AgeMatch.com - the best dating site for inter-generational lovers!  

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 56

Thread: How would feel about her making more money?

  1. #1
    star Guest

    How would you feel about her making more money?

    This is a question for all of you YM at Ageless. How do you feel about dating OW who make significantly more money than you do? Do you like it? Or does it make you uncomfortable?

    How about if she invites you to do something that would normally be out of your budget and she pays for it- like a really expensive dinner or even a trip somewhere? Would you be able to enjoy these things with her, or would you feel like a "kept" man?

    Or would you rather stick to things within your budget and you pay for them yourself in the traditional dating sense?
    Last edited by star; 08-04-2005 at 10:42 PM.

  2. #2
    LADave is offline Born 200 years too late
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    1,633
    So far, the women I've been with have been in the same financial boat as myself, or I might have been a bit better off. But, that being said, I can't imagine being insecure dating a woman who makes more money than I. She's been around longer, she's been in her career longer, so why shouldn't she make more money?

    A healthy dating and activities budget is an asset to bring to a relationship, regardless of whether it is the man or the woman or both who brings it. The budget goes into the same pot as personality, libido, interests and so on. All of these, ideally, will work in concert to create a relationship that is mutually satisfying to both partners.

    I wouldn't feel uncomfortable being treated by an OW to something like a cruise or the like that would be beyond my budget. I wouldn't feel like a "kept man." (though, it might just be one further excuse for me to do lots of what I SOOO LOOVE to do )For one thing, this kind of discomfort would limit our range of activities. Why should my lower salary be a brake on what we do? Also, there's proportion involved. I enjoy treating a favorite woman to fine dinners, good seats at the theatre, and so on. A trip might be about the same expense, proportionate to her income, as a grand night on the town would be for me.

    In any relationship I would want to treat regularly, particularly on the first few dates. But, I'd enjoy being treated, as well.

    Cheers from the City of Angels! Dave
    "You've got to dance like nobody's watching, and love like it's never going to hurt."--Anon

  3. #3
    GoldieCat Guest
    (Yay Dave! This issue...I always think shouldn't be an issue. I myself wouldn't date someone who had big hangups about needing to associate money with gender. IMO it's just so silly...)

    *hands the floor back to the guys*

  4. #4
    star Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldieCat
    (Yay Dave! This issue...I always think shouldn't be an issue. I myself wouldn't date someone who had big hangups about needing to associate money with gender. IMO it's just so silly...)

    *hands the floor back to the guys*
    I agree, Goldie, I wouldn't date someone who had hangups about it either. But I guess I should clarify what I was asking. (and this is why I asked the YM instead of all of the men) I agree that in a serious relationship, this shouldn't matter at all, and as Dave said it should be part of the total activities budget, proportionate to income. But I was thinking more in the sense of the early stages of dating someone.

    Many of us OW grew up with traditional dating where the man makes and pays for most of the dates. (at least that's how it was here in the South) I don't know if that's still the case or not, but I was wondering if a YM on a limited budget who is used to doing certain activities within that budget range who is dating an OW who is used to a more extravagant lifestyle would feel comfortable doing more extravagant things that would normally be out of his budget if she suggests and pays for it, or if he would prefer to keep to activities within his normal budget range and pay for it himself.

    Would it make him feel bad that she likes to do things that he wouldn't be able to afford to do for her himself? Would he feel the dates were "uneven" if she took him on an expensive trip and he had to follow that with a pizza and a DVD? LOL Or maybe with the men under 30 it is not the case at all. Maybe dating with the younger generation is more 50/50 anyway?

  5. #5
    ruthie Guest

    So I'm not a YM

    but after my last relationship, I wouldn't mind a bit more of a financial contribution to the relationship.

    A larger income isn't a critera of mine but I've tired of being the one who supports someone else. Apparently, I've become jaded.

    In the early part of dating, if someone isn't making the same amount of money 50/50 or going Dutch is ok with me. I'm not insensitive - going out is expensive.

