Comments on: Are women better off marrying for money? http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: ennemkay http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-75887 Thu, 12 Sep 2013 21:01:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-75887 In 40% of american households (with married couples), women are now the primary breadwinners. So I don’t know what this woman is blabbering about. Progress is being made and the fight for gender equality has certainly been worthwhile and continues to be.

]]>
By: Odious Swaggering GSBer http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-20622 Sat, 08 Aug 2009 18:05:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-20622 There is a third choice, technically easy but emotionally difficult: choose a high-ROI profession, then opt out of the materialist rat race. Here’s an example.

Dentists in the US make much more than non-specialized MDs, yet need less than half the schooling. Working just 15 hours a week, a dentist can earn $50k a year while still in her 20s, with very high job flexibility and security.

$50k is not a lot. Or is it? Depends where you live. Modest homes in small-town Iowa cost $60,000. That’s a down payment of $6,000 and monthly payment of $350. Move there, work your 15 hours, and you’re set for life, with or without a rich husband. People there have bad teeth, so the strategy is evergreen.

The hard part of this is not in the mechanics. The hard part is choosing not to live in NY, SF or LA with all your graduate-educated friends. Our pride, our competitive spirit, entraps us.

Reminds me of a quote a smart friend once told me: “Trapped in the walls of his paper prison, he waits out his time like the fool that he is.”

]]>
By: Chris Leow http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16793 Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:39:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16793 Well I believe we in Malaysia can marry for love and money at the same time. We in Malaysia are enjoying high growth and high inflation, I do not understand all this complaining for choices, you can have both love and money. After all money is easily available in Malaysia by jumping to a higher salary! We have to thank China for our strong growth as our economy was going down until March 2009 and China rescued us by buying our commodities. Currently there is strong job market, 2 jobs for every worker, we have to import in foreign labour to do jobs that locals do not want to do ! We have high inflation, an example is a local dessert called “cendol” selling for $1.20 in local currency a month ago, is now selling for $ 1.80 in local currency. Thats a hefty increase, so don’t complain, enjoy the World boom and marry for both money and love !

]]>
By: advocatusdiaboli http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16577 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:09:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16577 In a largely capitalist economy where money rules, everything you do should be tempered with money in mind. Lazy lay-about GW Bush would never have become president if it weren’t for the Yale schooling, one-year AWOL military service in light duty away from, and more that his parents wealth provided him. Everyone should marry money if they can–men and women–it’s a lot easier than the uncertainties of trying to earn it.

]]>
By: sunnyprof http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16549 Fri, 12 Jun 2009 05:51:34 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16549 As a reproductive biologist, I think that the love for money is reasonable. Generally speaking, the female mammale always choose the supportive and steady male as their fixes partner, and this choice is benefit to her babies.

]]>
By: Ananke http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16511 Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:50:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16511 I am a man in my 30s, happily married and with children…

Men are dumb enough to be manipulated by girls until they turn 20. Adolt men, and finnacially attractive men are smart and experienced enough to understand women.

So, what men think is that one cannot buy emotions, one cannot buy love. And, believe me, men want love. If a girl doesn’t trylly love me, I would not have my children from her, it’s that simple.

]]>
By: Anon http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16479 Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:31:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16479 Are women better off marrying for money?

Of course not. Just ask 30% of all women. The big money is in divorce.

Boom-boom!

]]>
By: Jenny http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16390 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:59:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16390 There are just 10% (or less) of men are rich in the world,but there are some many women in the world, to bear down some many rivals and get the quota for the 10%, I don’t think it is easier than getting success in wworking. It is not a good idea!

]]>
By: nika http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16373 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:38:25 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16373 Actually one is far better off marrying someone whom shares the same values, who wants to create an equal partnership. If you do that, the money will come. My parents are proof of that. You would have a “rich” life in every way that mattered, truly.

If the relationship is too lopsided in either direction and the parties do not have the same mindset, the likelihood of divorce is much higher.

As for the workplace, I work with many single and married parents and the majority of those had children at an early age. Thus, they lack financial security that one needs to enable being a good parent and provider. The real key to being rich is delaying parenthood, whether marriage turns out to be a factor or not.

]]>
By: SingleLine http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/06/05/are-women-better-off-marrying-for-money/#comment-16365 Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:33:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3863#comment-16365 I am male and 37 years old, I am not from America. I was married for 10 years, and divorced because we did not have any children.

There have been a lot of strong negative comments about this article, mostly from men. The author is correct, it is not easy to succeed in business and it is more difficult for women than men for a number of different reasons. My point is that she is correct, women do marry for money, but that does not mean they marry only for money. Love is a complicated and difficult thing to understand, love comes with time, and is based on friendship and mutual respect, as well as physical attraction. The way I understood her, the author meant that if you are a woman trying to decide whom to marry, if you are also thinking about financial security, then give some preference to the man with the good job, or the man with money over the man whose financial future seems uncertain. This is because you cannot easily achieve financial security by yourself, just as strong-working-mum says, she worked really hard just so that she and her son could survive without the help of any man (except Gordon Brown).

Financial security does not mean being a multi-millionaire, it means being able to support a comfortable lifestyle for yourself and family. The model (phoenix1) explained that these rich men will ‘eat you alive’, and she is right, it is impossible to become really rich without learning to ignore what does not matter (in many cases this means what your partner wants) while getting what you want. But I do not think the author of this article was talking about marrying a multi-millionaire.

Many posters have made allusions to prostitution, and how a woman that ‘marries for money’ is in some way a prostitute. I think these people do not really understand what prostitution is and how different the two ideas are. If a woman can marry a rich man, whom she cannot stand, only for finacial security, and she can live with him although she does not love him, then she has made some difficult choices, and has good control over herself, but she is not a prostitute, she is just somebody’s wife. There are two kinds of prostitutes, forced and by choice. Forced prostitutes are either drug addicts or are coerced by other illegal means. By choice prostitutes want a lot of money and independence at the same time, and they achieve both through paid sex with many partners. They are not attaching themselves to one man (or woman). The joke that someone posted is not really fair, almost anyone would have sex with someone they wouldn’t normally have sex with if they were offered a million dollars.

]]>