Women: how important is income to you?

[firelily]

I don't care. I recently broke up with a long time boyfriend who made enough money to provide for both of us, if this was needed. His job meant a lot of time away, it was too much of a strain, I begged him for years to take some other job which would allow us to be together like a normal couple, but he didn't want to earn less. He also didn't have particularly responsible spending habits, so it was all for nothing.

 

I'd rather live with someone with the same set of values and priorities, whether he earns a lot or struggles with earning enough. I'll gladly learn to live more economically for the right person, if needed. Biking and having picnics is just as fun as tropical vacations.

[Krankor]

It will, so your options will be even worse. This whole 'man power', ' I am man hear me roar' thing doesn't work outside of this site, I'm just being honest. When a grown a** man puts on his profile 'I work' or ' Nunya business' DELETE! I take that to mean he is either insecure about his job, has no job, has a minimum wage job, or is one of those men who are overly cautious cause they think all women want is their money. All of which are going to be turn offs for me.

 

 

I don't think I've ever used the income filter but if I had, I'd probably put it in your range, for no other reason except it's in my range.

 

You want quality, not quantity and if a woman is not willing to date you because of your income, she's probably not going to be quality anyway.

 

Seriously though, I would not take the 'none of your business' route. You get more bees with honey than vinegar.

 

Well, I do agree with this. When I read "Nunya business" or something similar on a profile, I automatically assume that she has a bit of an attitude. It's an instant turnoff.

[katrina1980]

Well, I do agree with this. When I read "Nunya business" or something similar on a profile, I automatically assume that she has a bit of an attitude. It's an instant turnoff.

 

I agree.

 

Krankor, you enjoy what you do, earn a decent salary, okay not six figures, but very decent.

 

Own that and be proud of that!

 

Proudly check that box, that type of confidence is very attractive no matter what you do or earn!

 

Seeking women's "approval" and/or needing that type of validation is not attractive.

 

Not to me and most other women I know.

 

Remain true to yourself, own it!

[Krankor]

Also to add, I don't give a s__t if anyone thinks I'm materialistic for having the view I have. If you came to my apartment, you'd see no brand names or anything anywhere. I live frugally and I drive a cheap car and I won't date a guy who has an expensive, expensive-to-maintain car. I STILL think finances are important. I am in a good career field and I want my partner to be too. Let's face it, life is hard, and I don't want either of us to struggle. I want to come together and be able to afford a halfway decent place to live in a place that isn't a ghetto, have good health insurance, be able to get LTC health policies, invest some $$, save up for retirement, travel once a year, buy a coffee once in a while without worrying, no paycheck-to-paycheck nonsense, etc.

 

I can see that.

 

If I'm being honest, I've never been Mr. Ambition. I wish I were more, but it's just not me. I'm more one who gets into my comfort zone and then likes to cruise along. However, I can definitely agree. I don't want to live paycheck to paycheck, praying that my car or the furnace doesn't break down. That's not a fun way to live. My job is enough to live comfortably and not really have to worry about money; save some, invest some, not throw money around with abandon but I can go out to eat or go to a nice brewery without worrying that I'm breaking the bank. If there's something I really want I can afford it, but it may mean sacrifice. For instance; if I want that snowmobile it may mean drinking cheaper beer for a while.

 

I probably wouldn't want to date a minimum wage worker. The closer to my income the better. That way neither of us has to subsidize the other. However, when you have a woman who makes say 30K a year filtering out anyone under six figures, that tells you that she wants to get her hands on some of his money. That isn't necessarily a terrible thing. Maybe she feels she has enough to offer. But it is definite hypergamy.

[itsallgrand]

I've been really into evolutionary psychology lately, and dating apps seem to bear some of its claims out. Men are into gene quality and reproductive potential and women are into resources.

 

Are you specifically looking for a younger woman?

