Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Over 45  > Women's Financial Status      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Welsh474
Joined: 9/13/2010
Msg: 451
Women's Financial StatusPage 19 of 27    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27)
Is this the same guy with no passion and only sees you once a week? The one that wasn't too happy about you wanting him to support your grandkids? Boy, sounds like fun. And while it's nice that he doesn't judge based on your income - you certainly seem to judge. The thing is, folks post on here and you pick and choose what to reply to. Kayla had some excellent points as did Largo and Paderic. The things is, you focus on the two male posters that "see" your position as opposed to the ones that call you a hypocrite and although you say you're not a goldiggger - you are looking for the silver lining and a meal ticket.

IF you can't see the irony in you wanting someone with more than you yet you don't want anyone with less...weird. I'm with Paderic, at least he called a spade a spade. As did a few others, Amethyst was bang on as well in being realistic.

As for the rest of the fora and limiting their choices because they have requirements/preference/needs that seem, to the majority, to be realistic - that's what mature adults do. You're still looking at the world like a damsel in distress. Sad.
 amethyst10616
Joined: 7/23/2009
Msg: 452
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 5:45:28 PM
A man may want to take care of a woman, there is nothing at all wrong with that. I do not know of anyone who is emotionally healthy who seeks out needy people. "Needy" is defined in this context as someone who needs someone to be helped out or to be lifted up to a higher standard of living by someone else's income contribution.

Two incomes do make for more disposable income when combined. There is no reason at all why each couple cannot decide how to contribute and spend together. It is all a personal decision. However, I think for the long run, the bigger contributor needs to know that the reason why the other person is with them is for love, not for financial gain.
 ladyc4
Joined: 2/14/2006
Msg: 453
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:08:02 PM
mjinct-
Not meaning to beat up on you, but I think welsh has nailed this.

Now, I do want to bring up the point that sometimes a person may bring some specialized skill, ability or talent to a relationship that makes for the 2 people having a better life yet conserving money and time( a man or woman who is very "handy", someone who is proficient in home maintenance/care/repairs, or has cooking, cleaning, gardening,household management skills that can significantly stretch a dollar. But again, the person has to be willing and committed to reliably make those non-cash contributions...unfortunately all too often this dollar-saving talent is retired or semi-retired once the possessor of said skill/talent feels that he or she is secure in the relationship.
But if someone has exceptional skills that can save money and make life better, and the ethics to continue using them, the actual dollar amount of cash income may not necessarily HAVE to match or exceed their partners'.
And yes, there are people of both genders who give little thought to their potential partners finances and ability to contribute in other practical ways. Indeed there are both men and women who are to all intents and purposes, willing to BUY a relationship. Now, a relationship on that basis would bother the hell out of me, regardless of which ay the financial discrepancy ran-but maybe that's just me.
Cindy O
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 454
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:09:42 PM
Ya know, maybe it's because when I was married 20 some odd years ago it was to someone who couldn't/wouldn't hold a regular job. That I was the only one always working, paying the rent. He even took our daughter to day care every day on my dime so he could 'look for work', and wondering who he could borrow money from next to buy cigs, pot, etc. So yes, stability and financially responsiblity is important to me. Two qualities that I think I possess so it does NOT make me hypocritical. You can fault me if you want for not seeking out someone who makes less than me. The fact is most men make more.

And for my partner needing to know my motivation for being with them, I point out the fact that I have been single for 25 years, turning down several offers of commitment from financially secure suitors.
 Paderic
Joined: 2/23/2010
Msg: 455
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:22:42 PM
Reminder, I have been feeding myself just fine on my own for 25 years now.


LOL, the name "meal ticket" does not literally mean meals.


It may seem hypocritical to some but if I can do better than someone who makes $12.00 an hour, why shouldn't I?


That you refer to it as doing "better" says a lot. Maybe most men want to do better than someone who makes $12 an hour as well.


I just think they may be limiting their choices by being so stringent in their requirements.


Isn't limiting one's choices the whole point of having requirements?
 Welsh474
Joined: 9/13/2010
Msg: 456
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:44:39 PM
""Ya know, maybe it's because when I was married 20 some odd years ago it was to someone who couldn't/wouldn't hold a regular job. That I was the only one always working, paying the rent. He even took our daughter to day care every day on my dime so he could 'look for work', and wondering who he could borrow money from next to buy cigs, pot, etc. So yes, stability and financially responsiblity is important to me. Two qualities that I think I possess so it does NOT make me hypocritical. You can fault me if you want for not seeking out someone who makes less than me. The fact is most men make more.
And for my partner needing to know my motivation for being with them, I point out the fact that I have been single for 25 years, turning down several offers of commitment from financially secure suitors. ""

--------------------

You still don't get it. Many men on here could have posted the very same thing you did - they supported someone and themselves for years (maybe more than once) and don't want to do it again. Doesn't mean they can't, just means they don't want to. Again - just being realistic. And yes, it still makes you hypocritical - you won't do what you seek.

