having $2M put away, would expect a "showplace" home - and I don't just mean the purchase price, although that too (another thing OP says bothers him about his ex). They would spend a huge amount on decorating and making sure each kid has a themed bedroom and being in the right kind of car for their social circle (the particular make/model varies by region, but none are Hyundais). They might not all want a big rock, but a very good chunk of them do. The thing that's strange about OP's complaints is that the only thing that's objectively objectionable and that actually makes her look materialistic happened before he proposed, and didn't throw him off. Wanting to invest more in a house is not materialistic, especially since they're in their 30s and talking about kids right away. Wanting to stay home and raise kids is not materialistic. Disagreeing about a housing budget before you've even started looking is par for the course and usually gets sorted out by seeing what's on the market.

This board jumped to "OP's ex is a terrible materialistic whore" but actually she seems to be exactly what he was asking her to be. Pretty, great in bed, traditional gender roles, wanted to marry him and stay home to raise his kids. Until he realized that it wasn't just "I'll be fine with a SAHM in the vague future" and it was on the verge really happening. He'd actually have to spend the money he says he's been saving for just this purpose, pretty soon. And the idea of doing that freaked him out so much, he asked for premarital counseling and then the ring back in what, a 6 hour interval?

+1 to all of this. This is a great post.

This post isn't all that good. Way too many generalizations about 'traditional Christian women' that is based on poster's limited interaction which such women. I don't sense OP was asking her to be anything just herself. Don't all men want "pretty"-- whatever they interpret that to be, and great sex is a given. Financially they weren't compatible and that's a huge issue that shouldn't be dismissed. Do I think both OP and his ex-fiancee were trying to check a box in getting married, absolutely. They both were. Their peer group is in that phase and yes, the fiancee is operating under a much tighter time frame for having kids without using fertility treatments if that is what she truly wants. Do I think her wanting a big house is materialistic, not necessarily, but she didn't seem to have a realistic plan on how to afford it. Let me dump it on my all partner and eat up his savings, while I maintain mine is selfish. Now I know some of you think, oh but he had the means, not really. His salary alone won't cover a 2 million to 2.5 house without eating up his premarital savings and is a 7 bedroom house truly a necessity when you only plan on having 2 kids who aren't even born yet? Oh but the housing market in Arlington, Falls Church is going to be a "great investment"--nothing is a sure thing anymore and with rising inflation, hmmm, me thinks him going over his budget is a terrible idea. Fiancee agreed to counseling and then flaked. Oh but she is a pretty feminine girl and OP has to be aware that these type of girls are going to more expensive. I won't even touch that one with a 10 foot pole. And despite what DCUM women want to portend, everyone has to live within their means and have a budget that both parties can live with.

[Anonymous]

she sounds immature with unrealistic expectations more than anything else. but you really dont need and shouldnt want (nor likely cannot afford) a 5-6 bedroom first home in this area. it sounds like she wants you to take care of her? is that what you are looking for? couples therapy to work on communication might be one option? how is the wedding planning going?

[Anonymous]

above poster, having now read more of the post, op i think you can really learn and grow from this experience. you may not have seen some of the materialism/incompatibility issues because you met and dated during a pandemic climate? but you will likely be that much more aware going forward. i think you will ultimately end up with someone much better matched for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:she sounds immature with unrealistic expectations more than anything else. but you really dont need and shouldnt want (nor likely cannot afford) a 5-6 bedroom first home in this area. it sounds like she wants you to take care of her? is that what you are looking for? couples therapy to work on communication might be one option? how is the wedding planning going?

I don’t know where the fiancé was from. Did she live in a lower HCOL?

We live in a large house with 7 bedrooms now but we used to live in an apartment, townhouse and a 4 bedroom house.

I have 3 kids. Will they want to live in a big house like ours? Maybe. Maybe not. Will they be able to afford this type of house when they first get married? Definitely not.

Sounds like the OP got his ego bruised, asked to go to counseling and prematurely asked for his ring back. It didn’t sound like they got very far in the wedding planning process. I guess the problem was that OP actually has the money and told the fiancé about this money. Maybe next time don’t tell your girlfriend/fiancé that you have been saving millions to buy a house for his future family and freak out when you find the fiancé and she wants a nice house.

[Anonymous]

Pp again. Next time find someone who loves you for you and don’t mention how much you have saved. Many newlyweds are starting out and have starter homes. They have budgets. Almost everyone has to compromise. Many guys who are high income or rich are purposely vague about their money. I don’t know if you told her exactly how much you saved but that may have been your problem.

I have a friend who was dating this banker. He had excellent taste, dressed nicely and had a fancy title. When my friend got married to him and started their home search, the budget was 600k. They live in a lower COL city. I remember my friend telling me the budget and I thought it was low for a banker. They saw old houses and new construction townhouses. They ended up buying and moving into the townhouse. She wanted what your ex wanted. She wanted to stay home and raise the kids. She loved this man. They ended up divorced. My friended wanted a nice house in a good neighborhood. Who doesn’t? Her fiancé gave her a budget. My friend never knew exactly how much her husband earned.

