[quote=svelte][quote=njtosd][quote=svelte][quote=CA renter][quote=svelte][quote=flyer]Not all beautiful women are vacuous gold diggers, just as not all handsome men are shallow trophy wife collectors, and I have to agree, to each his/her own when choosing a partner for all of the right
reasons–love, happiness, achieving life goals, etc., etc.
The wedding, the ring, the fabulous honeymoon, the great house, and all of the “stuff” are nice, and we’ve all been there, but, IMO, what makes the relationship lasting and beautiful is the deeper bond that’s been forged by things that money can’t buy.[/quote]
Agree with every word.
That’s why alarm bells would go off if I even caught a whiff of a potential spouse that was marrying me for the money. To those who are together for the $$, that’s A-OK with me as long as it works for them. But that’s not what I want my relationships built upon.[/quote]
Should alarm bells go off when a woman catches a whiff of a potential suitor/spouse wanting her for her beauty? (I would say yes.)
It goes both ways.[/quote]
Hmmm – that’s a sexist thought!
By using the pronoun “she” and the phrase “it goes both ways”, you’re implying that my response was for women marrying men for money and not men marrying women for money. It was not – my sentences were gender neutral on purpose.
If your sentence was rephrased “should alarm bells go off when someone catches a whiff of a potential spouse wanting them for their beauty? (I would say yes)”, then I would agree that one should run if a suitor was after them only for their beauty. Keyword “only”.
The beauty thing is a slippery slope. You have to be physically attracted to your spouse for it to work – so yeah I partly married for beauty. But beauty alone would not have been enough for me to marry her. Not even close.
She had a nice dowry too.
(j/k)[/quote]
Wait, your sentence was talking about someone marrying you for your money. Unless you were open to marrying a man or a woman, you weren’t being gender neutral.
What if someone said they married their spouse partly for the money?[/quote]
Yes, ntojd, all of my statements where gender neutral. I can only have one spouse at a time in the US until we adopt more Mormonesque rules, and I would make the same statement whether the spouse I pick(ed) was male or female. So all of my statements are indeed gender neutral! Nice try at spin, though.[/quote]
You have a wife (always a woman, I think). You’ve mentioned that in other postings. So I guess what you’re saying is that you’re open to marrying a man. Which is fine.