 

I was dating in my 30s when I met my current partner. There certainly were a fair share of men my age looking for younger women. I didn't put too much thought into what they valued, because they weren't my target audience. I was looking for someone close to my own age, who wanted a lot of the same things I wanted. Those men in my target audience did care about income and financial values. They wanted a woman who could come close to matching or outmatch them a little in that area of life.

 

Different people value different things. Think of your target audience. From what you wrote, you have a lot to offer the right woman.

[Krankor]

Are you specifically looking for a younger woman?

 

I was dating in my 30s when I met my current partner. There certainly were a fair share of men my age looking for younger women. I didn't put too much thought into what they valued, because they weren't my target audience. I was looking for someone close to my own age, who wanted a lot of the same things I wanted. Those men in my target audience did care about income and financial values. They wanted a woman who could come close to matching or outmatch them a little in that area of life.

 

Different people value different things. Think of your target audience. From what you wrote, you have a lot to offer the right woman.

 

Thank you.

 

To answer your question: no, not really. I set my age range as 28 to 45 but I've never messaged anyone younger than 34. The youngest I've spoken to was 31 but she initiated. Part of me does want someone just a little younger, like 33 to 38, but I'm pretty open-minded about a few years older, too.

 

If a woman who's in the next income bracket or up wants to filter me out that actually doesn't even sort of offend me. That's rational. If she's in my income bracket or lower, however, she's obviously looking for a man who can elevate her lifestyle. But that's fine too. Like you say, that just means she isn't my match.

[Kricket123]

I think salary can be linked to values and basic aspects of incompatibility.

 

I am female, in my 30’s, in medicine and make 200K/year. To get here, I was in school for a very long time (debt free—school covered all expenses) and work smart—I have multiple parts to my job but only work 45 hours/week and am not a workaholic. I am ambitious and see my salary as a way to live where I want, pursue a very expensive sport that I am passionate about, travel, and be secure down the road. I had a vision for my career, executed it, and it paid off.

 

Someone who is making, say 50/year likely will not match up with what I value with regard to lifestyle, ambition/drive, and money management. My sport is a huge part of my life (helped pay for college) and I can’t date someone who’s entire salary equals my recreation budget.

 

Lots would disagree with me, but that’s fine—you don’t have to date me But I do filter out certain salary ranges.

[Banished]

Brutal honesty time.

 

I am a Data Scientist making 130K, at 29 years old (while living in a much poorer country than the US). I have lost county of the amount of women who contacted me on dating sites because my academic profile (and working in a high-tech firm) were indicators for my income. These women usually had nothing to offer other than sex in exchange for their demonstrated desire in extracting resources from me.

 

It's called hypergamy. Women are biologically hard-wired to seek out the men with the most resources, to provide for them and their future children (as well as feeling indicative of their gene quality), just like men are naturally attracted to beautiful young women, as that indicates their fertility and allows them to father children. Social media is making this infinitely easier, indicated by the rise of sugar daddy/baby arrangements.

 

It really sucks when you learn to accept it (either as "a man who doesn't earn enough for women's expectations" or a "less attractive woman who is starting to show her age"), but it's just part of the game. My suggestion is just roll along and don't worry about it. I was lucky enough to find a great woman (who is currently working on her PhD in Biology and wants to remain in academia), which is a perfect combination of "smart and fun to be around" and "not going to earn more money than me".

 

What modern day feminism misses is that equality between the sexes does not mean sameness. Men and women are built differently biologically (as are males and females of other species), and thus have different sexual strategies.

[Batya33]

I think salary can be linked to values and basic aspects of incompatibility.

 

I am female, in my 30’s, in medicine and make 200K/year. To get here, I was in school for a very long time (debt free—school covered all expenses) and work smart—I have multiple parts to my job but only work 45 hours/week and am not a workaholic. I am ambitious and see my salary as a way to live where I want, pursue a very expensive sport that I am passionate about, travel, and be secure down the road. I had a vision for my career, executed it, and it paid off.

