Wanting a guy with both a good career & good looks considered having high standards?

[bubbletea]

I agree about the looks, but wanting both good looks/good career together first before anything else just seems odd to me.

 

If I work hard to get a decent paying job, I would expect my partner to have a similar status before combining finances or having to spend my life with them. It's a liability of someone does not have their finances in order. I have female relatives who went into debt, lost thousands of dollars due to their spouse being irresponsible with money. I don't want to spend my life scrounging for pennies or paying the entire way for 2 of us the rest of our lives.

 

I'm not incredibly choosy on looks, but finances is the #1 deal breaker to me. They don't have to make 100K a year, but I would expect they have a quite bit to spare each year. Saving for retirement, anybody??

Edited November 15, 2014 by bubbletea

[Got it]

Because she keeps saying things that don't make sense. And no she's never been married, but claims she wants someone with ambition & not just any job but an equal to her. But she never says what she herself does for a living. And I don't really even care about her situation much since I don't even know her, but I just wanted to know what others think about someone going after money/looks first & whether it was considered having high standards or being somewhat of a gold digger or not.

 

If she is looking equal to her's how is this gold digging? She isn't looking for someone to support her. She is just looking for equal.

 

I am not sure, while I would have other pieces factor in, financials and attractiveness would play a factor. The money does a great deal because a woman making more, especially substantially more, usually causes a lot of issues. There are few man that are comfortable with that especially progressing towards marriage.

 

I know if I was in the dating world this would be a major factor for me. When I was dating I wanted someone that was a professional, who would understand the responsibilities of my career and the obligations that come with it.

 

But, personality would be a major factor as well.

 

I don't know, how is this different than most men wanting a young looking attractive woman as a top priority when dating?

[eye of the storm]

I spent my entire marriage stressed about money. We never had enough and my H loved to spend. He never understood how many bills we had or why we couldn't go out to dinner whenever he wanted to.

 

So, if I were to ever hook my wagon to another man, finances and attitudes towards money are a HUGE consideration.

 

And who wants to date a person they don't find attractive?

 

And yes, NJ123, I would assume the man found me attractive or they wouldn't be dating me either. And they would know very quickly that finances are important to me and would either already be on board or would understand that I'm unwilling to have to go thru some of the financial stresses I have in the past and they can find someone else with more compatible views.

 

Now, is finances the only thing I look for in a partner? No. But is is on the list as one of my hard boundaries.

 

Money doesn't buy happiness. But dodging bill collectors and hocking your possessions to pay the light bill make even the "happiest" homes a stress filled nightmare.

[Got it]

I'm a high wage earner and dont have a problem being the heavy, as a lot of other guys I know are..It does surprise me though how many women feel like its a huge negative if a guy doesnt make much, or heaven forbid, any money at all...

 

With all the gender equality and modern feminism of today, you would think that these women wouldnt mind if the tables are reversed here, as guys have been financially carrying the load fpr eons...

 

TFY

 

I think women have had good reason to be wary of turning the tables and it has little to not being progressive or feminist. It has more to do with men being comfortable with it.

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/30/business/economy/women-as-family-breadwinner-on-the-rise-study-says.html?_r=0

 

"But the data on actual marriage and divorce rates suggests slightly different attitudes.

 

A recent working paper by economists at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and the National University of Singapore found that, in looking at the distribution of married couples by income of husband versus wife, there is a sharp drop-off in the number of couples in which the wife earns more than half of the household income. This suggests that the random woman and random man are much less likely to pair off if her income exceeds his, the paper says.

 

The economists also found that wives with a better education and stronger earning potential than their husbands are less likely to work. In other words, women are more likely to stay out of the work force if there is a big risk that they will make more than their husbands.

 

Perhaps even more tellingly, couples in which the wife earns more report less satisfaction with their marriage and higher rates of divorce. When the wife brings in more money, couples often revert to more stereotypical sex roles; in such cases, wives typically take on a larger share of household work and child care.

 

“Our analysis of the time use data suggests that gender identity considerations may lead a woman who seems threatening to her husband because she earns more than he does to engage in a larger share of home production activities, particularly household chores,” the authors write."

