Beware the pitfalls of a rich woman

[Bambi eyes]

This is from the Metro paper that is given out in NYC.
I found this brother's viewpoint interesting enough to post.
What do you think of some of the points he's made on the subject?

Any men here ever dated a woman that was earning more than you?

Any women ever dated a man that earned less than you?

What were the issue in your relationship?


Beware the pitfalls of a rich woman
my view by j. shawn durham


You can’t afford her. Trust me, my man, I know. Yes, I am single. Yes, I like to wine and dine a woman I’m interested in courting. Yes, I make decent money. So I don’t have too much problem with popping the bill for chivalrous activity. But for the upwardly mobile woman (UMW), it may be a hard reality to face: Your pockets may be fat, but they may not be fat enough.

Frustrating, huh? You make decent money and you live a comfortable life. But there’s a difference in making $50,000 and dating someone pulling in, say, $150,000. And brother, if you are on that $50,000 end of the equation — no matter your looks or charm — you’re likely swimming upstream in your efforts to reel in that professional skirt at the other end of the bar. You can marvel at the four-figure balance in your savings account, but she stacks her dough in a lofty, five- and six-figure Roth IRA and has diversified her stock portfolio.

There’s nothing wrong with women making dough. But nowadays, women are earning more money than ever before, which means their mate-vetting process is likely to get a bit more finicky. Why? Because unlike in the olden days, UMWs don’t have to seek a mate for her own survival. (A note here: A recent British study revealed that 59 percent of wives said they would divorce immediately if their future economic security was assured.)

So now that women are earning more, they are dating Average Joes less. According to an analysis of 2005 census data by sociologist Andrew Beveridge, women age 21 to 30 are earning higher wages — between 15 to 25 percent more depending on the city — than men in the same age range in cities like New York, Chicago and Boston.

Many UMWs feel if they earn a lofty salary, they should be with someone who earns an equivalent or higher wage. And no matter what feminist mantra they chirp to you, fella, many UMWs want a man secure enough fiscally to take care of her and maintain her comfortable lifestyle, even though she may not look to surrender her self-reliance (or her own wealth).

In short, man, it’s all about her option. Many UMWs want the option for it all: to keep, not spend, their money on anyone but themselves. Many want a man in control to take care of the bills and make all the decisions. Others reserve the right to claim independence and do whatever they want when it’s convenient.

No one said dating was easy.


J. Shawn Durham is a Washington-based freelance writer.

[devineone]

Interesting article,
I'll have to read it in todays Metro. 

My take is that I'd use much more than money as a measure for a mate. 

I'm not making a six figure salary, but I'm comfortable.  I'd imagine if I were making even more money I'd still be comfortable.  While I wouldn't want a man who'd only want me for my money, (same as a guy wouldn't want a woman who'd only want him for his money), I'd want someone who is fiscally responsible for the money he has.  The amount of money you make is not the only reflection of success, but how well you manage that money is equally important.

Plenty of people make big and spend even bigger.  What is it someone said the more you make, the more you spend. 

I'd be much more interested in the complete package, not just the size of the man's wallet in deciding whether I want to get serious with him or not.  There are plenty of men with a lot of money that are jerks just as their are plenty of women who have a lot of money and they can be hard to deal with.

Still, financial freedom has allowed women to be much more discriminating when it comes to who they choose for a partner.  However, I've met women who make big money, and still manage to get caught up with some no good man because they get sexed up and just lose their minds.  Go figure.

[Susa]

Reality is, if you're making 6 figures and all he can afford is Denny's, dating is difficult.

[devineone]

Reality is, if you're making 6 figures and all he can afford is Denny's, dating is difficult.

This is true, but I don't necessarily require a man to make a comparable six figure salary if I were making six figures.  I wouldn't won't him making Denny's wages either. But most people tend to date within their socio economical environment anyway.  This includes but is not limited to what someone brings to the table intellectually as well as financially. 

My boss makes much less than his wife who works for some bio pharmaceutical company.  In fact, he's the one who takes off work and goes with her to keep the baby when she has to travel for conferences.    He's a pretty smart guy too.  But there is a big discrepency in their incomes. 