 

Someone who is making, say 50/year likely will not match up with what I value with regard to lifestyle, ambition/drive, and money management. My sport is a huge part of my life (helped pay for college) and I can’t date someone who’s entire salary equals my recreation budget.

 

Lots would disagree with me, but that’s fine—you don’t have to date me But I do filter out certain salary ranges.

 

So you wouldn't date a fellow physician who chose academia (or let's say to work at a nonprofit, etc) - because, why? Would you find his choice less ambitious if he took the lower salary to contribute to his community, the world, etc? If you make that kind of salary and can save why would his lower salary affect your ability to do your sport? I get that you'd have to talk about how your joint income would be spent but many couples have joint and separate accounts.

[figureitout23]

Hah, strong ambitious woman got y'all in your feelings. Funny, especially you Banished, you just made a logical statement and the second a poster confirms it you get mad, even being as petty as to point out all rich men want is eye candy. Take it you're not a fan of modern feminism. You and I both know a woman with that much confidence, education and resources will have no problem finding a man.

 

Btw, I liked your post on accident,

I didn't feel the need to let you know but now I deffinetely do.

[Batya33]

I think the other issue the medical professional has isctehtvshe has to consider how much of a priority her sport is once she marries - things like family and geographic relocation and aging parents or inlaws can affect both the income stream for the sport and the logistics and practicalities. I knew what I was getting into with my husband's career and it's downsides from the very beginning and I experience the downsides even more because we have a young child. Had it been a non-career thing that would have been a factor in how much of a downside I'd be willing to endure. And I think that's typical. Certainly there are exceptions - certain artists can't make a living at their art but it's their passion that they won't give up despite its obvious Syrians on income etc (meaning the person makes a salary or take care of the kids but needs income to support his or her art). The good thing is adults can talk about this early on once things seem to have potential.

[itsallgrand]

Brutal honesty time.

 

I am a Data Scientist making 130K, at 29 years old (while living in a much poorer country than the US). I have lost county of the amount of women who contacted me on dating sites because my academic profile (and working in a high-tech firm) were indicators for my income. These women usually had nothing to offer other than sex in exchange for their demonstrated desire in extracting resources from me.

 

It's called hypergamy. Women are biologically hard-wired to seek out the men with the most resources, to provide for them and their future children (as well as feeling indicative of their gene quality), just like men are naturally attracted to beautiful young women, as that indicates their fertility and allows them to father children. Social media is making this infinitely easier, indicated by the rise of sugar daddy/baby arrangements.

 

It really sucks when you learn to accept it (either as "a man who doesn't earn enough for women's expectations" or a "less attractive woman who is starting to show her age"), but it's just part of the game. My suggestion is just roll along and don't worry about it. I was lucky enough to find a great woman (who is currently working on her PhD in Biology and wants to remain in academia), which is a perfect combination of "smart and fun to be around" and "not going to earn more money than me".

 

What modern day feminism misses is that equality between the sexes does not mean sameness. Men and women are built differently biologically (as are males and females of other species), and thus have different sexual strategies.

 

I disagree with a lot of what you wrote. Specifically, that women are hard wired biologically to seek men with the most resources.

 

There is no actual proof of that theory. It's been around a long time. And yes, there are people ( even in science) who still parade it as fact. But there is no proof at all that a woman's biology specifically hard wires her for behaviour that includes seeking out a mate with the most resources in exchange for sexuality.

 

There's no denying there are people out there willing to exchange sex for resources, and those willing to exchange resources for sex. However, it doesn't prove that gender hard wires us to those behaviours at all.

 

I'm not an advocate of modern day feminism either. That doesn't change that the science behind the theory is shaky, at best.

[mustlovedogs]

Thank you.

 

To answer your question: no, not really. I set my age range as 28 to 45 but I've never messaged anyone younger than 34. The youngest I've spoken to was 31 but she initiated. Part of me does want someone just a little younger, like 33 to 38, but I'm pretty open-minded about a few years older, too.