And really, who gives a rat's azz if you've turned down some suitors with means. If you have a vagina - you've probably turned down offers from financially secure suitors, it just is - doesn't make you special.
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 457
view profile
History
LOL, the name "meal ticket" does not literally mean meals.
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:47:37 PM
Duh, thanks. I didn't know that. Must be my limited earning power.
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 458
view profile
History
LOL, the name meal ticket does not literally mean meals.
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:49:14 PM
Duh thanks. I didn't know that, must be my limited earning power.
 amethyst10616
Joined: 7/23/2009
Msg: 459
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 6:59:33 PM
There are so many ways that a person can contribute as Cindy O pointed out. It really comes down to disposable income and that is directly affected by how much has to go out for eating, home repairs, car repairs, etc. If someone can really cook, they contribute to the bottom line by saving on food. I can cook, sew, and garden. I save in all kinds of ways that contribute to the financial well-being to my household. A handyman or handywoman can really save the household a lot of money. Saving is contributing.

As far as the poster who says she won't marry down, well her reality is her preference. Her life experience has taught her that she needs a man who is at least an equal contributor and that is what the majority of the posters on this thread is saying. For some reason, I interpret what she is trying to say differently than some of you. What is her bigger issue, IMO, is that she stayed with a man for 20 years who was a dead beat, from all that she posted.

On these forums, and especially on this one, I think we tend to be more authentic just because we have been there and done that for so many issues. Living in reality is something we have had no choice but to do in order to survive emotionally, physically, and financially. Some of us are just better at articulating what we really feel than others are.
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 460
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 7:04:57 PM
Thanks, but I thought I articulated it pretty well. And I didn't stay with him for 20 years, couldn't make it past 5.
 amethyst10616
Joined: 7/23/2009
Msg: 461
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 7:17:19 PM
I reread and I misinterpreted. I stand corrected about the twenty year marriage.

Mjinict, I was not defending you, just saying that we all make inferences based on where we are in this life. Articulate away:)
 Paderic
Joined: 2/23/2010
Msg: 462
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 7:30:46 PM

As far as the poster who says she won't marry down, well her reality is her preference. Her life experience has taught her that she needs a man who is at least an equal contributor and that is what the majority of the posters on this thread is saying. For some reason, I interpret what she is trying to say differently than some of you.


The issue is not with her preference, it's the criticism of men for having the same preference.
 amethyst10616
Joined: 7/23/2009
Msg: 463
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 8:01:12 PM
I do understand that. I did think that not everyone understood her message, but she thinks she articulates herself perfectly so apparently it is me who misunderstood.
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 464
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 8:13:45 PM
The issue is not with her preference, it's the criticism of men for having the same preference.
-------------
I think there's a difference in somebody wanting their partner to make the same 13.00 bucks an hour or better (me)than somebody wanting their partner to make the same 80,000 a year or better.
 laughingatliberals
Joined: 10/11/2011
Msg: 465
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 8:42:10 PM

I think there's a difference in somebody wanting their partner to make the same 13.00 bucks an hour or better (me)than somebody wanting their partner to make the same 80,000 a year or better.


What is the difference? Both are seeking a equal partner. One that makes the same income as they do.

Or do you think once past a certain income level they should just accept someone that earns much less than them?
 Welsh474
Joined: 9/13/2010
Msg: 466
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 8:45:21 PM
No one has mentioned numbers. The numbers are irrelevant really. And no, you still don't get it. What is being said is - folks have preferences, they are allowed these preferences and if one of those preferences is that someone make relatively equal to them, so what - it's what they prefer. You're saying it shouldn't matter and that they may pass up some wonderful person that makes less. Again, it's their preference. Just the same as someone who doesn't want to date someone who is fat or bald or 15 years older or has children at home.

And what Paderic is pointing out is that you, who say it shouldn't matter what someone makes, won't go out with someone who makes the same or less than you. This is the hypocracy in it all. Duh. And as usual you're taking a knife to a gunfight.
 LAgoodguy
Joined: 8/21/2008
Msg: 467
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/17/2012 9:54:02 PM
I'm sure that I'm not the only one who is worried that if you meet the wrong person, they might drive you broke. Or you would have to change your life style soo much cause they have no idea how to handle there own money and you start losing your money. I see so many people men and women who have no idea how to handle money. They see they want they buy. I guess Im one of guys who have lots of red flags when I meet people.
 laughingatliberals
Joined: 10/11/2011
Msg: 468
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 1:03:51 AM

I will keep my house and she can keep hers, my bills will be mine and hers will be hers.
-------------
Maybe you should have put this in your profile.


It is in my profile.
 Paderic
Joined: 2/23/2010
Msg: 469
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 5:47:45 AM

I think there's a difference in somebody wanting their partner to make the same 13.00 bucks an hour or better (me)than somebody wanting their partner to make the same 80,000 a year or better.


But you've made it clear that the same $13 an hour isn't enough for you, and you seem troubled by the idea that a man could have the same criterion. That's the rub.

