Women who have more money than Men

ah ha...well what about those men who earn 20 or 30K less a year than the women??? what then? What about the woman who is educated, has money, property and own tool kit and knows how to change a tyre? What then??

How does the man feel then?

I can sure as hell tell you that men don't like an independent successful woman!!!!!
They want someone to provide for and can't handle it if they are not needed!!

I don't need some schmuck to come along and pay for a thing/fix/provide for me and I resent the stereotypical Man Club hype that suggest all women are weak and need a man.....for their money...

grrr






[edit on 29-1-2006 by NJE777]

[edit on 29-1-2006 by NJE777]

what about to be there for you, care for you and make you feel special?

that usually comes at a cost....

I can do all the self caring for me that I need!

but for guys on the other thread to place all women in the same bag...needing men for their money ---> stuff that.

I would rather go without.

you obviously dont like the neolithic styreotype male your describing. it makes me wonder, how do you react when a man is romantic, eg buys flowers, chocolates etc. or offers to treat you dinner?

as a woman I love chocolates/flowers...but a pet hate of mine is when mr potential asks me out to dinner and then asks me to decide upon the restaurant!!....

I dont see romance as a weak thing, it has its place...

I was just reading your thread before I switched over to the other thread of money => woman logic and I find both sides of the argument far far from reality.
Well concerning this thread, men actually want to find more intelligent women because almost 90% of them have similar cognitive ability. (Atleast here in America). Also intelligence attracts other intelligence, it is a given .

Anyway in my case it was/is purely a cerebral attraction, not that any physical limitations exist but I have no inclination towards the physical properties/aspects of any person. It is just a bonus/accessory that complements the existing attributes but not something that can be used as a defining properties per say.
Also wealth is no limiter as well, if it were then I wouldn’t have been in the same relationship for well past 9 years. It depends on individuals and what they are in for, depends on upbringing and the principles that people hold dear to them. Generally in my experience I have noticed that people born into wealth or those wealthy through generations do not value wealth as a defining attribute of a person.


I hope to have made some sense.

IAF

[edit on 29-1-2006 by IAF101]

Originally posted by IAF101


I hope to have made some sense.

IAF

[edit on 29-1-2006 by IAF101]

Your right, its personnel atributes such as personality which make a relationship work, being drop dead gorgeous or loaded are just bonuses!

Originally posted by NJE777
ah ha...well what about those men who earn 20 or 30K less a year than the women??? what then?

Hi! I haven't seen you on the forum before, although i've only just posted on the BTS one.

Well as to the income question, things have obviously changed in the last what 20 years. Women are more independent, financially secure and can provide for themselves without needing a man. However is that all men are worth? I don't think so..men and women need eachother, regardless of what people think.

I can't comment on every single guy, i'd think that many men wouldn't be bothered by a woman earning more, i wouldn't be.

Originally posted by NJE777
What about the woman who is educated, has money, property and own tool kit and knows how to change a tyre? What then??

Good for her, although men have more uses than the things you listed

Originally posted by NJE777
How does the man feel then?

Depends on the man, not all are going to think the same.

Originally posted by NJE777
I can sure as hell tell you that men don't like an independent successful woman!!!!!
They want someone to provide for and can't handle it if they are not needed!!

Isn't that a little stereotypical and crass? As i've said all men are different, that goes for any person, regardless of gender. We're all individuals, even if we share common traits and behaviour.

Originally posted by NJE777
I don't need some schmuck to come along and pay for a thing/fix/provide for me and I resent the stereotypical Man Club hype that suggest all women are weak and need a man.....for their money...

Who says he has to be like that? Maybe he'd like a companion, someone to spend his time with, someone he can be affectionate with and maybe love?

Man club? Never heard of it . Btw some women are just as bad, who seem to denigrate and dehumanise men. That because they are a 'man', they can treat him a certain way and be justified because of belonging to a gender. Look at how some of the women's magazine talk about men, like they're clueless beings who need a makeover and an overhaul. A lot of men are not ideal, but still not all should be tarred with the same brush as they do.

Also these stereotypes do exist, the goldiggers i mean. Yet why do they do it? There are also male ones i know. So you can't pin it on one gender only. Although which one does it more remains to be seen.

Originally posted by NJE777
that usually comes at a cost....

I can do all the self caring for me that I need!

So you could be a spinster? Might you not want a guy who is affectionate, caring and genuinely want to be with you for you, without wanting to change any aspect of you? Do you want to be alone?