 

More Than Half Of American Women Are Breadwinners, Study Finds

 

Breadwinner Moms | Pew Research Center?s Social & Demographic Trends Project

 

Fox News: Female Breadwinners and Their Effect on Marriage

[Lady2163]

Who said you need cable TV? A lot of people these days are just using Netflix & Internet to watch things.

 

Assuming of course, you can afford the Internet. I suppose poor people today can sit around and watch their phones.

[MissBee]

I'm having a debate with some woman in another forum & she's claiming that she wouldn't get into a serious relationship with someone that's not good looking & doesn't have a good career & also says that's not having high standards or isn't being a gold digger. Which I think personally she is to both since she's looking at income/looks before anything else. She claims she's good looking & has a good career herself, but wouldn't get into a serious relationship with a waiter even though she found him really attractive. And said she wouldn't get into a relationship with a lawyer because she wasn't attracted enough to him.

 

High standards and gold digging are not synonymous.

 

People throw around the term gold digging a lot out of the context for which it is meant, acting like ANY care about career or finances is akin to gold digging when gold digging is about dating wealthy people with the SOLE intent of exploiting them for your financial benefit.

 

Having a good career and wanting to date a man who also has a good career is not gold digging, it makes perfect sense. Like wise who wants to date someone they're not attracted to??? Isn't this common sense? We all have our tastes and what tickles our fancy physically.

 

I have high standards for men I'm going to be with seriously but they encompass a lot more than looks and career as there are lots of good looking men who'd never make the cut regardless of their careers as well.

 

I'm also not understanding why having high standards is a bad thing or why it is being wrongly conflated with gold digging. The only high standard a gold digger usually is concerned with is that the man has a high income....whether he is ugly, an ******* etc hardly factors in. I have high standards in that most men I meet won't make the cut, there will be more men I'm not into seriously than I am but what disqualifies them isn't money or looks but lots of other things.

[Rejected Rosebud]

You say she looks at career and looks FIRST, but you aren't saying that she'll pick a man just because he has those things. Those things aren't unreasonable for a basic starting point for some people, I don't think you should be worrying about it. Are you trying to date her yourself?

[Lady2163]

I keep hearing this about how if you make more money that all of a sudden they won't have any common interests. What exact interests does someone making more money have besides I suppose being able to travel? Or is it just some sort of psychological thing?

 

You get to do more with your interests.

 

Let's say you love to golf. But, your are only making average money and you only get to golf a few times a year. All of a sudden, you get a huge raise. You can afford to golf once or twice a week, you can afford to join a club, you meet people who invite you to join their foursome.

 

Your spouse hates golf and hates the club you now belong to and want to spend all your free time at.

 

This can happen with almost any hobby. Unless it is one that both partners equally enjoy.

 

And let's not kid ourselves, men and women often have different interests.

[thefooloftheyear]

I think women have had good reason to be wary of turning the tables and it has little to not being progressive or feminist. It has more to do with men being comfortable with it.

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/30/business/economy/women-as-family-breadwinner-on-the-rise-study-says.html?_r=0

 

"But the data on actual marriage and divorce rates suggests slightly different attitudes.

 

A recent working paper by economists at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and the National University of Singapore found that, in looking at the distribution of married couples by income of husband versus wife, there is a sharp drop-off in the number of couples in which the wife earns more than half of the household income. This suggests that the random woman and random man are much less likely to pair off if her income exceeds his, the paper says.

 

The economists also found that wives with a better education and stronger earning potential than their husbands are less likely to work. In other words, women are more likely to stay out of the work force if there is a big risk that they will make more than their husbands.

 

Perhaps even more tellingly, couples in which the wife earns more report less satisfaction with their marriage and higher rates of divorce. When the wife brings in more money, couples often revert to more stereotypical sex roles; in such cases, wives typically take on a larger share of household work and child care.

 

“Our analysis of the time use data suggests that gender identity considerations may lead a woman who seems threatening to her husband because she earns more than he does to engage in a larger share of home production activities, particularly household chores,” the authors write."

 

More Than Half Of American Women Are Breadwinners, Study Finds

 

Breadwinner Moms | Pew Research Center?s Social & Demographic Trends Project

 

Fox News: Female Breadwinners and Their Effect on Marriage

\

 

 

Its unlikely Id ever be in that position...but I still doubt I would be so insecure about it....As long as a guy isnt humiliating himself by having to grovel for money...

 

Maybe one thing that the studies dont take into account( didnt read it) is how men and women differ when it comes to this...I leave my cash around and always have...Its there for the taking...If she takes it, she needed it and I dont need an explanation or line item accounting of how it was spent...No one needs to ask anything..I dont care and all of my investment holdings and monies are in accounts that she has access to...

 

I do know some guys whose wives make more than they do and the women hold much more control of the pursestrings than the guys I know do..They have to ask for permission for everything and account for every dime that is spent...Well...you can see how a guy isnt going to like that scenario...Its punitive and treats someone like a child..

 

 

Middle aged people on second or third go rounds shouldnt be concerned too much, anyway...Most of the people i know in these arrangements split living expenses and kind of do their own thing with their money..If one doesnt have much, but isnt asking anything of the other, then who really cares???

 

TFY

[Got it]

\

 

 

Its unlikely Id ever be in that position...but I still doubt I would be so insecure about it....As long as a guy isnt humiliating himself by having to grovel for money...

 

Maybe one thing that the studies dont take into account( didnt read it) is how men and women differ when it comes to this...I leave my cash around and always have...Its there for the taking...If she takes it, she needed it and I dont need an explanation or line item accounting of how it was spent...No one needs to ask anything..I dont care and all of my investment holdings and monies are in accounts that she has access to...

 

I do know some guys whose wives make more than they do and the women hold much more control of the pursestrings than the guys I know do..They have to ask for permission for everything and account for every dime that is spent...Well...you can see how a guy isnt going to like that scenario...Its punitive and treats someone like a child..

 

 

Middle aged people on second or third go rounds shouldnt be concerned too much, anyway...Most of the people i know in these arrangements split living expenses and kind of do their own thing with their money..If one doesnt have much, but isnt asking anything of the other, then who really cares???

 

TFY

 

Okay, but I will tell you not every man approaches their money in such a lackadaisical approach. There are many women who are in similar situations as these men you have referenced. This is ABUNDANTLY clear when a marriage starts to struggle and especially during a divorce. Suddenly the familial monies is the money of the earner.

 

I think it is far more human nature to have a basic/core belief that if the paycheck says "my" name it is "my" money. I may be sharing it with my spouse but I am essentially the owner. Women then struggle with limited earning capabilities if they have been out for child rearing and their spouse is now griping about child support and alimony. This is a very common occurrence.

 

I no very few people who truly embody and live the belief that monies earned is the family money and have zero feelings of ownership of it over their spouse.

 

So, yes, while I don't care how much my significant other makes, I do want to control that I continue to be able to support myself as well as they make enough to support themselves. There is too much power play tied to finances that keeping things close to equal helps negate it.

 

I do suggest reading the articles. They are informative.

 

In regards to 2nd and 3rd marriages, normally the monetary issues come into account with previous marriage obligations, i.e. children, continuing alimony or child support, etc.

 

My husband pays alimony and child support and will until the kids are 22. He pays about 4500.00 (as much as 5,000.00 in the beginning) a month. Luckily I make as much as I do that this does not greatly impact our day to day living. But I can see where this, in other circumstances, would cause a great deal of stress.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Got it

[Got it]

You get to do more with your interests.

 

Let's say you love to golf. But, your are only making average money and you only get to golf a few times a year. All of a sudden, you get a huge raise. You can afford to golf once or twice a week, you can afford to join a club, you meet people who invite you to join their foursome.

 

Your spouse hates golf and hates the club you now belong to and want to spend all your free time at.

 

This can happen with almost any hobby. Unless it is one that both partners equally enjoy.

 

And let's not kid ourselves, men and women often have different interests.

 

Yep, my horses would be much harder to support without my income! And, trust me, they came before the marriage, and the interest will continue even if the marriage doesn't.

 

It is a definite lifestyle that there are many men/woman who would not want to support a woman/SO doing it that isn't just about money. It is a 7 days a week, multiple hours a day, showing on weekends, etc. obligations that takes a great deal of compromising.

 

(Luckily my husband enjoys mucking stalls, stacking hay, a whiz at the horse trailer, and loves our newest horses so is soft with anything with her. ). But he compromises a great deal on what we are doing, what we need to fit in on a weekend, and how it only ramps up with snow/bad weather. Animals require care 24/7.

