Gold Diggers - Good or Bad? What do you think?

This made my loughs!!

http://www.freakonomics.com/2007/10/09/the-economics-of-gold-digging/

Yes it's very funny IM.....but probably not FUNNY to 
any girl who fits the type !

Maybe the Bible is true after all..."The LOVE of money is the root of all evils"

I guess this is true

For those girls hope for a more wise way to carry their life

http://www.freakonomics.com/2007/10/09/the-economics-of-gold-digging/

It's mercenary & ridiculous. Sheer desperation hidden in the anonymity of the internet. But her thoughts are shared by millions of women like her.
There are actually websites seeking such arrangements.

Her pleas, though, are honest which makes her comically ridiculous.   
As bad as the Brazilian student who auctioned her virginity on line & then got duped.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/brazilian-woman-auctioned-virginity-duped-article-1.1396191

it's me wrote:This made my loughs!!

http://www.freakonomics.com/2007/10/09/the-economics-of-gold-digging/

Now this was an interesting article. The comments were also very interesting.

Juliette Hardy wrote:It's mercenary & ridiculous. Sheer desperation hidden under the anonimity of the internet. But her thoughts are shared by millions of women.

There are actually websites seeking such arrangements.

Her pleas have an element of honesty which makes her comically ridiculous.

Not to be a pain, but isn't any woman who is seeking marriage for security reasons also in a way a gold digger?

What I mean is, if you "settle" for a guy not becuase you truly love him, but because he will be a good bread winner  (not necessarily rich just a good bread winner) isn't he also just being chosen for what economic value he can bring to the table?

So what's the difference between this gal who is being honest up front and all the other gals who make a guy think she wants him for him, but really just wants him for what he can bring to the table?

See the acid test for me is this - if a guy has money the one question any woman should ask is "If he lost all his money today and had no way to get back any of that money, would you still want to be with him?"

And if you stripped away his fancy cars, big house, money etc and are left with his arrogant attitude, lousy looks, lack of compassion etc etc etc any of the things that might irritate you about a guy but you might put up with if he had money (if that's your goal - not saying that was ever mine) then would you still stay with him?

And if you can honestly say that you would NOT then why the hell would you marry him in the first place?  Money isn't so much a bad thing, but I'd never put up with bad traits just because a guy had money.

It's the same thing I would say to a woman who is in LUST.  If you find a guy attractive and he really really turns you on, and the sex is great, but he has other traits that really turn you off or you find you're really not compatible, would you still marry him?

Because trust me, lust fades and as the years go by you'll be stuck with a guy you no longer find attractive AND who's habits or traits irritate or anger you either for the rest of your life or until you can't stand it anymore and divorce.

I wish we would teach our girls to have more self sufficiency.  Not to ever think you would rely on a man to support you the rest of your life.  To find an occupation that you love and that will support you all on your own if need be.

I would also recommend that young women make sure THEY are using birth and disease control every single time if they are sexually active.  It's the woman's responsibility to take care of her own health.  Don't ever let someone else determine your life path because you didn't protect yourself.  

Every time I hear of a woman getting accidentally pregnant and then having to marry I just shudder.  Not because children are a bad thing, but because she altered her life and it might not be necessarily where she wanted it to go.

And now I'll get off the soapbox...

To get personal for a moment, my husband and I are
"second time rounders". 
When we met I'd got a secure job, my own rented home, my own car, my own social life so I didn't want a man for all of those things. I'd also lived on my own for some years after my divorce and had learned a lot about myself from that.
I believe it's worked for us because of that experience
 I'd had.

I think many people rush into a second marriage before the ink has dried on the divorce absolute document, when they could possibly benefit from living solo for a while to find themselves.
That's just my opinion of course. I know some people 
have totally different views to mine about that.

Joanna wrote:I think many people rush into a second marriage before the ink has dried on the divorce absolute document, when they could possibly benefit from living solo for a while to find themselves.

Couldn't agree more!

LornaDoone wrote:
Not to be a pain, but isn't any woman who is seeking marriage for security reasons also in a way a gold digger?