  6. #6
    fos4snt Guest
    I think for many men it can be wholey emasculating. Both my ex-husbands had major resentment issues about me being the bread-winner and it caused a lot of problems. (It doesn't help when you're the bread winnder doing ALL the house work, yard work, bill paying and taking care of the kids, too...)

    I don't really know how Litical feels (maybe he'll answer for himself), but I sense that it makes him uncomfortable when I buy him things... so, I'm trying to curb that (even though I just bought him an engine for his truck ~ but only because a) they are VERY hard to find and b) I KNEW he didn't have the money... its been 7 months since it blew a rod through the block and I can't stand seeing this fabulous truck just sitting and rusting!!)

    But, I definitely get the feeling that it upsets him and he would PREFER to be the bread-winner... sometimes we talk about it, and realistically, IF we work out, things WILL balance out in the long run! His career will be taking off right around the time my boss retires and I'm back to square one (which, essentially, I will be ~ because when I DO leave here, I have no intent to stay in this industry)...

    ~phos

  7. #7
    GoldieCat Guest
    Ok, the way I see it is this: In ANY situation with 2 people in it, one probably makes more than the other. So you deal with it however fairly you can. IMO if you have 2 friends of ANY gender then you do things a certain way to keep it fair. I don't see any reason to hook this differential up to gender or age.

    IMO it isn't fair for one person to pay ALL expenses no matter who it is, unless the differential is so major that there's no other way to work that AND it is comfortable for the better-off person to handle (not like thesedays's situation for instance, where she could not afford to pay for both). You put the fairness in another way, maybe, so that things can balance at a later date when the other person is doing better. I wasn't at all recommending that anyone "support" anyone else. I don't believe in women being "supported" either as a general rule. If there are children then you could negotiate things another way, but if this is only 2 able-bodied adults then I just don't believe in one completely living off the other except in a true and temporary emergency.

    It's nice of people to want to be kind and delicate to male egos...but I personally don't see the point of that. Why does he feel like he's less because he's not living up to social dictates? Why reinforce any feeling of inadequacy by accommodating it? The word "emasculating" has always annoyed me...nobody can make a man less of a man through some behavior or other. He IS a man, and will always be, no matter what, and he can be justly proud of who he is. Money can be gotten and lost, and means nothing, despite the way so many want to pretend it improves their quality. Are you or are you not the same great person no matter what car you drive?

    The implication of "emasculation" anyway is that a man becomes somehow womanly by not commanding more than a female does, that he is less than she. The idea that a man loses his manhood to become feminine, which in this view is ipso facto a DOWNGRADE, is one of the most female-insulting ideas society has come up with. Is the same man making the same amount not emasculated if his partner stops making more than he does? Why is he to be measured against her and only if he achieves more financial success than SHE, specifically, is he masculine?

    Sorry....I just can't go for that line of thinking. In our couple it doesn't mean jack who makes more when...we just want to be able to pay for life and then some, and enjoy it together. *shrug*

  8. #8
    The Shadow's Avatar
    The Shadow is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    S/E Texas
    Posts
    510
    All has been very ture,in has been said.Tho would like to add my .02,if I may.Even if you had all the money in the world....theres one thing that money cant buy.
    .............Love..............
    It must be earned.


    The Shadow

  9. #9
    fos4snt Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldieCat
    The implication of "emasculation" anyway is that a man becomes somehow womanly by not commanding more than a female does, that he is less than she. The idea that a man loses his manhood to become feminine, which in this view is ipso facto a DOWNGRADE, is one of the most female-insulting ideas society has come up with. Is the same man making the same amount not emasculated if his partner stops making more than he does? Why is he to be measured against her and only if he achieves more financial success than SHE, specifically, is he masculine?

    Sorry....I just can't go for that line of thinking. In our couple it doesn't mean jack who makes more when...we just want to be able to pay for life and then some, and enjoy it together. *shrug*
    Hey, I'm not a GUY, GoldieCat. I can't explain WHY they felt that way, but they did ~ they SAID SO. I am not in control of how they felt and hell if I was going to STOP working to make them happy.

    Just because you don't like the line of thinking doesn't mean the line of thinking isn't out there or valid. Nor do I have control over it... I only stated what I know to be true from my last two marriages. BOTH my ex's had MAJOR problems with ME making more money than them. It made them feel, their words, "Less of a man."