[NJ123]

You get to do more with your interests.

 

Let's say you love to golf. But, your are only making average money and you only get to golf a few times a year. All of a sudden, you get a huge raise. You can afford to golf once or twice a week, you can afford to join a club, you meet people who invite you to join their foursome.

 

Your spouse hates golf and hates the club you now belong to and want to spend all your free time at.

 

This can happen with almost any hobby. Unless it is one that both partners equally enjoy.

 

And let's not kid ourselves, men and women often have different interests.

 

I get that, but what's with all the resentment towards the spouse for making less money? I just still don't see what the problem would be if the woman is making good money, why wouldn't she want to involve her husband/boyfriend in those things even if she's technically paying for them? I remember I made a thread about a month ago asking about income in dating, and most of the responses were way different than what I've been seeing in this thread. Where pretty much the vast majority said as long as they can support themselves than there's no problem.

Edited November 15, 2014 by NJ123

[Got it]

I get that, but what's with all the resentment towards the spouse for making less money? I just still don't see what the problem would be if the woman is making good money, why wouldn't she want to involve her husband/boyfriend in those things even if she's technically paying for them? I remember I made a thread about a month ago asking about income in dating, and most of the responses were way different than what I've been seeing in this thread. Where pretty much the vast majority said as long as they can support themselves than there's no problem.

 

I don't think Lady is saying that. She is saying that the husband/boyfriend is not interested.

 

In regards to a spouse resenting the lack of income of the other spouse, this is not a one sided issue and happens quite often towards women.

 

And the original question wasn't tied to what spouses found acceptable or not but what a woman found attractive out of dating candidates. At that point there is nothing invested in her male suitors to make her want to compromise on this preference.

 

Why does it matter that she has these priorities? This is one woman who prefers things like this. Others may only date blondes, or tall, or left handed, etc. Everyone has preferences and some have very strict preferences. They are limiting their dating pool but she is seemingly okay with that. Whether she actually finds appropriate suitors is really her issue.

 

One person's high standards is another person's snobbery.

[Mangina]

I get that, but what's with all the resentment towards the spouse for making less money? I just still don't see what the problem would be if the woman is making good money, why wouldn't she want to involve her husband/boyfriend in those things even if she's technically paying for them? I remember I made a thread about a month ago asking about income in dating, and most of the responses were way different than what I've been seeing in this thread. Where pretty much the vast majority said as long as they can support themselves than there's no problem.

 

 

It's called hypergamy, it's so strong some think it's part of biology. I've asked many women about it and they say it doesn't matter, but when I see who they're married to, he always makes equal or more.

 

I've never met an attractive women who had a poor husband. With the exception of the women who marry criminals.

[Mangina]

I don't think Lady is saying that. She is saying that the husband/boyfriend is not interested.

 

In regards to a spouse resenting the lack of income of the other spouse, this is not a one sided issue and happens quite often towards women.

 

And the original question wasn't tied to what spouses found acceptable or not but what a woman found attractive out of dating candidates. At that point there is nothing invested in her male suitors to make her want to compromise on this preference.

 

Why does it matter that she has these priorities? This is one woman who prefers things like this. Others may only date blondes, or tall, or left handed, etc. Everyone has preferences and some have very strict preferences. They are limiting their dating pool but she is seemingly okay with that. Whether she actually finds appropriate suitors is really her issue.

 

One person's high standards is another person's snobbery.

I don't believe men really care about a women's income.

[Got it]

I don't believe men really care about a women's income.

 

Then you are uninformed. There have been many studies tied to it. I even posted some articles discussing it earlier in the thread.

 

So you may not believe it but, honey, it is true.

[Got it]

It's called hypergamy, it's so strong some think it's part of biology. I've asked many women about it and they say it doesn't matter, but when I see who they're married to, he always makes equal or more.

 

I've never met an attractive women who had a poor husband. With the exception of the women who marry criminals.

 

Okay, so you even admit there are some women.

 

Do you think that your pool of females may be too small to do a fair and complete analysis of this?

[Mangina]

Okay, so you even admit there are some women.