Or are you even into men?

Originally posted by NJE777
but for guys on the other thread to place all women in the same bag...needing men for their money ---> stuff that.

I would rather go without.

To be fair to guys like orangetom1999 & think2much (and others) they do bring up some good points. Even though i don't agree on certain of their views. They have stressed that they do not mean every woman, just many. I know you didn't name them personally, but they're probably two of the few you meant. Also a lot of these guys have probably had bad experiences, and are a little jaded. So you'd understand where they're coming from. Besides, maybe one of them is a good match for you

Originally posted by NJE777
as a woman I love chocolates/flowers...but a pet hate of mine is when mr potential asks me out to dinner and then asks me to decide upon the restaurant!!....

I dont see romance as a weak thing, it has its place...

Well i do find it amusing when some women expect you to be a mindreader. A guy may have been on several dates, where some have preferred if he asks where they go, whilst others prefer if they decide. The fact he'd ask shows he has consideration for other people, that isn't a bad thing.

I agree, romance has its place

If a man has a problem with a woman who's successful and can take care of her own. It's probably down to his own insecurities. The fact that he feels inadequate because he isn't sure what else he can offer, other than the obvious, which is himself. Especially in this day and age where we get so many programmes on men making mistakes, doing this and that wrong or changing them etc. Kind of gets a little demotivating i guess.

Anyway that's my piece, make of it what you will

[edit on 29/1/06 by Flyboy211]

[edit on 29/1/06 by Flyboy211]

[edit on 29/1/06 by Flyboy211]

Yes, my topic did stereotype men, I was just really peeved off with the other thread. It goes both ways....

Who says he has to be like that? Maybe he'd like a companion, someone to spend his time with, someone he can be affectionate with and maybe love?

you have raised some very good points and to be honest...I havent really thought of it that way.

Look at how some of the women's magazine talk about men, like they're clueless beings who need a makeover and an overhaul.

That applies to women also...

So you could be a spinster? Might you not want a guy who is affectionate, caring and genuinely want to be with you for you, without wanting to change any aspect of you?

Is there such a thing as someone not wanting to change any aspect of someone?

Originally posted by Flyboy211
So you could be a spinster?

Interesting choice of word. Spinster was a denogrative term applicable 150 years ago when fathers couldn't marry a daughter off and when 60 year olds married 16 year old virgins with child bearing hips, good teeth and a dowry of barn animals. 'Bachelor' of course is not a denogrative term and is still seen as something admirable yet if a woman is single there must be something 'wrong' with her.

Or are you even into men?

="She must be a dyke."
="ug"

Blimey. It's kind of ironic that you were playing her point down yet validated it by using the old feminist/lesbian spin. Just because some women are self empowered and like their independence.. it does not mean they want to be men or desire women.

NJE777.. I am certain there is a man out there who is perfect for you and will not feel masculinely [yeah i know that isn't a word] compromised by how much you earn, your independence, talent or intelligence. When you find him.. ask if he has a brother.

For those who don't know, australian culture is big on being mucho. The contrast between male and female was and is still [to an extent] what defines manhood yet now men are limited in ways to expressing it because their female counterparts have also developed [traditional] 'masculine' traits. "Oh I twisted my ankle'.. and the guy carries her off into the sunset. Actually.. the aussie male might just dump her in a cab and get back to drinking with the boys.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by riley]

Originally posted by NJE777
ah ha...well what about those men who earn 20 or 30K less a year than the women??? what then? What about the woman who is educated, has money, property and own tool kit and knows how to change a tyre? What then??

How does the man feel then?

Well I cant speake for other men but it wouldnt bother me if my girl friend earned more money then me.
Who cares about income?
Money cant make you happy.
NJE777 who is the person in your avatar?

[edit on 29-1-2006 by xpert11]

Originally posted by riley

Originally posted by Flyboy211
So you could be a spinster?

Interesting choice of word. Spinster was a denogrative term applicable 150 years ago when fathers couldn't marry of a daughter off and when 60 year olds married 16 year old virgins with child bearing hips, good teeth and a dowry of barn animals. 'Bachelor' of course is not a denogrative term and is still seen as something admirable yet if a woman is single there must be something 'wrong' with her.

Or are you even into men?

="She must be a dyke."

="ug"

Blimey. It's kind of ironic that you were playing her point down yet validated it by using the old feminist/lesbian spin. Just because some women are self empowered and like their independence.. it does not mean they want to be men or desire women.

NJE777.. I am certain there is a man out there who is perfect for you and will not feel masculinely [yeah i know that isn't a word] compromised by how much you earn, your independence, talent or intelligence. When you find him.. ask if he has a brother.

For those who don't know, australian culture is big on being mucho. The contrast between male and female was and is still [to an extent] what defines manhood yet now men are limited in ways to expressing it because their female counterparts have also developed [traditional] 'masculine' traits. "Oh I twisted my ankle'.. and the guy carries her off into the sunset. Actually.. the aussie male might just dump her in a cab and get back to drinking with the boys.

[edit on 29-1-2006 by riley]

Bump! When I saw the spinster word... I actually choked on my coffee.
Aussie male dumping her in a cab... so funny! but true...

Originally posted by riley
Interesting choice of word. Spinster was a denogrative term applicable 150 years ago when fathers couldn't marry a daughter off and when 60 year olds married 16 year old virgins with child bearing hips, good teeth and a dowry of barn animals. 'Bachelor' of course is not a denogrative term and is still seen as something admirable yet if a woman is single there must be something 'wrong' with her.

Was being the operative word. Perhaps spinster was the wrong choice of word (especially when she doesn't seem to be pushing 60), but i certainly didn't mean it to be derogatory. I simply meant it as defining a yet unmarried woman.

As for the attitude difference, well it's like what orangetom1999 has said on another post..

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Socially it is acceptable for women to do this ..men should be more expendable or disposable and should not have access to this type of "option"????

To an extent it is true, for instance a woman physically beating a man might be more tolerated than the other way around. That if a woman strikes a man, he's just meant to stand there and take it. Although the other way around the police are called and the man gets locked up in jail.

Yet i could find a polar example, where if a man sleeps around, he's praised for it. If a woman does it, she can get labelled as a 'whore'.

It's not fair but these unbalances on both genders are found throughout societies. Why? Who knows..maybe on the latter example, men feel threatened and a touch (if not a lot more) of sexual jealousy, baser instincts.

Originally posted by riley
="She must be a dyke."

="ug"

You said it not me . I don't appreciate people putting words into my mouth. The fact that i don't know her, and that she seemed fairly hostile against men led me to question. I didn't say "you must not be into men". Instead i asked..

Originally posted by Flyboy211
Or are you even into men?

Please don't mix the two up.

Originally posted by riley
Blimey. It's kind of ironic that you were playing her point down yet validated it by using the old feminist/lesbian spin. Just because some women are self empowered and like their independence.. it does not mean they want to be men or desire women.

Where did i state that she wanted to be a man? I only asked if she was even into men, since i don't know her and couldn't work out if she was some stereotypical feminist lesbian ranting on men, or just a little disillusioned.

It's a good thing that women can look after themselves, more the power to them. Everyone should be able to look after themselves, regardless if they have one or two 'X' chromosomes.

Originally posted by riley
NJE777.. I am certain there is a man out there who is perfect for you and will not feel masculinely [yeah i know that isn't a word] compromised by how much you earn, your independence, talent or intelligence. When you find him.. ask if he has a brother.

As i believe, the person should like you for being yourself, and not want to change you. I would never wish that on anyone, nor do i expect it on me. If they don't like your success, status, intelligence, talent etc then they only feel threatened. Because they want to be able to provide for you. Yet some don't realise that just being them is enough.

Originally posted by riley
For those who don't know, australian culture is big on being mucho. The contrast between male and female was and is still [to an extent] what defines manhood yet now men are limited in ways to expressing it because their female counterparts have also developed [traditional] 'masculine' traits. "Oh I twisted my ankle'.. and the guy carries her off into the sunset. Actually.. the aussie male might just dump her in a cab and get back to drinking with the boys.

Let's hope it doesn't happen in the outback

[edit on 30/1/06 by Flyboy211]

Originally posted by Flyboy211
To an extent it is true, for instance a woman physically beating a man might be more tolerated than the other way around. That if a woman strikes a man, he's just meant to stand there and take it. Although the other way around the police are called and the man gets locked up in jail.

Well.. generally it is not acceptable for either to beat eachother up. When a man beats a woman though.. the size diffence is enough to put her in hospital and in my experience when a man hits a woman he usually intends to really hurt her. Yes there are women who are strong enough to inflict damage on men but it's not the norm. I do not condone this at all and I think they should be locked up as well.. one problem might be police laughing in his face or a man not willing to physically defend himself. Hopefully this will change one day as I'm sure it happens.

