Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not gold digging to want to marry someone who can add to the stability you can already provide for yourself. At a certain point if you want to leverage your life and keep a lot of balls in the air it takes two people. Sure I can support myself and my kid on my FT income of $220K but I could have more kids and a higher quality of life for us all if I marry someone who makes the same or more. That’s just common sense. And also, what happens if one of you gets sick or disabled? Or life happens? As PP said, relying on one income is a stool with one leg.

OP here. This is my line of thinking as well. I am not a gold digger and I earn good money on my own. I want a partner who earns more than me to increase our stability, and provide flexibility for me to be the type
of mother I’d like to be. I make no judgements about those who choose to live differently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why “a man is not a plan” and marrying comfortable/well off are somehow mutually exclusive, or why marrying wealthy somehow means not also making money.

I would much rather my daughter have her career prospects widened and her stress level lowered by marrying a man with money than have to choose every job based on whether she can keep a roof over her head.

Money is a major factor in divorce and lower HHI corresponds to higher divorce rate. No one gives you a medal for marrying a poor partner and struggling and acting like people who marry wealthy don’t marry for love is ridiculous.

I'd rather my daughter be able to keep a roof over her head independently of a man.

She marry wealthy as well

Anonymous wrote:Anyone here marry a very well off man they met past the age of 28 who is also a truly nice guy. Or is the hope for this pretty much over if you didn't go to school together or something?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not gold digging to want to marry someone who can add to the stability you can already provide for yourself. At a certain point if you want to leverage your life and keep a lot of balls in the air it takes two people. Sure I can support myself and my kid on my FT income of $220K but I could have more kids and a higher quality of life for us all if I marry someone who makes the same or more. That’s just common sense. And also, what happens if one of you gets sick or disabled? Or life happens? As PP said, relying on one income is a stool with one leg.

OP here. This is my line of thinking as well. I am not a gold digger and I earn good money on my own. I want a partner who earns more than me to increase our stability, and provide flexibility for me to be the type
of mother I’d like to be. I make no judgements about those who choose to live differently.

Anonymous wrote:This kind of post really sets women back.

For the 100th time: a man is not a plan!!

Anonymous wrote:This kind of post really sets women back.

For the 100th time: a man is not a plan!!

Anonymous wrote:It’s not gold digging to want to marry someone who can add to the stability you can already provide for yourself. At a certain point if you want to leverage your life and keep a lot of balls in the air it takes two people. Sure I can support myself and my kid on my FT income of $220K but I could have more kids and a higher quality of life for us all if I marry someone who makes the same or more. That’s just common sense. And also, what happens if one of you gets sick or disabled? Or life happens? As PP said, relying on one income is a stool with one leg.

Anonymous wrote:It’s not gold digging to want to marry someone who can add to the stability you can already provide for yourself. At a certain point if you want to leverage your life and keep a lot of balls in the air it takes two people. Sure I can support myself and my kid on my FT income of $220K but I could have more kids and a higher quality of life for us all if I marry someone who makes the same or more. That’s just common sense. And also, what happens if one of you gets sick or disabled? Or life happens? As PP said, relying on one income is a stool with one leg.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone here marry a very well off man they met past the age of 28 who is also a truly nice guy. Or is the hope for this pretty much over if you didn't go to school together or something?

OP - guy here. just curious what your definition of well off is in term of income/assets?

Very well off is NW over $12-15.

Np.

Anonymous wrote:What is with the repeated threads in recent months about meeting and marrying wealthy people? Do that many of the posters on this site crave wealth and use it as a yardstick for measuring dates? Do people just hope to stop working as soon as possible in their lives and live off what a spouse brings to the marriage? How transactional and mercenary. Yeah, I'm judging and I own the fact I'm judging. It just screams "I want to be 'kept.'" And no amount of excuses like "But! I only desire for our kids to want for nothing!" or "I fear being poor because I was raised poor" or other supposed "reasons" could stop this thinking from being mercenary.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why “a man is not a plan” and marrying comfortable/well off are somehow mutually exclusive, or why marrying wealthy somehow means not also making money.

I would much rather my daughter have her career prospects widened and her stress level lowered by marrying a man with money than have to choose every job based on whether she can keep a roof over her head.

Money is a major factor in divorce and lower HHI corresponds to higher divorce rate. No one gives you a medal for marrying a poor partner and struggling and acting like people who marry wealthy don’t marry for love is ridiculous.

Yup. Relying solely on your income is a stool with one leg (for both partners).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know plenty of heterosexual nice guys who are nearing 40 who want to get married and have a family. They were working their butts off to make money in their younger years because they did not come from wealthy backgrounds.

Unfortunately, all they are getting are gold-diggers women without family values. So they are also stuck.

This is BS.

Do these men live in a bubble?

There are women where they work, women where they live. They have family, friends and acquaintances who know great women.

I guess the first red flag would be that a man chose to stay single until his 49s just because he wanted to " make money in his younger years". It tells you how important money is to him. He is just attracting female versions of himself.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why “a man is not a plan” and marrying comfortable/well off are somehow mutually exclusive, or why marrying wealthy somehow means not also making money.

I would much rather my daughter have her career prospects widened and her stress level lowered by marrying a man with money than have to choose every job based on whether she can keep a roof over her head.

Money is a major factor in divorce and lower HHI corresponds to higher divorce rate. No one gives you a medal for marrying a poor partner and struggling and acting like people who marry wealthy don’t marry for love is ridiculous.