 I'm interested in dating men and considering more than their financial means as a draw.

[Bambi eyes]

Reality is, if you're making 6 figures and all he can afford is Denny's, dating is difficult.

Susa,

But what about when all he can afford is not Denny's...this brotha said he was bringing in decent money... is the difficulty still there because it's not MORE than what the woman is earning?

Devineone,

I'd be much more interested in the complete package,

According to this guy, he thinks he is the complete package except for the money issue, so that disqualifies him.  I wonder if most women are willing to overlook that one issue if everything else is okay, or if he has a point?

Btw... this was the article I was planning to post on Thursday but didn't get around to it... it was in the Wednesday's Metro. 

[devineone]

Bambi some people have their dating checklist and they won't deviate from it. (See my post on True love under what does Love mean to me).

I have my criteria too, but I wouldn't rule someone out if they have the qualities and values that I admire even if they were making less than I make.

I think that we have gotten (as a whole in society), much more materialisitc now.  We look at TV and see how the celebrities live and we say to ourselves, "We can have that, we can be like that).  We look at the external more so than the internal person.  We keep up with the Joneses in a big way.

I look at my sister and brother in law and how both started with very little and through the years, they built  together.  Today, (and I made this comment under Before the first date topic..).  Women and Men amass their fortune and lifestyle and they look around for someone who "complements" the picture.  That's all fine and good but are we looking at the whole person, their character, qualities, traits?  Or are we just looking at one or two things externally so we'll look good among  our social circle?

I like the following quote:

If there is one thing modern America a country of vast wealth on the one hand, yet screwed-up marriages and screwed-up kids on the other has taught us, it's that making money is a whole lot easier and more important than building relationships.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

[Susa]

Susa,

But what about when all he can afford is not Denny's...this brotha said he was bringing in decent money... is the difficulty still there because it's not MORE than what the woman is earning?

I personally have and probably would continue to date men who make less, but the reality is it does present limitations. For example, I may want to do things with him, like  go to Europe with me, and that may not be possible if he makes $50,000. In my experience, this kind of stuff comes up often when women make more. If the man makes more, he simply treats his less-earning woman to a treat.

Men don't take treats and I wouldn't offer him one either.

[Bambi eyes]

Or are we just looking at one or two things externally so we'll look good among  our social circle?

I think you've hit on something here... I think for many rich woman, it's more about whether the man will fit into their social circle which I would think consists mostly of people who are in their income bracket than they are about how much money he's pulling in.  If a man can pull of a class act and appear like he's loaded without really being loaded, he's got one foot in the door.  Women who have money generally aren't sweating the small stuff... they don't care if you can't pay their way, they aren't nickle and diming, but if you have no class and can't meet them on intellectual level, they would rather pass.  I think a man with money whose got no class would fail just as miserably in securing a relationship with a rich woman.

Men don't take treats and I wouldn't offer him one either.

Yeah... and I'd add to that the one's who have character and are not out to scam you don't take treats. They usually have too much pride.

[devineone]

Or are we just looking at one or two things externally so we'll look good among  our social circle?

I think you've hit on something here... I think for many rich woman, it's more about whether the man will fit into their social circle which I would think consists mostly of people who are in their income bracket than they are about how much money he's pulling in.  If a man can pull of a class act and appear like he's loaded without really being loaded, he's got one foot in the door.  Women who have money generally aren't sweating the small stuff... they don't care if you can't pay their way, they aren't nickle and diming, but if you have no class and can't meet them on intellectual level, they would rather pass.  I think a man with money who'd got no class would fail just as miserably in securing a relationship with a rich woman.

Men don't take treats and I wouldn't offer him one either.

Yeah... and I'd add to that the one's who have character and are not out to scam you don't take treats. They usually have too much pride.

LOL remember when Elisabeth Taylor married was it husband number 6 or 7?  Larry the construction worker?   That lasted for about a minute.  As long as she was in drug rehab which is where she met him, things worked out just fine.  When she got out, he had to go.

[Bambi eyes]

As long as she was in drug rehab which is where she met him, things worked out just fine.  When she got out, he had to go.