What I mean is, if you "settle" for a guy not becuase you truly love him.....

Because trust me, lust fades and as the years go by you'll be stuck with a guy you no longer find attractive AND who's habits or traits irritate or anger you .....

I wish we would teach our girls to have more self sufficiency. ..

Well, yes. I'm against "settling" & mercanary gold-diggers. Women who enter longterm arrangements, whether sexual, marital or as "companions for appearances/ platonic escorts."

I'm refering to the ridicule in that comical "request to be a gold-digger" post.
It's an awful feeling for women to force themselves to be with someone just for financial security. It's empty.... Not complete. Even if he's good-looking, affluent, kind...there has to be love, chemistry, understanding,  a strong connection, compatibility....

A girlfriend who acted just like that would argue that I'm too idealistic and that I'll end up not enjoying a "lifestyle" that she had with her sugar daddies.  She even gave me a book once called "How To Snare a Millionaire " or something (that ended up with my Oxfam donations.)

I don't agree with such mercenary gold-diggers.
I refuse such advances no matter who it is. It's having the power over me to control that makes me resist even more.   
Women need to feel more independent & have self-respect.

I don't think lust fades where there's love. Look at Nick & Nina.
That to me is the most important and vital component: LOVE

Everything else can be worked on, if there is true, romantic love.

One of the worst traits in a woman or a man, if you ask me.

The voice of experience talking, I´ve met both. Men are rare but women are everywhere.

I´ve been subjected to it ever since I graduated. It´s all men in high places usually and partly their behavior keeps this going and opportunities open for "gold diggers".

What to do?

It´s really frustrating but first thing you need to do is to change the parameters of your interaction with these men. Just say no! I´ve never met a man who was mad at me because of it.

Also there are good women living payroll after payroll, not having a messy life but taking care of whatever they have, keeping order and planning ahead, spending money wisely. They want a man who can provide more while not compromising their love. I don´t think they are gold diggers.

Agree with you ladies. So true what you have written. The artical is really funny especially the answer. LOL

I never was interested in a rich guy but some of my friends are. And the difference is that, some of my friends have bad paid jobs and are not interested in a career and are always broke by the end of the month and they see no other option to change that only with a RICH MAN.

And I started a career, have a good position in my company and I am well paid. Meaning I am independend and can do what I like. I don't need a man to have a lifestyle I want and that helps.
On the other hand I think I would have a problem to date a man who would earn less than me. He should at least earn the same. Money always creats problems.......so it is better if both sides are on the same level. But having said that, there are enough examples out there where it works. 

Carla97 wrote:One of the worst traits in a woman or a man, if you ask me.

The voice of experience talking, I´ve met both. Men are rare but women are everywhere.

I´ve been subjected to it ever since I graduated. It´s all men in high places usually and partly their behavior keeps this going and opportunities open for "gold diggers".

What to do?

It´s really frustrating but first thing you need to do is to change the parameters of your interaction with these men. Just say no! I´ve never met a man who was mad at me because of it.

Also there are good women living payroll after payroll, not having a messy life but taking care of whatever they have, keeping order and planning ahead, spending money wisely. They want a man who can provide more while not compromising their love. I don´t think they are gold diggers.  

I love that Carla. Best sentence I read today LOL But really so true. If you like a guy you have ten woman around him. Never know where they came from. One is always more pretty than the other. So depressing

Isn´t it.

Men want to get something for nothing. And somehow they want to be prepared, pile the stock, it wasn´t raining when a Noah built the ark, so maybe it´s biological.