 

If a woman who's in the next income bracket or up wants to filter me out that actually doesn't even sort of offend me. That's rational. If she's in my income bracket or lower, however, she's obviously looking for a man who can elevate her lifestyle. But that's fine too. Like you say, that just means she isn't my match.

 

 

Second paragraph. If a woman...

 

If she's in the same or lower than you, she's trying to elevate her lifestyle? Explain that?

 

I mean +/- one seems somewhat reasonable... are you saying you only pursue women exactly in yours? If so, what's the point of this thread?

[Banished]

Hah, strong ambitious woman got y'all in your feelings. Funny, especially you Banished, you just made a logical statement and the second a poster confirms it you get mad, even being as petty as to point out all rich men want is eye candy. Take it you're not a fan of modern feminism. You and I both know a woman with that much confidence, education and resources will have no problem finding a man.

 

Btw, I liked your post on accident,

I didn't feel the need to let you know but now I deffinetely do.

 

Your like isn't particularly meaningful, and I didn't "get mad". If a man would have written that particular post, you would have called him a misogynist, and rightfully so. If you do a survey of truly rich men (certainly above 200k/yr), you'll see that the great majority of them do look for eye candy. Furthermore, if they want to have children, dating a woman in her 30s would be catching her at the tail end of her fertility window - which wouldn't provide them with many heirs for their fortunes. That post was disgustingly arrogant:

 

"Someone who is making, say 50/year likely will not match up with what I value with regard to lifestyle, ambition/drive, and money management. My sport is a huge part of my life (helped pay for college) and I can’t date someone who’s entire salary equals my recreation budget

 

I fully support the empowerment of women, and I believe in true equality.

Note that she further confirmed my point - in that a man who earns so much would likely not care about the income of his significant other, whereas a woman does.

 

My post wasn't at all critical of women - it just discussed generalities in sexual selection. Note that I also described absurdities in how men select partners, which you naturally conveniently avoided.

[figureitout23]

If a man would have written that particular post, you would have called him a misogynist, and rightfully so. If you do a survey of truly rich men (certainly above 200k/yr), you'll see that the great majority of them do look for eye candy. Furthermore, if they want to have children, dating a woman in her 30s would be catching her at the tail end of her fertility window - which wouldn't provide them with many heirs for their fortunes.

 

Soooo ^ this isn't arrogant

 

 

 

That post was disgustingly arrogant:

 

"Someone who is making, say 50/year likely will not match up with what I value with regard to lifestyle, ambition/drive, and money management. My sport is a huge part of my life (helped pay for college) and I can’t date someone who’s entire salary equals my recreation budget

 

But this ^ is....

 

 

I fully support the empowerment of women, and I believe in true equality.

Note that she further confirmed my point - in that a man who earns so much would likely not care about the income of his significant other, whereas a woman does.

 

Well according to you he only cares if she's young and fertile, which is perfectly fine but a woman expecting a man to be on her level?!?! BLASPHEMY!!!

 

 

My post wasn't at all critical of women - it just discussed generalities in sexual selection. Note that I also described absurdities in how men select partners, which you naturally conveniently avoided.

 

I'm sorry you're right I didn't notice, I'm still flabbergasted how a dude who says this:

 

 

I was lucky enough to find a great woman (who is currently working on her PhD in Biology and wants to remain in academia), which is a perfect combination of "smart and fun to be around" and "not going to earn more money than me".

.

 

Gets butthurt that a woman only dates men in her income bracket. You claim you believe in the concept of hypergamy but when you see it in action, you insult the poster, that doesn't even make sense.

[Krankor]

Second paragraph. If a woman...

 

If she's in the same or lower than you, she's trying to elevate her lifestyle? Explain that?

 

I mean +/- one seems somewhat reasonable... are you saying you only pursue women exactly in yours? If so, what's the point of this thread?

 

No, what I mean is that is that if a woman who is in my income bracket or lower filters me out based on income, it must mean that she wants a man who can elevate her lifestyle.