 

Do you think that your pool of females may be too small to do a fair and complete analysis of this?

 

I work with over 20 women in my department alone. If 18 of them have husband who make more, then I think it might generally be true. There have been many studies confirming this, why do you need to challenge me? I'm sorry this doesn't paint females in the best light, but females aren't perfect.

[Mangina]

Then you are uninformed. There have been many studies tied to it. I even posted some articles discussing it earlier in the thread.

 

So you may not believe it but, honey, it is true.

 

I could find many articles and probably more that contradict what you have. I don't appreciate you calling me honey as if you are belittling me.

[NJ123]

I don't think Lady is saying that. She is saying that the husband/boyfriend is not interested.

 

In regards to a spouse resenting the lack of income of the other spouse, this is not a one sided issue and happens quite often towards women.

 

And the original question wasn't tied to what spouses found acceptable or not but what a woman found attractive out of dating candidates. At that point there is nothing invested in her male suitors to make her want to compromise on this preference.

 

Why does it matter that she has these priorities? This is one woman who prefers things like this. Others may only date blondes, or tall, or left handed, etc. Everyone has preferences and some have very strict preferences. They are limiting their dating pool but she is seemingly okay with that. Whether she actually finds appropriate suitors is really her issue.

 

One person's high standards is another person's snobbery.

 

It doesn't matter, but most of the people in the thread are basically saying that her standards are likely too high. That's her problem, & she comes across as having a bitchy attitude as well yet claims she's a nice person. She wants a guy with high ambition, good job, good looks, good personality. It seems social media has really screwed up some women's perceptions in finding a guy. They want their guy to be almost perfect basically. They keep waiting for this perfect guy that will never come than their stuck settling for someone when they reach their mid 30s so they can have kids before it's too late.

[MissBee]

It doesn't matter, but most of the people in the thread are basically saying that her standards are likely too high. That's her problem, & she comes across as having a bitchy attitude as well yet claims she's a nice person. She wants a guy with high ambition, good job, good looks, good personality. It seems social media has really screwed up some women's perceptions in finding a guy. They want their guy to be almost perfect basically. They keep waiting for this perfect guy that will never come than their stuck settling for someone when they reach their mid 30s so they can have kids before it's too late.

 

I'm curious....what should she be looking for then?

 

Would her standards be "just right" if she's looking for a man without ambition, no job or a low paying job, facially challenged and a horrible person? Is that more acceptable?

 

What does social media have to do with anything? Do you think 50 years ago or even 25 years ago before social media people were looking to marry no job having, unattractive, bad personality folks??? Er no.

 

People may have different wants and needs and ideas about what is good...but most people want someone good FOR THEM! No person with any sense would willingly date someone they feel is ugly, broke and has a bad personality.

 

When since is having a good job, being ambitious, being attracted to someone and liking their personality the same thing as perfection? Perfect is an unrealistic standard. All people are imperfect but they still can have good jobs, be ambitious, be attractive and be generally nice interesting people. I never dated a perfect man but they all at least qualified in the basic areas of the above. It seems the only people who complain about this are those who feel slighted by other people's preferences because they don't fit it IMO so try to act like those basic standards are something from a fairytale.

 

Ambitious, good job, nice personality, someone you like to look at are very general qualities that lots of things and people can fit into actually. Ambition can encompass a lot, what a good job is isn't just one specific job, finding someone attractive can mean lots of different looks, liking someone's personality can also encompass all kinds of personality types. So this is pretty wide and has NOTHING to do with perfection.

 

I am really genuinely curious though, what in your thinking is an "acceptable" standard. What would you have these supposedly misguided women looking for men with ambition, good jobs, looks they like and good personalities, look for instead? What's a reasonable list in your mind?

Edited November 15, 2014 by MissBee

[NJ123]

I'm curious....what should she be looking for then?

 

Would her standards be "just right" if she's looking for a man without ambition, no job or a low paying job, facially challenged and a horrible person? Is that more acceptable?

 

What does social media have to do with anything? Do you think 50 years ago or even 25 years ago before social media people were looking to marry no job having, unattractive, bad personality folks??? Er no.

 

People may have different wants and needs and ideas about what is good...but most people want someone good FOR THEM! No person with any sense would willingly date someone they feel is ugly, broke and has a bad personality.