Well after I came out of a messy relationship and lost all my assets and a lot of money (doesn't pay to earn more than your partner ladies!) I vowed and declared that no-one was going to take what I had worked hard for again..... made me a tad bitter. Then I met hubby who was wealthy (compared to me) had a Porsche, Ducati 2 homes etc. He has a very generous nature and I wasn't used to that at all. He would often take me away for surprise weekends, fancy restaurants, the works. There were times I honestly thought I was living someone else's life, felt a bit spoiled but what a ride!! I always insisted on paying my share, he always refused. Fast forward a few years and hubby turned his back on financial success to follow his bliss, porsche's were replaced with station wagons (3 kids in his 911 didn't fit very well, and apparently you cant put them in the boot). There has been unemployment, illness, etc along the way, financial adjustments had to be made when I decided to be a full-time Mom, all these can add pressure, some of it not welcome, but you get there. 17 years together and we are about to celebrate our 10th wedding anniversary and the bottom line for me is that when I first met him I knew he had a good heart, still does - so whether its raining money or not he is still the only one that I want to have fun with, the only one who can turn my knees to jelly (corny but true). And then there are the days I could cheerfully hit him on the head with a rolling pin, but that's another story.

You lucky girl
You lucky!!!!  

Yes 

Yep I picked much better the 2nd time round, believe me when you have seen bad, you know when good comes along...

Oh so nice theminis. Like that story. Congrats to a great man     There are still out there


"And then there are the days I could cheerfully hit him on the head with a rolling pin, but that's another story. ..."

I was laughing hard.........

Nice

But guess G would prefer a bat


Right?

Yes congrats to a great man! Nice story.

Felt so happy to read this thread... some of your personal sharing I mean  

From the little that I have witnessed so far through different lives, I think like everyone else, that a genuine love-relationship is a blessing... in today's times though it is quickly becoming a "rare" blessing

Absolutely
More and more rare

Juliette Hardy wrote:

I don't think lust fades where there's love. Look at Nick & Nina.
That to me is the most important and vital component: LOVE

Everything else can be worked on, if there is true, romantic love.

I agree also, that a bit of lust would exist in a strong love relationship (not vice-versa)... romantic love is an exhilarating mixture after all...  And yes again, everything can be worked on, if both partners want that their genuine love continues to exist...

Nicky80 wrote:Oh so nice theminis. Like that story. Congrats to a great man     There are still out there


"And then there are the days I could cheerfully hit him on the head with a rolling pin, but that's another story. ..."

I was laughing hard.........

Believe me some days I waiver between the rolling pin or a cricket bat LOL. Fairytales are not real ladies, we know that, however there are moments of absolute bliss to be found. I think the trick is to refresh your memory all the time on why you picked this person to be with, weather the little storms, glimpse a lovely rainbow and keep on moving onwards -

Rainbow after baseball bat


Ok!

HA HA yep maybe that too.

Forgot to answer the question: True Gold-diggers = bad - marry or partner for love is better

Absolutely bad
For both

theminis wrote:Well after I came out of a messy relationship and lost all my assets and a lot of money (doesn't pay to earn more than your partner ladies!) I vowed and declared that no-one was going to take what I had worked hard for again..... made me a tad bitter.  Then I met hubby who was wealthy (compared to me) had a Porsche, Ducati 2 homes etc.   He has a very generous nature and I wasn't used to that at all.  He would often take me away for surprise weekends, fancy restaurants, the works.  There were times I honestly thought I was living someone else's life, felt a bit spoiled but what a ride!!   I always insisted on paying my share, he always refused.   Fast forward a few years and hubby turned his back on financial success to follow his bliss, porsche's were replaced with station wagons (3 kids in his 911 didn't fit very well, and apparently you cant put them in the boot).  There has been unemployment, illness, etc along the way, financial adjustments had to be made when I decided to be a full-time Mom, all these can add pressure, some of it not welcome, but you get there.   17 years together and we are about to celebrate our 10th wedding anniversary and the bottom line for me is that when I first met him I knew he had a good heart, still does - so whether its raining money or not he is still the only one that I want to have fun with, the only one who can turn my knees to jelly (corny but true).  And then there are the days I could cheerfully hit him on the head with a rolling pin, but that's another story.  

(3 kids in his 911 didn't fit very well, and apparently you cant put them in the boot)

OMG I was laughing so hard when I read this that I couldn't breathe and started coughing!

See you made my point - "when I first met him I knew he had a good heart, still does..."