 

[Informed Investor]

Age would play a significant role to I"m guessing. 50K in your 20s in most places is great money. 50K in your 40s doesn't quite have the same effect.

Men do take treats! I wish a woman would offer me something financial for a change instead of it being the other way around!

[Susa]

Men do take treats! I wish a woman would offer me something financial for a change instead of it being the other way around!

A woman who treats a man just gets used.

And ITA, a man who makes 50K often doesn't fit in with a group of people who make $150 to $200k. I've tried it before and he usually gets intimidated and starts taking it out on the woman who put him in that spot.

I'd like to believe that money doesn't matter, but most times I've experienced, it matters to the man more than the woman.

[JShawn]

Hello all,

This is J. Shawn Durham and I wrote the piece in question for Metro's newspapers last week.

I am encouraged, for the most part, at the witty, intelligent and measured dialogue the piece has stirred on your site. I have written in various other mediums on plenty of dating tipics and often I get a lot of name callingg and back and forth/war of the sexes bunch of tripe as feedback. With that said, a few things:

--Firstly, the piece was simply outlining the changed landscape of dating. Women who earn more money than ever before can't expect the landscape to be the same as that of their mothers and grandmothers. And with black professionals, period, there is a lot of judging people based on their bank accounts intstead of their sincerity, drive, and ultimately, there moral character. After all, rich people who are fiscally, equally yolked are big failures when it comes to dating and relationships as well.

--Secondly, however, a man who tells you that money isn't everything is immediately insecure. I am not a six-figure man, but I am not on that 50K plain either. I hold my own and I understand the importance of having more than enough to make do. So the money isn't everything, but it is important.

--Thirdly, though, There are plenty of six and seven figure folks who simply are shallow as hell and only God knows how they amassed their fortunes, let alone any brand of college education. So the think that all five figure gents are simply rubes or idiots is a bit insulting and has no base. True, some people of lower incomes aren't on some person's "level," but there is no need to insist that you devise and entire dating doctrine that rules out a class on something so simple.

What I often find funny is how I know a lot of things, know how to dress and appear stunningly at certain events on some date's arms, and the people at business functions and hotiy toitty soirees, are -- to put it bluntly -- dumb as scrotum.

--Fourthly, I find that there is a skepticism among alpha women who fit the UMW model. For instance, women think they might look desperate if they go out by themselves of go to a bar alone. Others would never even consider approaching a man or give him a flirtatioous opening out of the blue to trigger conversation. Why is this the case? After all, a lot men don't want to have to have their idito friends always run interference with a Praetorian Guard clique of women just to talk to one woman, who very often, seems to make it more difficult on a man just trying to say "hi."

I'm rambling, but I digress.

--Fifthly, and this is key: It is interesting how the ultimate standards of UMW are traditional in this sense: a man must be on my level or better. If not, he is not the man for me. This is somewhat understandable and atraditionalist. But here is the problem facing not only men and women: EVERYONE THAT IS RIGHT FOR YOU OR INTENDED BY GOD FOR YOU TO HAVE IS NOT GOING TO BE PERFECT IN YOUR EYES.

My parents have been together for 47 years and they are a progressive, equally yolked couple. But they had no problem being poor together.  And growing together. They had less ego and more humility.

I dunno. I personally think men and women both need to shut the hell up and take a long hard look at our personal flaws before before we start eliminating the "worth" of others based on their income level. If that were the case, then the world would have never accepted Jesus -- after all, he was nothing but a blue collar carpenter.  We should measure a man by his character, faith and his work ethic. After that, everytthing else should fall into place. 

[Bambi eyes]

Welcome to AHB J. Shawn.  I am so glad you found your way to the site to comment on your article "Live" in person.   Thanks for adding the additional comments which I'll get to reading right now and respond to later on. 

[Legacy]

Men do take treats! I wish a woman would offer me something financial for a change instead of it being the other way around!

A woman who treats a man just gets used.

Susa, I don't understand this thinking. Is a man who treats a woman just getting used? Why do women have such a double standard when they make more money? Men have carried women for like, well ever, & no one ever said one word about it. Money matters but it should matter *less* if there's enough between 2 people.

I agree w/ II totally. I take treats too.  - LOL