Instead of thinking she is suddenly a materialistic gold digger, you could have reasoned with her. She may have been naive or immature about money. Point is don’t go around saying you saved $2m to spend on your future wife and family and then get all upset when the fiancé expects you to spend it on the house and her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To those speculating OP could never find a partner as frugal as him, I disagree. I was super frugal back when I was single. But there's no way I could have ever met OP's standards for femininity. None of the frugal women I know are feminine, and none of the feminine ones I know are frugal.

Note to OP: feminine women are more likely to want to be SAHMs, expect their husbands to cover major expenses such as housing, want to spend more money on jewelry/clothing/makeup/housing/home decor/personal grooming/etc. OP should adjust his expectations accordingly.

This. I was frugal when I was single and also now that I am married. Would not meet exacting standards for "hotness" because that costs a lot of money in just clothes and upkeep.

OP, you have a choice: high standards for what you consider feminity (costing you $$$ once you get married) or a frugal woman whose goal is to also save money. The two are not compatible.

The OP just said he dated a feminine woman who was frugal. But keep on preaching this drivel.

Women saying you need money to look good and feminine are either lying, nor feminine and lie to themselves, or lazy. I lived on a frigate budget of $30k I’m a major city when I was in school. I didn’t have a money for super fancy things or designer brands, but I had a good skincare regimen, worked out and ate healthy, and dressed nicely. You have no idea how taking good care of your skin, working out and eating healthy, and dressing nicely will make you look good and look feminine. My husband and I have a high HHI but I still never buy a bunch of designer clothes, handbags, or jewelry. Many traditional women are Christians and they don’t wear a ton of makeup or jewelry and still look feminine. I never had issues attracting men in my frugal days. Many women in low income areas still manage look feminine and attractive. Stop with the nonsense that you need a ton of money in order to take care of yourself or look feminine.

I grew up around traditional Christian women who know how to stretch a dollar and prioritize femininity and looking pretty and staying fit. They would all, absolutely and without exception, expect their boyfriend/fiance to pay for every date and would not offer to pay (one thing OP says bothered him about his ex). They would also expect to stay home and if their DH made $400k/year and bragged about having $2M put away, would expect a "showplace" home - and I don't just mean the purchase price, although that too (another thing OP says bothers him about his ex). They would spend a huge amount on decorating and making sure each kid has a themed bedroom and being in the right kind of car for their social circle (the particular make/model varies by region, but none are Hyundais). They might not all want a big rock, but a very good chunk of them do. The thing that's strange about OP's complaints is that the only thing that's objectively objectionable and that actually makes her look materialistic happened before he proposed, and didn't throw him off. Wanting to invest more in a house is not materialistic, especially since they're in their 30s and talking about kids right away. Wanting to stay home and raise kids is not materialistic. Disagreeing about a housing budget before you've even started looking is par for the course and usually gets sorted out by seeing what's on the market.

This board jumped to "OP's ex is a terrible materialistic whore" but actually she seems to be exactly what he was asking her to be. Pretty, great in bed, traditional gender roles, wanted to marry him and stay home to raise his kids. Until he realized that it wasn't just "I'll be fine with a SAHM in the vague future" and it was on the verge really happening. He'd actually have to spend the money he says he's been saving for just this purpose, pretty soon. And the idea of doing that freaked him out so much, he asked for premarital counseling and then the ring back in what, a 6 hour interval?

+1 to all of this. This is a great post.

This post isn't all that good. Way too many generalizations about 'traditional Christian women' that is based on poster's limited interaction which such women. I don't sense OP was asking her to be anything just herself. Don't all men want "pretty"-- whatever they interpret that to be, and great sex is a given. Financially they weren't compatible and that's a huge issue that shouldn't be dismissed. Do I think both OP and his ex-fiancee were trying to check a box in getting married, absolutely. They both were. Their peer group is in that phase and yes, the fiancee is operating under a much tighter time frame for having kids without using fertility treatments if that is what she truly wants. Do I think her wanting a big house is materialistic, not necessarily, but she didn't seem to have a realistic plan on how to afford it. Let me dump it on my all partner and eat up his savings, while I maintain mine is selfish. Now I know some of you think, oh but he had the means, not really. His salary alone won't cover a 2 million to 2.5 house without eating up his premarital savings and is a 7 bedroom house truly a necessity when you only plan on having 2 kids who aren't even born yet? Oh but the housing market in Arlington, Falls Church is going to be a "great investment"--nothing is a sure thing anymore and with rising inflation, hmmm, me thinks him going over his budget is a terrible idea. Fiancee agreed to counseling and then flaked. Oh but she is a pretty feminine girl and OP has to be aware that these type of girls are going to more expensive. I won't even touch that one with a 10 foot pole. And despite what DCUM women want to portend, everyone has to live within their means and have a budget that both parties can live with.

Honestly, it’s not that I think that they should buy a $2 million house. But having different budgets for a house before you start looking and having different time frames on when to start trying for children is *completely normal* and doesn’t mean that one person is a skinflint of that the other is a gold digger. Neither of these people have ever bought a house or had a child before. They don’t know what they are doing and need to figure it out together. The only thing that she said that was unusual was about the size of her friend’s ring. But she said that before they got engaged, and he still proposed.