Yet i could find a polar example, where if a man sleeps around, he's praised for it. If a woman does it, she can get labelled as a 'whore'.

I don't think that will ever change unfortuantly.

It's not fair but these unbalances on both genders are found throughout societies. Why? Who knows..maybe on the latter example, men feel threatened and a touch (if not a lot more) of sexual jealousy, baser instincts.

Exactly.. they have to distinguish themselves from the rival males.. it might be difficult if some of things that define the 'alpha male' belong to females as well. Maybe they should go back to beating their chests.

You said it not me

. I don't appreciate people putting words into my mouth.

It was exactly what you meant though.

The fact that i don't know her, and that she seemed fairly hostile against men led me to question. I didn't say "you must not be into men". Instead i asked..

The fact that she was talking about potential male mates not wanting her to earn more than them would imply that she is indeed a hetero. There are many men on this board who have been equally hostile about women... would it make sense to call them gay [celebate maybe ]?

Where did i state that she wanted to be a man? I only asked if she was even into men, since i don't know her and couldn't work out if she was some stereotypical feminist lesbian ranting on men, or just a little disillusioned.

The 'she wants to be a man' thing usually follows the atyical lesbian line ['she has penis envy'] so I just carried it over. It might be better to answer posts in the context they're in instead of trying to figure out what 'stereotype' might be writing them.. that'd take forever. There may be even 'lesbian manhaters' on the board.. why does it matter what group someone belongs to? Would that somehow impact the validity of their opinions? I'm not trying to be nasty.. I just don't like this myths being perpetuated. In fact, aside form gay pride marches on the news.. I don't really understand why it still exists. Why are strong/assertive women assumed to be gay?

As i believe, the person should like you for being yourself, and not want to change you. I would never wish that on anyone, nor do i expect it on me. If they don't like your success, status, intelligence, talent etc then they only feel threatened. Because they want to be able to provide for you. Yet some don't realise that just being them is enough.

Agreed. ..problem is the more 'unique' someone is the harder it is to find people to relate to. People usually like to go for their 'equals'.. and there's no such thing as a perfect fit [metephorically speaking].

Let's hope it doesn't happen in the outback

[edit on 30-1-2006 by riley]

Originally posted by NJE777
How does the man feel then?

I can sure as hell tell you that men don't like an independent successful woman!!!!!
They want someone to provide for and can't handle it if they are not needed!!

I have to comment here because I've heard all of this before. From my ex gf.

I was that "typical male" you describe. I wanted to pay for everything, take care of her etc etc....

And she was a very fiercely independent girl so that was one of the reasons why the relationship ended. I felt like I wasn't needed for anything. Like I was just "the guy she sleeps with". But in the end I realized that the problem wasnt with her but with me. At the time I didn't know why I couldn't handle it, then it I realized that by wanting to do everything... I was in a way trying to control her in a way. Which was the dumbest thing in the history of man.

Im just sorry it took me going through a lot of crap to figure that out. LOL!

My wife makes a lot more than me...sort of..

Half of mine, and all of hers...And I don't mind sharing..

Originally posted by Ocelot
I was that "typical male" you describe. I wanted to pay for everything, take care of her etc etc...
But in the end I realized that the problem wasnt with her but with me. At the time I didn't know why I couldn't handle it, then it I realized that by wanting to do everything... I was in a way trying to control her in a way. Which was the dumbest thing in the history of man.

I really appreciate your honesty...it takes a lot of self development to realise when you have the problem and to admit it. This issue is an individual thing, it's based on personal experiences.
I have my own perceptions grounded from my experiences and some of which are negative and unfortunately, prevent me from moving forward; by way of being very guarded. So the experience has changed my personality. It is funny though, your next relationship, you will apply what you have learnt from the previous one and it maybe the issue that is the problem, eg: 'the new partner might feel because you don't control/do everything, you don't care'... seems like a vicious circle.
I think this is referred to as 'emotional baggage'?

Originally posted by NJE777
I can sure as hell tell you that men don't like an independent successful woman!!!!!
They want someone to provide for and can't handle it if they are not needed!!

I'm always lookin' for a sugar momma!!! Still haven't found one yet though..........

LostSailor

Originally posted by NJE777
I can sure as hell tell you that men don't like an independent successful woman!!!!!
They want someone to provide for and can't handle it if they are not needed!!

