Even the women marrying the older rich guy is not marrying solely for money. If they guy was abusive, a total jerk, etc. she probably would not marry him. The fact that he has money means she may be willing to compromise on other things (e.g. age, looks, etc.).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many (most?) women marry for money to a certain extent. There was a thread on here not too long ago about whether they had income requirements for someone they would marry. Most did. Few women on this board, for example, would marry someone whose ceiling is security guard at Walmart or french fry man at McDonalds. There is another thread on here about a husband who has not worked in a few years, most responses were to dump him with the quickness.

So there's a continuum from marrying an older rich guy to requiring your husband to at least have a job that could support a family. But the difference seems to be in degree, not kind.

I don’t agree. I think there is a difference between wanting the person to bring similar things that you bring to the relationship aka equal versus a trade/compromise or boxing. If an attractive person wanted to be with someone equally attractive or an employed person wants to be with someone equally employed no one bats an eye. Also, if it’s the thread I remember, most women said the guy had to be hard working and/or ambitious, and not a spend thrift, not that he had to make a specific amount. IRL a know a couple that met in high school at a job. They both went on to college and started a business together - doing quite well now but they met when they both made very little.

But why should the women care if the husband makes a similar amount as she does? She has an income/salary/income potential requirement, it's just not as high as someone trying to marry rich.
Even the women marrying the older rich guy is not marrying solely for money. If they guy was abusive, a total jerk, etc. she probably would not marry him. The fact that he has money means she may be willing to compromise on other things (e.g. age, looks, etc.).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many (most?) women marry for money to a certain extent. There was a thread on here not too long ago about whether they had income requirements for someone they would marry. Most did. Few women on this board, for example, would marry someone whose ceiling is security guard at Walmart or french fry man at McDonalds. There is another thread on here about a husband who has not worked in a few years, most responses were to dump him with the quickness.

So there's a continuum from marrying an older rich guy to requiring your husband to at least have a job that could support a family. But the difference seems to be in degree, not kind.

I don’t agree. I think there is a difference between wanting the person to bring similar things that you bring to the relationship aka equal versus a trade/compromise or boxing. If an attractive person wanted to be with someone equally attractive or an employed person wants to be with someone equally employed no one bats an eye. Also, if it’s the thread I remember, most women said the guy had to be hard working and/or ambitious, and not a spend thrift, not that he had to make a specific amount. IRL a know a couple that met in high school at a job. They both went on to college and started a business together - doing quite well now but they met when they both made very little.

Anonymous wrote:Well you aren't a genius that's for sure. The younger, sexy woman who wants to marry you for your money isn't going to think a pre-nup is a great return on her "investment."

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are really underestimating how emotionally attractive a powerful person can be to a female. I say “person” because girls/women also tend to kiss the evil queen bee’s ass.

Ps: I’m obviously generalizing.

-Female, not into older guys.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many (most?) women marry for money to a certain extent. There was a thread on here not too long ago about whether they had income requirements for someone they would marry. Most did. Few women on this board, for example, would marry someone whose ceiling is security guard at Walmart or french fry man at McDonalds. There is another thread on here about a husband who has not worked in a few years, most responses were to dump him with the quickness.

So there's a continuum from marrying an older rich guy to requiring your husband to at least have a job that could support a family. But the difference seems to be in degree, not kind.

I don’t agree. I think there is a difference between wanting the person to bring similar things that you bring to the relationship aka equal versus a trade/compromise or boxing. If an attractive person wanted to be with someone equally attractive or an employed person wants to be with someone equally employed no one bats an eye. Also, if it’s the thread I remember, most women said the guy had to be hard working and/or ambitious, and not a spend thrift, not that he had to make a specific amount. IRL a know a couple that met in high school at a job. They both went on to college and started a business together - doing quite well now but they met when they both made very little.

Anonymous wrote:Many (most?) women marry for money to a certain extent. There was a thread on here not too long ago about whether they had income requirements for someone they would marry. Most did. Few women on this board, for example, would marry someone whose ceiling is security guard at Walmart or french fry man at McDonalds. There is another thread on here about a husband who has not worked in a few years, most responses were to dump him with the quickness.

So there's a continuum from marrying an older rich guy to requiring your husband to at least have a job that could support a family. But the difference seems to be in degree, not kind.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone REALLY think Melania finds Trump physically attractive....men, even narcissistic wealthy old white men are not that stupid.