It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gold digging "females" way to many!

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 03:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: 1KINGHUGO
a reply to: DeathSlayer

My wife's 54 years old,i would swap her for three 18 year olds.



My husband has said almost the same thing.He told me,before I turned 60,he
was going to trade me in for two 30 year olds after my 60th birthday.




posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: mamabeth
I just turned 61 and my husband will be 80 next month. I have always been
attracted to older men.I should mention that my husband has provided me
with a nice home,nice furniture and I drive a Volvo.I am not a gold-digger!


My mom is 11 years my dad's junior, my stepmom of 20+ years is 30 his junior,my younger brother is not fond of women his age or younger and prefers them around a decade older, and I'm 13 years my hubby's junior.
My late grandmother's last husband was about 10 years her junior, too, IIR. Truth be told, he was like an overgrown child, though. Not "tantrums" immature or "self-centered" immature, but "extremely, inexcusably stupid" immature.
If this kind of preference can eventually be found to be tied to genetics, then it's definitely a runs-in-the-family thing XD

I can't say this enough -- age is just a number, personalities count much more!
edit on 2/26/2016 by Nyiah because: Whoops, numbers typo!



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

I don't have any problems with the issue of age difference.I am glad that I am
much younger than my husband,I can look after him better in his golden years.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: mamabeth

who's going to look after you? my husbands is 4 years younger and I like the idea of us growing old together, helping each other... to each their own.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
It is rare to see a man of wealth and/or a politician with a woman his age. I could not see myself with a woman the same age or younger than my own daughter. To me..... that is inapropiate. I don't need to raise another young girl BUT it is a two way street isn't it. My point? The younger woman agrees to the relationship and I WONDER why? Is it for his money?



Because he CAN!

Why would a man who could afford a Ferrari or a Rolls Royce settle for

a Ford or Fiat?

Or even a £1,000 watch when he could have a Rolex?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: inquisitivenature If a man (or woman) enters into a relationship with the agreement that he/she is the bread winner, while the other stays home and takes care of the housework(meals, chores ect..)and raises the children(no easy task) then the relationship doesn't work down the line... why would anyone want to see the other person penniless?
There are women out there too paying alimony to men that have made less then them.
To minimize the job of raising kids and doing everything in the house, doesn't make sense especially if the person making the money loves his kids or ever appreciated the fact that his home was tended to, laundry done and had a nice dinner to come home to everyday.
Maybe you are referencing the women who stay at home with house keepers and nanny's?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

Are you denying gold diggers now? Really? Lol



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: peppycat

Are you denying gold diggers now? Really? Lol
No, gold diggers are out there.
I am sticking up for the housewives that enter into a relationship with a man that supports her and raising a family. Some men earn less than their wives as well... making less or no money then your spouse isn't what makes someone a gold digger and being a housewife without nannies and housekeepers is not easy especially if they are tending to children.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

Cool, but you brought the notion of 'housewives' into the thread lol, nobody else but you, axe to grind or something?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: inquisitivenature
The concept of moral responsibility and civil responsibility is disconnected. Why is it ok for a female to be intimate with a male that she knows is married and yet she doesn't care about her betrayal or that of his.

I think what you brought into a relationship and then jointly created is what you should leave with... Male or Female.

Male: I earned all the money whilst you looked after the kids. I paid for the house that you live in, I pay for the food, bills, school for our beautiful children, the cleaner (for some), the Gardner (for some), insurance and all other things that sustain the household.

In my view, separate to agreement legally, I ask the question...? Why does a female get half of what she didn't create.

What was her contribution in the end.
This is the post I replied to. Is he not bringing up housewives here? What the contribution the wife had in the end, was taking care of the family and home... usually called a house wife or home maker.
edit on 26-2-2016 by peppycat because: content added



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand please note my post above.



