Do women year for status and wealth in a man?

wan said:

It really depends on what the definition of wealth is. Yes, when someone works, he puts his paycheck into his bank account. So right there, he has wealth. However, if he immediately spends this money, and now the account balances read zero, then to me, there is now no wealth.

Show me your definition of wealth.

Click to expand...

If he spends his money, he gets something in return - either a good or service. Meaning he has something tangible. A homeless man with no income, has no good or service.

I forget from our previous discussion your understanding of econimics is pretty bad.

Wealth is any measure of valuable resources a person has: an income, money, real estate, posessions, etc. The phone in your pocket, the fridge fll of food is part of that wealth. They are resources you posses.

Some people have more wealth than others. Some people have no wealth. Most people have some wealth.

A man with no wealth at all is someone who has no resources.

A man with little or meager resources, its still wealthy.

wan said:

It determines whether relationships are successful, but it does not always determine whether women feel genuine attraction.

Probably not, but I have known some women who do.

Click to expand...

Not true.

A big component and turn on for women is succesful men. Some women don't even pay attention to a guy who does nothing for a living.

david starling said:

"Would you date a hot homeless guy? "

Click to expand...

I'm giving the guy at least one good attribute, so he can have at least some appeal. You can just make the question "would you date a homeless guy" if you prefer.

Dirius said:

When did I do that? You responded to my wealth post.

Click to expand...

You specified "hot" in the post I responded to.

wan said:

Probably not, but I have known some women who do.

Click to expand...

Then you expect this person to have at least a minimal amount of wealth.

Period.

Your expectations might be low, but thats how it is.

You are attracted to some level of wealth and status. The lowest possible, but you are nonetheless.

Dirius said:

But you have read it.
That is how you found the post to begin with.

I'm basing myself on the extract you posted here. If there is more to it, then go ahead and post it. But you can't blame me for basing my opinion on the little fraction you posted here.

Is there more? Go ahead, post it.

Click to expand...

Actually I think I know where the confusion is. The stuff you read in the OP in this thread was written by me. Not by someone else. It's fine that you read stuff I wrote here and see some sort of implication from it, but you can't tell me you knew what someone else who has never posted anything on this board was saying.

Thats fine. But it still means you are wrong, because you haven't been able to prove your point beyond a failed and flawed example.

Click to expand...

Lol, you have an overwhelming need to "prove" people "wrong".

Look, I really don't what you think of my example (or even me, by extension). You are incapable of deciphering people's main point, the message, from the examples that they gave. You just pick apart people's imperfect (this much I admit) with great fervor and somehow you think that means you are a good debater. Lol, laughable.

And a lot of women sleep with men feeling no real attraction for them - just because they may at times want attention or companionship.

Click to expand...

My point is that when you say that women marry men of wealth, that means they are attracted to this attribute, you are wrong. They marry out of financial considerations, not true attraction. OK maybe not all women, but enough of them to make my point stand. Personally, I have literally met zero women who would be willing to marry a rich guy that they have no attraction for.

That you care about wealth - even if you don't realise it.

Click to expand...

I think I know what I care about more than you do. But keep reading people's minds.

Dirius said:

I'm giving the guy at least one good attribute, so he can have at least some appeal. You can just make the question "would you date a homeless guy" if you prefer.

Click to expand...

Would you date a homeless guy with a great head of hair?

wan said:

Then make me.

Did I say there were relationships? Or are you hallucinating again?

I think I will do whatever I want.

Click to expand...

Relationships in the sense that you had an interaction with these people. This is why I also called them "flings", implying some of them might not have been long term or durable.

Just saying that if you want me to give my opinion, you need to give me the story - otherwise your request is pointless.

Would you date a homeless guy who wants Trump to lose the 2020 Election?

Here's a real problem: If physical contact is involved, do both people have to get tested for Covid?

david starling said:

Here's a real problem: If physical contact is involved, do both people have to get tested for Covid?

Click to expand...

"I would risk covid for you" might become 2020's most used pick-up line

Dirius said:

"I would risk covid for you" might become 2020's most used pick-up line

Click to expand...

"Covid-proof" condoms?

Sex-possible hazmat suits?

This pandemic makes STDs look like a minor dilemma!

"Covid-negative woman looking for Covid-negative man for possible relationship."

chiamaria said:

Wan, why do you keep feeding Dirius? He's only determined to disagree with you. This thread can swell to 100 pages as long as you keep responding and you'll get nowhere.

Click to expand...

wan tends to get lost with her own contradictions

Dirius said:

If he spends his money, he gets something in return - either a good or service. Meaning he has something tangible. A homeless man with no income, has no good or service.

Click to expand...

Not true. If you count having something tangible as "having wealth", then a homeless man who at least owns one toothbrush technically has "wealth" too, according to your definition.

I forget from our previous discussion your understanding of econimics is pretty bad.

Click to expand...

There is no need to get catty.

Wealth is any measure of valuable resources a person has: an income, money, real estate, posessions, etc. The phone in your pocket, the fridge fll of food is part of that wealth. They are resources you posses.

Some people have more wealth than others. Some people have no wealth. Most people have some wealth.

A man with no wealth at all is someone who has no resources.

A man with little or meager resources, its still wealthy.

Click to expand...

In a strict sense, yes, a man who has little money or few possessions still has some wealth. However, when I use the word "wealth" in the context of this thread, I am referring to men who are rich. People who are capable of buying women nice things, like diamond rings, mink coats, a car, or paying her bills.

So you can see, it serves no purpose for you to insist that almost anybody with a job has some degree of wealth. Not because you are wrong, but because we are not in Economics 101. We are talking about dating and attraction.

Not true.

A big component and turn on for women is succesful men. Some women don't even pay attention to a guy who does nothing for a living.

Click to expand...

We are not talking about "successful men". We are talking about men who are rich or high-status, but who otherwise have few things going for them.

Dirius said:

Relationships in the sense that you had an interaction with these people. This is why I also called them "flings", implying some of them might not have been long term or durable.

Click to expand...

I don't agree with your definition of relationship. You seem to be saying that having any sort of contact/interaction with someone means that they are having a "relationship". This is not how most people define a relationship. If you were correct, then technically you and I are having a "relationship", too, because we have been interacting with each other.

Just saying that if you want me to give my opinion, you need to give me the story - otherwise your request is pointless.

Click to expand...

I don't have a problem sharing my stories with you but I feel that it's quite impossible. Do you want me to copy and paste all of the posts and the entire conversation history I have had with this guy (note they span literally months) so as to show you why I thought he was cute? It simply isn't feasible.

Dirius said:

wan tends to get lost with her own contradictions

Click to expand...

Not really, but thanks for your concern.

Have you picked apart any more examples today?

wan said:

Not true. If you count having something tangible as "having wealth", then a homeless man who at least owns one toothbrush technically has "wealth" too, according to your definition.

There is no need to get catty.

In a strict sense, yes, a man who has little money or few possessions still has some wealth. However, when I use the word "wealth" in the context of this thread, I am referring to men who are rich. People who are capable of buying women nice things, like diamond rings, mink coats, a car, or paying her bills.

So you can see, it serves no purpose for you to insist that almost anybody with a job has some degree of wealth. Not because you are wrong, but because we are not in Economics 101. We are talking about dating and attraction.

We are not talking about "successful men". We are talking about men who are rich or high-status, but who otherwise have few things going for them.

Click to expand...

You don't need to be rich to buy a woman a present.

In any case, what you are looking for is an average level of wealth, sufficient enough for him to sustain a mainstream way of life for himself. A job that allows him to survive and live without anyone's help.

A man being unable to make ends meet is an unnattractive quality, as stated by all women on this thread. This means that on a basic level, all of you gals are looking for at least that level of wealth - that allows a man to sustain himself without anyone's help. This leaves out of your radius a rather high number of men that can't.

wan said:

I don't agree with your definition of relationship. You seem to be saying that having any sort of contact/interaction with someone means that they are having a "relationship". This is not how most people define a relationship. If you were correct, then technically you and I are having a "relationship", too, because we have been interacting with each other.

I don't have a problem sharing my stories with you but I feel that it's quite impossible. Do you want me to copy and paste all of the posts and the entire conversation history I have had with this guy (note they span literally months) so as to show you why I thought he was cute? It simply isn't feasible.

Not really, but thanks for your concern.

Have you picked apart any more examples today?

Click to expand...

I'm using the term informaly to refer to the fact that you were involved with these men.

I don't care about your story. But you demanded that I provide an opinion regarding your relationships, and I obviously can't do it unless I know the story to begin with.

All I know is you were involved with someone you fell for over the internet, but it didn't go well.

chiamaria said:

You're what people call an "energy vampire". That's all it is. And no one has to prove anything to you. You're not that important.

Click to expand...

If you were able to prove me wrong, you would.

You haven't, because you can't honey.

Because you have said you do look for someone with at least some form of wealth and security:

chiamaria said:

Now will I get with a broke man? No

Click to expand...

chiamaria said:

It defeats the purpose of bringing young into the world if they can't be clothed or fed properly. Does he need to be rich? No. But he needs to be on his feet and established enough to be able to provide for his family, and that is fair enough.

Click to expand...

So get off your high horse, and accept the reality. Doesn't make you a bad person for wanting a guy with money.

Sexual selection and sexual narcissism go hand in hand.

Dirius said:

You don't need to be rich to buy a woman a present.

In any case, what you are looking for is an average level of wealth, sufficient enough for him to sustain a mainstream way of life for himself. A job that allows him to survive and live without anyone's help.

A man being unable to make ends meet is an unnattractive quality, as stated by all women on this thread. This means that on a basic level, all of you gals are looking for at least that level of wealth - that allows a man to sustain himself without anyone's help. This leaves out of your radius a rather high number of men that can't.

Click to expand...

And like almost every one of us said, the reason we want someone employed is not because we want some level of wealth. You keep reading "women want wealth" into our preference despite being told, numerous times, that it has nothing to do with the guy's perceived level of wealth. You need to step back, take a deep breath, and really listen. And I will tell you, probably for the last time, that the reason I want a guy with a job is because it shows he has character and can stand on his own two feet. It is NOT because I perceive that he has wealth.

I'm using the term informaly to refer to the fact that you were involved with these men.

I don't care about your story. But you demanded that I provide an opinion regarding your relationships, and I obviously can't do it unless I know the story to begin with.

Click to expand...

I no more "demand" it than you demand me to back up some of the stuff I said. This is an exchange of ideas, and people naturally want the other person to explain or account for the things that they have observed. I am not "demanding" you to do anything. Stop putting a negative spin on what I do.

All I know is you were involved with someone you fell for over the internet, but it didn't go well.

Click to expand...

It shouldn't matter why my relationship with this guy failed. And it's because we are not talking about what will make a relationship work. We are talking about the initial stage, the very beginning, or what I call the attraction stage. And the fact is that I fell hard for a guy who had neither wealth nor status. Something that you fail to explain.