I'm always lookin' for a sugar momma!!! Still haven't found one yet though..........

LOL LOL LOL...


It has been years since I read this thread and have not posted on it since my name or moniker was mentioned. No problem ...now I will post on it since some years have gone by and much has changed with the years.

Interesting things have happened but certain social framework has not changed...outwardly yes..but I believe inwardly it has not changed.

I notice more and more males today not able to hang on to paying jobs...and constantly switching jobs. They seem to have quite a resume..and a lengthy one.
The interesting thing to me is that they dont seem to have problems getting women.
What I am interested in with many of these men is how long they can keep a woman...in or out of marriage.

To my knowledge women can count money more effeciently than a male. These females tend to be better number crunchers of theirs and others monies.

What also I know ..is that a woman who can take care of herself..can come to a man for love only....the very thing so many women are claiming is missing from their secure and self sufficient lives. But do they in fact do this?? Or do the women want a complete resume from a male they date...before hand???

Do you know women who are interested in dating or marrying down the economic ladder?? Or do you know women who marry men making less than they with the view to these women making up the difference financially.. in "Love"...and as a career??

When you understand the depth of this template ..go back and look at NJE777's post and find out how many women who make more monies than most males...are interested in financing a man for a lifetime or career opportunity verses working their way up the food chain..to a fellow who must needs make at least as much as they or more???

But it is ok and socially expected to have a male make himself "expendable and disposable" in this manner for a woman or a woman and her kids by previous marriage/marriages...particularly if he makes more monies than does she.
But watch NJE777s post. Is she mentioning making up the difference for a man who makes less than her?? As a career move?? A higher maintenance man..or man and his children?? And will she call this "Love and Romance??" Think this through carefully.

Does NJE777 mention the concept that a woman making more monies than does a man is now able to come to a man for love only..even if he makes less than she...but do they in fact do this???

None of these factors today do you see NJE777 covering in her posts. She only expresses her Ire at what others have posted. To me this is an interesting reaction.
Which is why I never responded to this thread many years ago and am only now returning to it.

How man women do you personally know who marry a man with children verses men marrying a woman with children??

With my knowledge it is mostly men who take on a woman with children. Not that many women do as do the men. This seems to be socially unacceptable to most women seeking to start out with the great plan and social program. I suspect at some level the competition is not desirable.

However...what I am beginning to notice is that alot of women are growing older...and willing to accept men or males who make less than they. This is going to be interesting to observe as to how long it lasts. I suspect for many of them the romance will fade quickly when they realize how "High maintenance" many of these males are ..financially.
I think the romance will fade quickly with many of these women.


I've dated several women who made more monies than do I. They do not work the overtime that I do and hence do not gross the same..but on an hourly basis they make more monies than do I. However...I also know that these women are also not interested in supporting me financially with me taking off or quitting work. They are not that noble or "Good Providers."
I also note that many women do not want to work overtime or long hour shifts..nor tavel far from home for long periods. This seems to go against many social ideas or thinking at work in many female minds.
The women I know who do work overtime,most of them, have no other "Options" verses their obligations.


They have.. however...often asked me to "flashdance" them through certain problems with their homes, cars, and other issues which their expenses ..recipts to not always cover conveniently and timely...no matter how much they make or earn..

I do not feel socially or morally obligated to do this for them since they are making more monies than am I. They have no intentions of "Flashdancing" me through my problems with my homes and cars et al..out of their recipts.

I am not the pit crew for them to get back out onto the racetrack or the fast food lane for them and their children. Some of them have even asked me to look at or repair their chidrens vehicles as their expenses verses recipts do not cover this. I have often declined this task for the same reason. Male expendability and disposability. It is quite common out here. One of the worst things I have noted is that you do not let many women know you can do repairs. They will quickly put this extra stuff in the wagon for you to pull for them and their children..no matter how tired you are from working or labors.

Nonetheless..I note that there are more women out here making more monies than many of the males. ARe they interested in that much "Equality" so as to support a male as a career opportunity..a male and his children...along with her children ...while he stays at home and she works to support all of these obligations??
Are today's smart , savvy, educated, intelligent women of this world interested in that much "Equality??"

What do women like NJE777 say about this??

Think it through carefully.

Orangetom

reply to post by orangetom1999


oh wow hi Orangetom... I haven't seen you post for ages!

wow you know it is NJE777? (I got divorced so my initials changed, changed username...) lol
omg it is going to take me a while to read your reply but just wanted to say hi before you log off.