Why is dating and marrying for money a predominantly female pastime?

[rubydazzler]

I think far less men would say yes if it was an ugly woman, compared to the women.

 

But the strange thing is that most men are married to women who are quite plain or even ugly, looking at them without the eyes of love! I've heard men whose girlfriends/wives have faces like a bag of spanners say, without a trace of irony, that they wouldn't touch Camilla Parker-Bowles or Jade Goody with a bargepole or words to that effect.

 

You're hiding a little grin as they speak, as they'd never get the chance for a start, being even worse looking themselves than either Charles or Jack!

 

People tend to date in their own league really, unless either fame or money comes into the equation. Most men and women who can't seem to get a partner are looking out of their own league. I include myself in that situation, sadly.

[jezzyjj]

Sorry... it sounded just like Desmond Morris' "The Naked Ape" to me.

Confusing good science with that nonsense is not good! You may not like the truth about why we do what we do and the behaviour may sound old fashioned, but the underlying principle behind everything we do is make sure we have kids and that they survive to produce kids. That's how the world really works.

 

I agree that men and women's motivations may be different; I don't agree that more women than men value money over emotion.

Many stereotypes arise because they are based on fact. You may not behave like that or want others to do so, but pretty girls will always grab rich/powerful men even if they don't love them, it very rarely happens the other way around. I've beenin positions of power/influence and guess what, I 'm suddenly taller and more good looking or so it appears! I've known plenty of women who go for monied/powerful men, never known a single man to do the same.

 

 

This study -- or at least this excerpt -- doesn't say or suggest that women value money over emotion. It uses the phrases "expectation of marriage" and "anticipate marrying" -- which is not the same as "desire to marry" their current partner. The women might not anticipate marrying their lower income, less educated partner for a variety of reasons, which could include the men being marriage-shy, unfaithful, unmotivated, boring, abusive or incompatible because of basic values.

Talk about rewriting statistics!

If you take a large no of women and ask them if they want to marry their partners and there is a straightline correlation between saying yes and their positive financial prospects, it would be foolish[or hopelessly optimistic] to think it's another reason. It makes perfect sense for women to marry well, so why deny the fact? Several millions of years of evolution aren't going to change as a result of a few decades of the sex discrimination laws.

You should also look at Maslow's heirachy of needs. This is what guides our fundamental behaviour and again is not Desmond Morris coffee table book content, but well recognised and it underpins everything we do.

 

Even though the OP may be a bit dubious in his postings at times, it doesn't mean he's also wrong about this. I do not believe women are inferior to men, but it's funny how women are always claiming to be better at things that men like mulitasking [i.e. doing several things poorly rather than one thing well!] and yet still want to claim we are identical. You cannot have both, we are either the same in abilities or we aren't. Women cannot choose just the positive attributes, which is what seems to happen.

Man + women are are different in strengths, weaknesses, drives, needs. It's not a bad thing, it is much better that we do complement each other. Teams work better with a variety of skills and abilities, so why should a couple be any different? Apply Occam's Razor to this scenario of men and women having very different needs re power vs youth with regard to breeding, which is directly related to the fact older women don't produce healthy babies, I bet you cannot think of another reason to explain otherwise.

[DIVA]

I believe sleeping with someone for financial gain is called prostitution. It's inherently sad someone would go to these lenghts to satisfy such materialistic notions.

 

Who's sadder? The prostitute, making a living, or the kerb crawler who has to pay for her company? If the women you refer to are prostitutes, then the men are kerb crawlers.

 

 

It is very, very rare. And one susepects that often it is not a financial raitonal, but a sexual attraction. Let's put it this way. If Mr Joe average, aged 48, won the lottery tomorrow, he would have women flocking round him like crack dealers round a schoolgate. If Miss June average won the lottery, I simply don't believe there would be a string of handsome young men beating a path to her door.

 

 

That depends, is Miss June average 48 too? You see, it's perfectly acceptable, and encouraged, amongst guys, for a guy to go out with a younger woman, but when it's the other way round, a guy needs a hell of a lot of integrity and guts to stand up to the ribbing from his so-called mates. At the end of the day, it's all about image for the type of guys who usually get taken to the cleaners, and if they're so shallow, then, good luck to the girls, get it whilst you can, coz you know that Mr Bigtime will swap you for a younger model in time, or if you get "too fat to ride next to him his Ferrari". (And by the way, you know what they say about men with flash cars.)

[jezzyjj]

But the strange thing is that most men are married to women who are quite plain or even ugly, looking at them without the eyes of love! I've heard men whose girlfriends/wives have faces like a bag of spanners say, without a trace of irony, that they wouldn't touch Camilla Parker-Bowles or Jade Goody with a bargepole or words to that effect.

Don't forget we all have different tastes, my best friend and I have completely opposite tastes in women.

 

You're hiding a little grin as they speak, as they'd never get the chance for a start, being even worse looking themselves than either Charles or Jack!

 

People tend to date in their own league really, unless either fame or money comes into the equation. Most men and women who can't seem to get a partner are looking out of their own league. I include myself in that situation, sadly.

 

But if they were rich, which is the point in question, then they would have better looking wives! Plus women age quite poorly compared to men and also women are much, much, much more critical about other women's appearence than men are. So the wife may have been a stunna once, but now without her youth is nothing.

 

I photograph people for a living and I prefer to shoot men as you can do more interesting and varied images, whereas with women the image has to make the woman/girl look beautiful or it is not acceptable 99% of the time. To men or women. Men gets distinguished as they get older, women simply get less attractive. One of those unfair things about life. But if wrinkles were a sign of female fertility, smooth skin would be hated!

[jezzyjj]

That depends, is Miss June average 48 too? You see, it's perfectly acceptable, and encouraged, amongst guys, for a guy to go out with a younger woman, but when it's the other way round, a guy needs a hell of a lot of integrity and guts to stand up to the ribbing from his so-called mates.

And the reason it is seen as a bad thing is that ultimately, kids aren't unlikely to happen. So it's pointless from an evolutionary standpoint. So his mates could be seen as doing him a favour in fact, by ribbing him and therefore increasing his chance of having children with someone more suitable.

[Solomon1]

women want someone who is going to take care of them and their offspring for 20 years. them's that got the wonga can do that better (materially...perhaps not emotionally)

 

tis simple innit

[Solomon1]

And the reason is seen as a bad thing is that ultimately, kids aren't unlikely to happen. So it's pointless from an evolutionary standpoint. So his mates could be seen as doing him a favour in fact, by ribbing him and therefore increasing his chance of having children with someone more suitable.

 

what if he doesn't want kids dude? you sound like a bit of an eejit

[StarSparkle]

And the reason is seen as a bad thing is that ultimately, kids aren't unlikely to happen. So it's pointless from an evolutionary standpoint. So his mates could be seen as doing him a favour in fact, by ribbing him and therefore increasing his chance of having children with someone more suitable.

 

You really are a card!

 

Shakes head in disbelief

 

StarSparkle

[jezzyjj]

what if he doesn't want kids dude? you sound like a bit of an eejit

Well, completely missed the point of the example. We aren't talking about specific individuals, we are talking about generalised behaviour of humans as a whole.

So it looks like you're the eedjit!

[jezzyjj]

You really are a card!

 

Shakes head in disbelief

 

StarSparkle

And you aren't very bright, so I understand if you do not grasp the principles of evolution.