 

I don't only pursue women in my own bracket. I may have explained myself poorly. The point was wondering how many women in my income bracket and lower would be disinterested in me based upon my income.

[figureitout23]

. The point was wondering how many women in my income bracket and lower would be disinterested in me based upon my income.

 

Depends on what type of woman you're looking for.

 

Average everyday women in your income bracket - very, very few.

 

Average women above your bracket -

I'd still say few, depends on what you look like/ confidence level/ what you bring to the table beyond income.

 

Super hot women who make less than you,

again, depends but your odds of success may be lower.

 

Super hot women who make more than you, depends but you may be fishing out of your league.

 

Before people jump on me, I'm not saying a super attractive woman is shallow or anything like that. Just looking at the reality of online dating, a woman who is a 10 regardless of her income is going to have a ton of options. Same as men who have super large incomes, they are going to have a lot of options. An attractive woman or man with a large income? Theyve got pick of the litter.

 

People are getting so touchy and offended as if the reality of how shallow online dating is, isnt incredibly obvious to anyone paying attention. How can it not be shallow? Look how many options you have, look how easy it is to dismiss someone based on so many arbitrary reasons.

 

The trick is to stay in your league and not give a second thought to people you don't stack up to, People who don't, tend to get their feelings hurt, as evidenced by the 'online dating never works' posts by shallow men on this site cause they can't catch the rich 10's attention, when there's a gaggle of average everyday good women more than willing to get to know them.

[Batya33]

Maybe online dating is shallow if you're mostly communicating or looking at photos online but it's no different than other ways of meeting complete strangers if you don't date on line but use it as another way to meet people. If you're looking for a long term rletoonship there's really no difference in volume because you don't want to meet just anyone in person. In fact it probably takes longer to sift through the profiles. It did for me. It is a candy store for those just looking to meet fun people to date casually and short term.

[Banished]

Gets butthurt that a woman only dates men in her income bracket. You claim you believe in the concept of hypergamy but when you see it in action, you insult the poster, that doesn't even make sense.

 

Naturally, you go out of your way to insult me. I didn't intend to insult the poster, just to make her understand that her income isn't all that valuable in attracting men, because:

she stated she is "in her 30s", which likely means in her late 30s (because otherwise she'd state "early 30s"). For eligible bachelors of any income level and want kids, the ship has sailed. She is about to become infertile / any children she will bear are at a significant risk for various types of issues.

 

For eligible bachelors who don't want kids, she isn't that attractive of a catch either - Why date a rich older woman when there are a lot of young women who you "can have fun with" (remember, these are men who don't want kids / family), who will be more attractive than she is simply because they are younger.

 

The problem is compounded that, because of hypergamy, she wants someone who earns at least as much as she does, which narrows the dating pool even further.

 

Her issue is that she believes that her income makes her attractive to men, but that simply is not the case for most men for the reasons I explained.

[Banished]

Depends on what type of woman you're looking for.

 

Average everyday women in your income bracket - very, very few.

 

Average women above your bracket -

I'd still say few, depends on what you look like/ confidence level/ what you bring to the table beyond income.

 

Super hot women who make less than you,

again, depends but your odds of success may be lower.

 

Super hot women who make more than you, depends but you may be fishing out of your league.

 

Before people jump on me, I'm not saying a super attractive woman is shallow or anything like that. Just looking at the reality of online dating, a woman who is a 10 regardless of her income is going to have a ton of options. Same as men who have super large incomes, they are going to have a lot of options. An attractive woman or man with a large income? Theyve got pick of the litter.

 

People are getting so touchy and offended as if the reality of how shallow online dating is, isnt incredibly obvious to anyone paying attention. How can it not be shallow? Look how many options you have, look how easy it is to dismiss someone based on so many arbitrary reasons.