The man may have had money but when you stripped it away, he was STILL someone you wanted to be with.  That's not someone who is a gold digger, that's someone who met someone she really liked, lusted for and then loved so when the money went away, the reason for marrying him was still there - HIM - NOT his money.

Anyway, thanks for that laugh.  Kids in the boot - too funny!

Him
Not his money
Yes

Well I had the benefit of seeing him around at work and at functions etc for 3 years before we dated, he was always happy and smiling and that was the main attraction, his smiley eyes and the way they would sparkle. One night at a work function, (just before he left for Europe for 2 months) he asked me to dance and when he pulled me in close it was electric (ooh Im making myself puke now LOL) and we both knew it. He then left the club promising to call me for a date when he returned. The day he arrived back in Melbourne, he did just that and the rest is history - that's my love story. When I tell the kids our story I leave out all the parts about Mummys lustful mind!!!

Theminis just read your story---so sweet it made me cry....  

Thank you SG, happy to share. Its one of those defining moments for me, so I think its important to remember those nice moments in life we have. My Dad shared with me when I was a teen that although they were married for over 20 years he still saw Mum as his bride - now that was sweet, I didn't fully understand though what he meant till I was much older.

Ahhhh. That reminds me of one of those sayings that keeps popping up on facebook: keep smiling because you never know who's falling in love with your smile. Something like that anyway.

Coming back to golddiggers, there aren't all that many women out there who are purely and solely motivated by a man's bank account. Some, yes, but not all that many.

Where it gets more complicated is the fact that even in the 21st century a man's earning power is important and if we're honest with ourselves, it's still a consideration. It's often a consideration that we're willing to set aside if the man's a good man but it's still something we'll think about, whether we want to admit it or not.

Ask yourself this: if you could imagine the perfect man for your daughter (can be an imaginary daughter) would you wish him to be poor or to have a decent income? That doesn't make you a gold digger or mercenary. It simply makes you practical.

Well it wont matter to me if my daughter marries a poor man, she's going to rock this world!!

I would definitely not want her to struggle financially but would hope that she is more than capable of taking care of herself if need be and if she is happy in her relationships all the better.

Hoping that whatever path she chooses she makes sure to prepare for it. Get back to me in about 10 years or so when she wants to date - I may have very different things to say then.

Yep agree that it doesn't matter who she marries as long as she's happy but that wasn't the question.  If you could choose whether the man she loves and makes her happy is poor or rich, all other things being the same, I think you'd choose rich, right?

If you think about the courting game of dating, right from the start, men usually are looking for ways to display dominance and strength. They say they like Miss Independent but I have come to the conclusion that damsel in distress is more appealing. Men want to help, even if you don´t need any help.

If it was other way around, woman helped man, she would eventually feel used, but strangely men just feel good about themselves  

Katiedot wrote:Yep agree that it doesn't matter who she marries as long as she's happy but that wasn't the question.  If you could choose whether the man she loves and makes her happy is poor or rich, all other things being the same, I think you'd choose rich, right?

Nope sorry I wouldn't exclusively choose rich, I'd choose capable above those choices, so if I stop sitting on the fence for a minute here, well I would not pick rich.

I wouldn´t mind if he is little rich, maybe that´s just me  

theminis wrote:Nope sorry I wouldn't exclusively choose rich, I'd choose capable above those choices, so if I stop sitting on the fence for a minute here, well I would not pick rich.  

Yep, but you don't have to choose between those qualities. He can be capable AND rich. Or capable AND poor.

Ok I would choose rich over poor if I get the same thing.

Of course money is not everything but it helps a lot. If the guy is poor or would earn less than me it makes it difficult. If you in a relationship and have like nearly no money your relations ship is all about money and how to afford things, how to pay bills. Ok maybe not always but I guess you know what I'm saying....

Yep, that's my point. Money matters and it's something we all of us think about whether we'd want to admit it or not.

How much we act on it depends on individual circumstance. Some people decide it's an important thing in finding a partner, many of us don't. But it is something we all consider at some stage in the dating game.

