Jul 31 2018, 08:58 PM
First and most importantly, congrats to TS for getting engaged!
Next,
IMO I think TS is being crucified because she's improving herself not for it's - the activity - own sake but rather as a means to something else i.e. to attract rich men.
Quoted from the first post:
1) She reads finance and investment topics not for her own benefit but rather so that she "knows what to chat with them, and impress them";
2) Cooking and singing not because she enjoys it but again to not be an "empty vase".
3) Having high earning power not for herself but because "Men find rich/high-earning women attractive too, so be one."
Then she ended it with "
Lastly, love a man not for his money, but for his personality, his character, dreams and ambitions, and earning potential. The truly rich man is one who can lose everything, smile and start all over again, and earn the same pot of gold in a decade or two. Now that is what I call true wealth.
" ******
Thing is her underlying motive is already attracting "rich men" (however defined whether T20, M40), everything else is secondary so she literally just contradicted that entire conclusion.
All the guys she's listed are rich firstly. Once they've cleared that threshold then only does she looks at the personality, which is why she didn't settle for the the first couple of guys despite them being rich.
Because she identified being an over achieving strong independent woman, I would assume she wouldn't undermine herself by making money her primary concern when seeking a relationship. Also, since we're living in times of gender equality where it's not uncommon for females to earn considerably more than their male counterparts. So why can't the female become the main breadwinner instead of the male and the male becoming the househusband?
She isn't the typical gold digger with all the negative connotation that is attached to the label but she's undoubtedly looking for a man with money making the relationship contractual and transactional fundamentally. Of course, there is nothing wrong with that because she's entitled to her choice.
What people find off-putting, IMO is her stance of marrying someone primarily because of his riches let alone writing a "how to guide". From her tone of writing, I would agree she's an alpha female (being assertive). So why marry for riches if she herself can attain those riches and marry any man she wants, for example someone with a more noble goal who's poorer?
As many has pointed out, a compassionate, hardworking and genuine person won't necessarily be rich.
And I being a single male in my mid 20s hope that her stance isn't representative of the general female population. Although sometimes it does seem the case hence spawning the ever popular saying " Ada Wang Ada Amoi."
I strongly feel that if she worded her title " How to Marry your IDEAL Man" rather than rich, she wouldn't have gotten nearly as much shit.
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
to perfect myself so that I could attract the men I want. Yeah, I stayed single & unavailable for many years, just to polish myself to near-perfection. 
)
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
This post has been edited by Simply_Ed: Jul 31 2018, 09:30 PM
Quote
0.0149sec
0.97
6 queries
GZIP Disabled