 

The trick is to stay in your league and not give a second thought to people you don't stack up to, People who don't, tend to get their feelings hurt, as evidenced by the 'online dating never works' posts by shallow men on this site cause they can't catch the rich 10's attention, when there's a gaggle of average everyday good women more than willing to get to know them.

 

I don't see how people can thank this disgusting post. "Leagues" don't exist. The answer is to learn to be okay with rejection. Go ahead and message any girl you like. Most women on dating sites have such a plethora of choices that the odds of getting a reply are fairly low for a man of any quality (which has been studied many times).

 

Krankor, note how this post confirms that wealth is the most attractive quality in a man (in the eyes of the great majority of women).

 

This behavior is seen across all dating sites.

 

look up these few studies:

 

 

[Banished]

Maybe online dating is shallow if you're mostly communicating or looking at photos online but it's no different than other ways of meeting complete strangers if you don't date on line but use it as another way to meet people. If you're looking for a long term rletoonship there's really no difference in volume because you don't want to meet just anyone in person. In fact it probably takes longer to sift through the profiles. It did for me. It is a candy store for those just looking to meet fun people to date casually and short term.

 

The problem is that online dating sites create an illusion of choice based on "objective parameters" like income, age, beauty, and so forth. This makes it very easy for both sides to subconsciously "rank" members of the other sex based on desirability.

 

I don't have a solution to the problem, but that is the root cause, in my opinion.

[Romanticheart1]

His book "The Pleasure Trap" helped me lose weight and get healthy. You can find a ton of lectures by him on YouTube but those mainly have to do with healthy eating. His podcast and website however goes far more into relationships, self-esteem, male and female motivations, etc.

 

Ahhh, I am aware of Dr. Lisle and his expertise in diet. I'm a fan. I didn't know that he also dealt with relationships.

 

As for money, I only care that a guy has a job and isn't a lazy bum. I don't care about money.

[Kricket123]

Actually, I never asserted that I believe my income is attractive to men. I don’t list it on any profiles, and it’s hardly a first date discussion topic.

 

But here’s the lovely thing about our society: those who don’t agree with my views have the freedom not to date me. There you go: off the hook. And why get indignant that I hold my own views on the matter? I generally don’t have any issues dating because of salary. I actually do most of the declining of second dates, etc when I don’t think we’re a good match (and there are many reasons for this, nothing to do with income initially since that’s not an early conversation). What you’re not realizing is that some high achieving men want their intellectual equal and women who are young and hot but don’t have admirable accomplishments don’t cut it for these folks.

[Banished]

Actually, I never asserted that I believe my income is attractive to men. I don’t list it on any profiles, and it’s hardly a first date discussion topic.

 

But here’s the lovely thing about our society: those who don’t agree with my views have the freedom not to date me. There you go: off the hook. And why get indignant that I hold my own views on the matter? I generally don’t have any issues dating because of salary. I actually do most of the declining of second dates, etc when I don’t think we’re a good match (and there are many reasons for this, nothing to do with income initially since that’s not an early conversation). What you’re not realizing is that some high achieving men want their intellectual equal and women who are young and hot but don’t have admirable accomplishments don’t cut it for these folks.

 

I agree wholeheartedly regarding intellectual equals, and that's the primary driver in my own relationship. The way you phrased your comment makes it seem like that is not what YOU are looking for, though. Furthermore, the thread's op asked about women's attitudes towards money. You stated that you want highly paid men and ignore Batya's question regarding physicians in academia or in nonprofit organizations who would certainly be your intellectual equals but would probably earn less than half of your salary. The same goes for many other professions, with university professors being the best example.

 

You also ignored my point regarding children and a family. If you decided you don't want kids and that works for you, all the best to you. However, high-achieving men who want to start a family won't date a woman beyond a certain age (regardless of their own age - biology is simply not fair).

[pippy longstocking]

I disagree with a lot of what you wrote. Specifically, that women are hard wired biologically to seek men with the most resources.

 

I agree grandy ...I am sure there are those that do, infact I know there are those that do ... But I have never met one