I understand why you want a partner that earns a good living. Money enables us to live a nice lifestyle. What confuses me is why you can't see that a man would also want that and if it's OK for one gender, it's OK for the other.
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 470
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 6:47:55 AM
I didn't say a 13.00 hr match wouldn't be good enough for me, hell if I had that these many years of being single, I'm sure I'd be better off-IF he were financially responisble.

A man who makes 80,000 a year plus combined with 13.00 hour should still have a nice lifestyle if they had minimal expenses and were responisble. But I guess some men would feel slighted in the disparity-but not all.
 mjinict
Joined: 8/13/2008
Msg: 471
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 6:55:29 AM
(responsible)
 BlackLady1953
Joined: 5/27/2011
Msg: 472
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 7:03:46 AM
Most men expect the woman to match them "dollar for dollar." If you don't, or can't, then they aren't interested. Combine that with the way a lot of them carry themselves, you can understand why there are so many more men actively seeking relationships than there are women.
 Welsh474
Joined: 9/13/2010
Msg: 473
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 7:12:47 AM
""A man who makes 80,000 a year plus combined with 13.00 hour should still have a nice lifestyle if they had minimal expenses and were responisble. But I guess some men would feel slighted in the disparity-but not all.""

I think by our age a charming smile and the odd b.j. doesn't go as far as it used to. Many men in our age range have gone through a divorce or two, supported families and maybe given up half of everything they worked for in the last 20 to 30 years. They can be battered, bruised and starting over as well and less willing to "support" someone else. Hence looking for someone self supporting, can share in whatever lifestyle they have chosen and able to match them in the expenses department. I don't think this is unrealistic or an uncommon expectation.
 Iona_Bob
Joined: 3/31/2012
Msg: 474
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 7:18:55 AM
Most men expect the woman to match them "dollar for dollar." If you don't, or can't, then they aren't interested. Combine that with the way a lot of them carry themselves, you can understand why there are so many more men actively seeking relationships than there are women.


O.K. I will grant you that the more money a woman earns, the less likely she is to turn to a "relationship" in the hopes of securing a financial future. Does that mean that a man who seeks a high income woman may be left out in the cold? I think a woman who is comfortable with her financial future is less inclined to want to jeopardize it through a poor financial pairing. However, the same rings true for men. WHY (over 45 - since that is the point) would anyone who is in a "financially stable" position want to risk it by marriage to a person in a less solvent position?

That is my point.

There have been comments calling men a snob or chastising men for protecting their financial security as if they are to be pitied for having the consideration of $$$$ impinge upon the true love fantasy. Yet, the concept that a commitment to a person who earns more is not limiting the fairy tale aspect of "true love" (defined by immature people as throwing caution to the wind and overcoming all obstacles based on the pure power of emotion) is seen as a VALID premise.

I just have a hard time understanding how this perspective can be based on anything other than having the rules made to suit someone and mocking others whose individual choices threaten the other person's goals.

It just smacks of a certain infantile level if expectation, in my opinion.


I didn't say a 13.00 hr match wouldn't be good enough for me, hell if I had that these many years of being single, I'm sure I'd be better off-IF he were financially responisble.

A man who makes 80,000 a year plus combined with 13.00 hour should still have a nice lifestyle if they had minimal expenses and were responisble. But I guess some men would feel slighted in the disparity-but not all.


mjinict - you said in an earlier post that "financial responsibility" did NOT equate to the amount of money a person earned. You claimed a lower wage earner could be more fiscally responsible than a higher wage earner. Now you seem to use it to mean someone who earns more.

Also, why do you presume to know what an acceptable and/ or "nice lifestyle" is for another person? I have paid for luxury vacations for BFs in the past, because I wanted them to go, and they could not afford it. At this point (over 45), I am unwilling to do so, as my retirement years are n the horizon and my planning does NOT allow for subsidizing another. I can see how men would feel a woman who could not be an equal contributor would be a DRAIN on their lifestyle. I just don't understand how someone can pronounce how someone else should perceive their own level of personal enjoyment should still be "nice" if they are forced to shell out a subsidy for meals out, upscale events (charity, concerts, plays), travel, perhaps also being expected to subsidize the groomng habits that could go along with it (spa, hair, nails, clothes).

If he buys fine wine for dinner, won't you be drinking it? Maybe a woman with higher income would bring a bottle home on her own. A lower income person cuts the higher income person's disposable income by whatever proportion they are NOT contributing. :bye:
 rearguard*2
Joined: 2/8/2008
Msg: 475
view profile
History
Women's Financial Status
Posted: 6/18/2012 7:19:02 AM

Combine that with the way a lot of them carry themselves, you can understand why there are so many more men actively seeking relationships than there are women.


Well, spend a few weeks as an available man that is polite, smells nice and has an income, and you would quickly get the impression that the number of women actively seeking a relationship is almost unlimited.......
Show ALL Forums  > Over 45  > Women's Financial Status