 

When since is having a good job, being ambitious, being attracted to someone and liking their personality the same thing as perfection? Perfect is an unrealistic standard. All people are imperfect but they still can have good jobs, be ambitious, be attractive and be generally nice interesting people. I never dated a perfect man but they all at least qualified in the basic areas of the above. It seems the only people who complain about this are those who feel slighted by other people's preferences because they don't fit it IMO so try to act like those basic standards are something from a fairytale.

 

Ambitious, good job, nice personality, someone you like to look at are very general qualities that lots of things and people can fit into actually. Ambition can encompass a lot, what a good job is isn't just one specific job, finding someone attractive can mean lots of different looks, liking someone's personality can also encompass all kinds of personality types. So this is pretty wide and has NOTHING to do with perfection.

 

I'm just confused about this whole thread, since a month ago everyone was saying they would have no problem how much a guy/woman makes as long as they can support themselves. Now all of a sudden everyone is saying almost the complete opposite. So it's like to those that were saying it "doesn't matter", are now saying it does matter if they want to get married to that person. So why even go out with them in the first place if their job is going to be a huge problem later on?

[NJ123]

I'm curious....what should she be looking for then?

 

Would her standards be "just right" if she's looking for a man without ambition, no job or a low paying job, facially challenged and a horrible person? Is that more acceptable?

 

What does social media have to do with anything? Do you think 50 years ago or even 25 years ago before social media people were looking to marry no job having, unattractive, bad personality folks??? Er no.

 

People may have different wants and needs and ideas about what is good...but most people want someone good FOR THEM! No person with any sense would willingly date someone they feel is ugly, broke and has a bad personality.

 

When since is having a good job, being ambitious, being attracted to someone and liking their personality the same thing as perfection? Perfect is an unrealistic standard. All people are imperfect but they still can have good jobs, be ambitious, be attractive and be generally nice interesting people. I never dated a perfect man but they all at least qualified in the basic areas of the above. It seems the only people who complain about this are those who feel slighted by other people's preferences because they don't fit it IMO so try to act like those basic standards are something from a fairytale.

 

Ambitious, good job, nice personality, someone you like to look at are very general qualities that lots of things and people can fit into actually. Ambition can encompass a lot, what a good job is isn't just one specific job, finding someone attractive can mean lots of different looks, liking someone's personality can also encompass all kinds of personality types. So this is pretty wide and has NOTHING to do with perfection.

 

I am really genuinely curious though, what in your thinking is an "acceptable" standard. What would you have these supposedly misguided women looking for men with ambition, good jobs, looks they like and good personalities, look for instead? What's a reasonable list in your mind?

 

And honestly all I'd want is a nice loyal girl that I'm attracted to that genuinely cares about me. Don't care about what job they have, I mean yeah it would nice if they had a good job, but it's not like it's a requirement.

[Mangina]

I'm just confused about this whole thread, since a month ago everyone was saying they would have no problem how much a guy/woman makes as long as they can support themselves. Now all of a sudden everyone is saying almost the complete opposite. So it's like to those that were saying it "doesn't matter", are now saying it does matter if they want to get married to that person. So why even go out with them in the first place if their job is going to be a huge problem later on?

 

I didn't want get middle but I saw you going back and forth with that guy on the other thread where you said girls dont caring if a guy works at walmart. You don't need this thread you can just take a look around and see that isn't true or even close to true.

[StanMusial]

I'm having a debate with some woman in another forum & she's claiming that she wouldn't get into a serious relationship with someone that's not good looking & doesn't have a good career & also says that's not having high standards or isn't being a gold digger. Which I think personally she is to both since she's looking at income/looks before anything else. She claims she's good looking & has a good career herself, but wouldn't get into a serious relationship with a waiter even though she found him really attractive. And said she wouldn't get into a relationship with a lawyer because she wasn't attracted enough to him.

 

Did she say whether or not she WANTED a serious relationship? Did she explain her concept of "attracted enough"?

 

Of course she doesn't want to date a waiter if she's a career woman, I don't know any career woman who would (with one or two exceptions).

 

To be honest here, I wouldn't take this too seriously... if she's an online dater she probably has some kind of checklist that will never be completed.