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

Yeah I imagine you are bitter from your experiences, get over it lol



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: peppycat

Yeah I imagine you are bitter from your experiences, get over it lol
pardon? What experience? You stated that I was the one to bring up housewives and then I posted the post that had brought up women who are supported by a man and what they don't contribute.
I've never been a house wife myself and I'm not sure where or why I'm getting somewhat of an attitude from you... or am I just misreading your last post about getting over something?



posted on Feb, 26 2016 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

Cool, do your thing lol



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 04:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand
a reply to: peppycat

Cool, do your thing lol

Why are you being an asshat to Peppy? She was responding to someone else's post, completely in context.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 05:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

What is an asshat? Is it a silly US politically correct alternative word for asshole or something, same as you call a toilet a rest room? Who actually goes for a rest in a toilet lol?
Peppy or you can always click alert and let the mods decide instead of bleating like a lost lamb on the hillside...sorry I'm not on ATS for the mutual appreciation love-in.


*Edit*
Classic ATS thread full of misplaced moral outrage about two consenting adults doing their thing while not harming anyone else. Soooo glad I don't live in backwards religious America lol
edit on 27.2.2016 by grainofsand because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand Well, to stay on topic,

Have a good day!



edit on 27-2-2016 by peppycat because: silly stuff



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: peppycat

Star for the lol



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: DeathSlayer
That is good. I have been in real estate awhile now and sell homes for builders as a site agent. I have met quite a few billionaire developers in my day and have several that are friends. These guys are literally indistinguishable from your average laborer most of the time when they are out in public. They didn't get where they are by being stupid.

I had one that when I met him the first time, he rode up on an old bicycle and had on painter pants with holes in them and an old t-shirt. I learned long ago to not judge people by their appearances in this business. He was asking pretty pertinent questions about land development and the market currently that 98% of the people have no clue about which kept my interest. Turned out he was not only a billionaire, he also created several well known corporations, owned huge amounts of land surrounding universities that he would develop as the university expanded, for housing, etc. I ended up developing a 300 acre plot of land with him in the end. Why? Mainly because I didn't disregard him because of how he approached me. I learned in working deep cover many moons ago to be a chameleon in society. I can hang with the worst of the worst or the best of the best. They will never know.

These people, unless they are going to a meeting, or community event (charities for example) will dress to blend in and not be bothered by the public. Just think if you are a lawyer going to Bike Week. You don't go in a suit in your limo. So many 'gold diggers' out there have no clue. And most of them are much more personable and engaging than most believe. Almost like they enjoy mingling with the people more than the rich class. But, in the end I guess they are chameleons too. I suspect they like getting over on people and really have a good feeling of how the public thinks by doing so.



posted on Feb, 27 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   
There is the old saying, 'A fool and their money are soon parted'. More to the point of this thread anyway. I see no problem if a woman wants financial security and to be comfortable and have fun in life, usually requiring money. Many relationships go through hell over the financial issues in their lives rather than other things.

Here is the problem though. It is when a woman marries a guy, lets say has $400 million when they get together. His loss if he doesn't get a prenuptial agreeing to the financial issue before her marries her. Anyway, say in 3 years he somehow has $500 million. She should get half of the $100 million jointly gained during their marriage. It is not right for her to get $250 million as some 50:50 split because she spent 3 years what took him his life to gain by earning it or making it somehow. I think that is more the issue that people call 'gold diggers' over because they unjustly penalize the guy for no reason other than she was with him for more than a couple of years. She is claiming money she has nor right to in my opinion.

Now if the guy was brutal to her during those three years, there may be some reason to consider more, but not half just because. I would say in the majority of cases where they are not wealthy, the split if often 50:50 and it is often earned or GAINED during the marriage. I don't care if she worked or not, she can care for the household which is usually more work that a guy wants to do anyway if children are involved. They work all day and evening in many cases.

However, the gold digger mentality is probably a result of our legal system using a one size fits all solution of 'Half your Stuff' that resulted in the women gaining half of the wealth they married into rather than gained. I wonder if the guy started with $400 million and ended with $200 million would she be responsible for half the losses? Probably not in our system. Some women are all about material things. Some could care less and want the relationship to be their wealth.

I agree that it is the people's choice of being together and if they are happy then good for them. It is jealousy that makes others whine and cry about what someone else has. I have taken my licks in relationships and not for the financial reasons. But I have a problem with a type of woman. I tend to attract the excitement seekers, or more pointedly the ones that liked the danger element. They can be destructive when things are quiet and normal for some reason. I never had ones after financial gain. Well, unless they went for it all lol!


edit on 27/2/16 by spirit_horse because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join