    I thought it was ridiculous, too. But, what is... IS. My first ex STILL complains that he can never get/keep a woman because he doesn't make enough money, that girls break up with him because he cannot support the kind of lifestyle THEY want. All I'm doing here is stating what he tells me... and we're good friends and I think he's ABSURD to think that way, but that doesn't change his feelings on the matter.

    ~phos

  10. #10
    Edu Guest
    I really couldn't care less if my OW (if I ever get one) earned oodles more cash than I did - bring it on as far as I'm concerned. She can pay for all the big things if she needs to/wants to, but what I would say is that every now and again, on my pittance of a wage, I would like to pay for dinner and the taxi back, and stupid things like that. I like doing that.

    I certainly don't think that it would "emasculate" me to be witha wealthy woman.....

    Hmmm, I really don't know what to say because this is a total non-issue for me, and I would say the vast majority of guys I know would feel the same way.

  11. #11
    LADave is offline Born 200 years too late
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    1,633
    Quote Originally Posted by star
    I agree that in a serious relationship, this shouldn't matter at all, and as Dave said it should be part of the total activities budget, proportionate to income. But I was thinking more in the sense of the early stages of dating someone.

    I was wondering if a YM on a limited budget who is used to doing certain activities within that budget range who is dating an OW who is used to a more extravagant lifestyle would feel comfortable doing more extravagant things that would normally be out of his budget if she suggests and pays for it, or if he would prefer to keep to activities within his normal budget range and pay for it himself.
    In the early stages of a dating relationship, I'd certainly like to pick up the tab frequently. I'm just used to it. But I wouldn't be bothered by doing something more extravagant on a higher-earning woman's tab. Again, it's proportion and the "activities budget." Why should the lower salary act as a brake on activities? There's a rule out there saying that he/she who invites, pays. I like that rule. It's unisex, straightforward and sensible.

    If the couple decides to go Dutch, the better way, IMHO, is to trade off picking up expenses. For example: he pays for dinner, she pays for movie tix and a round of drinks. There's nothing less romantic than the "dinner table accountancy" of splitting a check. As far as money on dates goes, the less conspicuous, the better.

    At times I question doing really fancy stuff on early dates, and it has nothing to do with economics. I think there's something to be said for keeping things casual (and consequently moderate budget) on the early dates when the two are just getting to know each other. As we've all experienced many times, many dating situations do not wind up working out for any sizable length of time. Spending too much money, planning, etc. on something that's an early flop is a letdown.
    "You've got to dance like nobody's watching, and love like it's never going to hurt."--Anon

  12. #12
    star Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by LADave
    There's a rule out there saying that he/she who invites, pays. I like that rule. It's unisex, straightforward and sensible.
    THAT'S what I was asking!! I agree with that "rule" and was just wondering if it would make a YM on a more limited budget feel uncomfortable if the things the OW invites him to do and pays for are more extravagant than he can afford to do when he invites and pays.

  13. #13
    Mark Guest
    Most guys would have no problem dating an older woman, money or no money. As with most age gap relationships, it's usually the woman who has the problem. Successful women routinely reject guys with inferior incomes in favor of men who are more financially successful than they are. The reason? Prestige and "how it looks" in front of other women.

  14. #14
    yellowrose's Avatar
    yellowrose is offline Texas Gal
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4,559
    Successful women routinely reject guys with inferior incomes in favor of men who are more financially successful than they are.
    Mark, where did you get this "fact"? Because STUDIES have shown the opposite.

    I think you are making statements of facts, when it is really what you think. Two entirely different things. And from what I have seen you post, the statements that you put out there are usually negative toward women. Have you noticed this?

  15. #15
    Bella_D Guest
    Do you suppose it could depend on how the money is spent and how finances are divided in the relationship? I can see how a certain type of guy might resent his partner's wealth if she hoards it to herself or uses it as leverage in the relationship. But if the money is pooled as a common resource...why would a guy resent having a greater disposable income that he didn't have to work for himself?

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •