why men don't chase rich women

Post Reply New Topic

^
Eureka, are you saying that all or most good looking/beautiful women are "bimbos" and at least potential gold diggers? If I'm misunderstanding something here would you care to elaborate as the post you quoted addressed mostly looks, not behaviour?

As far as I'm concerned, I never had any kind of interest into the "girl next door" stereotype, especially as a wife and I'm not alone in my preference. Fortunately, most women are far more diverse and faceted than "nice girls" and "bimbos" and none of my girlfriends or my wife would fit these labels.

It's still very confusing to me to see this subject represented in such extreme, black and white terms. Hell, I'm so grateful most people are actually much more complex and interesting than this! Life and especially love would be so drab and boring otherwise...

Sure, when you're very young and interested mostly in sex or casual relationships, you will most likely focus on looks, especially if you can choose.

As you grow older, at least if you had any experience, you figure quite quickly you might not want to spend the rest of your life with a beautiful imbecile, lust in itself doesn't last that long if it's not fuelled by other factors. So priories will change, and while most of us are still reacting to "hot" women, other things will take precedent over looks. If you're not completely inexperienced or out of touch with reality, by then you know that looks won't make or break a marriage and other factors will play a much bigger part in how a relationship endures.

So me saying that a lot of men don't go for looks is fueling gender war here?
Seriously, what's wrong with you?

It's you who's fueling gender war by categorizing women into two narrow groups.

Nope, I was wondering why you seem to keep pushing the gender stereotypes (your insistence on the paradigm of hypergamy, for example), if the part of your post that I quoted has been your experience.

My experience is that there is a bell curve of personality types for both men and women - a few who fit the extreme gender stereotype of each gender at the top end of the curve, and a few who fit the extreme anti-gender stereotype at the bottom end. The vast majority of everyone else falls somewhere in the middle, so anyone who believes that ALL members of a gender are somewhere at either extreme is, IMO, horribly misguided.

I don't think anyone can ever be happy in a relationship until a) they accept and love themselves for who they are, and b) they treat every other person as an individual and stop tarring them with the brush of bad past experiences.

YES, there are a few bad apples in both genders (the bimbos/golddiggers and playahs/PUAs), but until any given individual stops blaming his/her own bad luck with dating/love/relationships on gender stereotypes, that person is going to be miserable and alone. Period.

So the guy who's correct ("go out and get to know some real human beings") is answered incorrectly by the guy citing a study.

Certified woman who turned down a real live millionaire speaking: Hale_Bopp et al, you have no idea what you're talking about. I suggest meeting some actual women. Primary sources & all.

Did you miss the "all other things being equal" part? That means equal hotness, equal physical attractiveness.

What, women's intelligence and ability to be educated don't affect the intelligence or ability to be educated of their children? Men's physical hotness doesn't affect the physical hotness of his children?

Two points: one, men's genes don't get passed on if the kids die before producing grandkids, either. Second, in the ancestral environment, excluding only the last few hundred years, nobody lived much beyond 40, including men. They had a ticking clock, too.

Wait, now we're talking about wealth? I thought we were talking about intelligence and education.

If she's ugly (say, 50 lbs overweight) but young and healthy, you might find that the decision matrices are actually pretty similar.
Likewise, the decision's going to be different if the woman already has kids, or if she doesn't; she might choose a wealthy old curmudgeon if she's already had kids and doesn't want any more, but she's less likely to go for him if she doesn't have kids, and wants them.

In any case, very few people are going to marry someone of any gender, unless it's someone whom they feel that they can understand, and be understood by, and someone whom they can get along with at the end of the day. There's very little that's worse than hating the idea of going home because you can't stand the person there.


eyeahh, it's kind of funny how many people think that they know more about evolution than a trained biologist on this board. No matter how many popular science articles you read, it doesn't make men and women as different as you'd probably like to think.

Also, even if it were true that men are always and only ever concerned with "hotness" in a mate, how does that not count as a form of "hypergamy" as well?

^ because by definition, hypergamy doesn't include hotness, hotness can be hardly measured while wealth, age, education level, height are easily measured.

"Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as "marrying up") is the act or practice of marrying someone of higher caste or status than oneself.[1] Although the term is not gendered, it is generally used by social scientists to refer to women marrying higher-status men, rather than to men marrying higher-status women.[2]"

Hale_bopp is a certified woman too.

Then she's universalizing her view inappropriately. I work with many women whose careers are more successful than their husbands', and make more money. I make quite a bit more than my boyfriend does, a situation to which his ASness has no doubt contributed. That millionaire of mine also happened to be smart and goodlooking, and he had a swell mom, with whom I'm still friends 20 years later. I just didn't want to go live in his world, and he wasn't going to leave it.

Not all that many capable women are looking for save-me-protect-me-support-me men, partly because too many of those men rely on "Me big strong save lady" for a sense of identity and self-worth and status among other men, and get all dejected (and sometimes angry) if the woman demonstrably looks after herself and enjoys doing it. You ought to look into the notion of companionate marriage.

The other thing is that a really accomplished or successful woman isn't likely to have a lot of patience with men who don't bring much to the table in terms of energy, accomplishment (which doesn't necessarily mean money), interest in life, intelligence/curiosity, etc. Because he'll mostly get in her way. Same is true when high-powered men go shopping for wives: they want someone who'll improve their life, not be someone who has to have everything done for her. Rich men's wives are some of the most ferocious managers I know, really get s**t done.

More a quite bit doesn't really count, do some of your friends make a LOT than their men?



Well true, I didn't say they would be after traditional men.

.

Ok, now here when things can get blurry, unless the man has some .....great talent, and does non-lucrative painting, writing...etc or does a lot of humanitarian non lucrative activities (but those people are exceptional and rare), how else a man can demonstrate his accomplishments without being manifested by money?

That presumes, in the face of significant evidence to the contrary, that very attractive women do not enjoy higher social status than less attractive women.

by being a great dad.
by building and/or maintaining a house.
by filling a home with art or music.
by any of the other myriad ways humans demonstrate their humanity and human worth.

I did mention those in my post as people having "great values/achievements".






Any woman wanting to have children would want that in a husband, whether he's financially successful or not.

But again, stay at home dads are less than 1% in the most liberal countries, they are still largely not accepted by society.





Home improvement skills, that's typically manly roarr roarr. But few people are good at it.

Building a house? You are asking for an expert builder or a civil engineer.


But with no financial/career accomplishments, a man (especially with no artistic talent) has little maneuverability to stand out from the crowd. If he hasn't some talent, what other non-career values can he demonstrates? Hugs? Kisses? Caring? Being a personal shrink? Being a such Nice guy? duh. Back to real life.

If the "very attractive women" are born poor and got poor education, are they then really born with a higher social status just because of their great beauty? I bet they are more likely to suffer sexual harassment, mistreatment and bullying, and more likely to be forced/pushed into prostitution.


The "very attractive women with higher social status" you are referring to are typically of higher social status thanks to their higher social status men, their beauty makes it easier to climb the ladder of hypergamy, in other term, to get a man of a higher social status, It can be used as a mean to get a better social status (whether through a man or some career requiring beauty like modeling) but it is not a better social status itself.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 20 Jan 2014, 5:21 pm, edited 7 times in total.

You don't think that those are valuable things? Maybe I'm getting cynical with age, but a genuinely compassionate, kind, caring person of either gender seems rarer and rarer to me, and more valuable.

As for 'professional builder,' my next-door neighbor when I was a kid built the family home himself, and was far from a professional builder. AfaIk it was the first and only significant edifice he ever built.

A such one-time accomplishment doesn't much count, ok he built a house, this was a great accomplishment , but not necessarily a greater man.

If he became a lazy unemployed couch potato later then he wouldn't be better than any other lazy unemployed couch potato just because he built the house.




No offense, older women often tell me such things, yet most of them didn't pick a guy in their youth just for his kindness and caring personality.

Hey, dogs offer that!