Oh well I must be a weirdo then as money didn't come into my mind when I got together with my second husband. I'd got my own home, a financially secure job, a car and a good social life so I didn't want him for any of those reasons.
I wanted love and emotional security and found it.

Joanna wrote:I wanted love and emotional security

Yep, so does pretty much everyone but that's not really relevant because gold diggers can want these things just as much.

You've just mentioned that you have your own home, a financially secure job, a car and a good social life so at some point this is something that's crossed your mind even if only to cross it off the list and file it under something not to have to worry about because it's not important to you.  But it seems to me that you did think about it.

The point I'm trying to make, obviously not very well, is that writing as if gold diggers are some weird exotic species of human being alien to the rest of us (as some posters do) isn't really very accurate.  Considering a possible partner in terms of their financial stability is something that pretty much all of us do, even if only for a moment and even if only to decide that it's not important to us.  It's still an evaluation.

Okay yes I thought about hubby's financial stability the more involved we became however we never discussed money, earnings assets until we moved in together, it was never a factor. Lets hope I don't have to choose for my lovely as I would still choose poor bottom line.

I still know some women who won't date anyone who doesn't earn 6 figures, they have had a lot of fun but are still alone

What about meeting the man of your dreams, everything is simpatico, he is very financially secure and he asks you to sign a pre-nup?

blubelle wrote:What about meeting the man of your dreams, everything is simpatico, he is very financially secure and he asks you to sign a pre-nup?  

I'm all for that, bluebelle, because that way you can prove you don't have ulterior motives.
Pre-nups sometimes can be overridden, but with precise, elaborate clauses that are so well-drafted, they're pretty ironclad.

I wouldn't find it offensive. In fact I'd welcome it. It's not about lack of trust, nor suspicion.
Just a precaution.
I find it absurd that someone of lower socio-economic status can enter a legal social union contract, and walk away a few years later with half the assets of the other.

If I was in the reverse situation where the husband-to-be was less affluent than me, of course I'd insist on it, too. Even if I loved him wholehearteldly and would languish if we were apart.
So, naturally, I'd expect the same if I was involved in a civil partnership/ marriage with someone more affluent than myself.

It's just fair.

theminis wrote:Nope sorry I wouldn't exclusively choose rich, I'd choose capable above those choices, so if I stop sitting on the fence for a minute here, well I would not pick rich.

Katiedot wrote: Yep, but you don't have to choose between those qualities. He can be capable AND rich. Or capable AND poor.

I would want to know the *why*...

If he is poor, did he become that way because he left a job that paid well but required him to do unethical or immoral things?

Or, is he poor because he's not capable?

If he is rich, did he become that way because he paid people minimum wage while earning a million dollar salary?

Or, is he rich but following the golden rule of doing unto others as he would want done to him?

And if he lost his riches, would he still be okay? Would he be capable of not tying his bank account with his self?

Interesting article, and the comments are too.

But turn it around. I have dated guys who once they secured the relationship, used me to pay their debts, support them once they moved in, and so on. And I am not wealthy by any means. But I have a way to survive, and it attracts the wrong men. So, I am just not dating right now till I figure out my "glitch" !!
But there are men who think just like the girl in this article.

mosaic wrote:

     theminis wrote:Nope sorry I wouldn't exclusively choose rich, I'd choose capable above those choices, so if I stop sitting on the fence for a minute here, well I would not pick rich.  

Katiedot wrote: Yep, but you don't have to choose between those qualities. He can be capable AND rich. Or capable AND poor.

I would want to know the *why*...

If he is poor, did he become that way because he left a job that paid well but required him to do unethical or immoral things?

Or, is he poor because he's not capable?

If he is rich, did he become that way because he paid people minimum wage while earning a million dollar salary?  

Or, is he rich but following the golden rule of doing unto others as he would want done to him?

And if he lost his riches, would he still be okay?  Would he be capable of not tying his bank account with his self?

Good points mosaic.

And your last point was the point I was trying to make in my comments. With the added point of how the woman would react if he lost his riches.