Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Girls are money minded, And be proud of it.

views
     
cyrixMII300
post Apr 27 2009, 06:31 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


i thinks this thread is full of girls who are too shallow minded... and b4 u say here is another with no money... i have enough to last a long time... and i was way poor to start with.... since then i have made it in life with the girl whom i love next to me every step of the way thru thick and thin... today we are more in love and stronger in love because of what we went thru...

change you view girls.. money is not everything... love, understanding, trust and belief is whats important... many a poor man has made it to the top on the back of true love... there is no guarantee that a rich man can make you happy just as there is no guarantee a poor one would make u sad. its all you.. if you are materialistic then what you beget in life in terms of sorrow and heart break is what you deserve.


cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 04:15 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(debbieyss @ Apr 27 2009, 06:59 PM)
Money is everything, when you and your wife need your both's parents to sponsor money to give birth to baby;
Money is everything, when you need your mother or your wife's mother to nurse your baby;
Money is everything, when you suddenly lack of money and need to have dinner at your mother's house or your wife's house;
Money is everything, when you have got married but still your parents worried of your financial capability.

If we gals are able to make good money as guy can, why can't guys make better money than gals?

You have no rights to say we gals are shallow, unless you are able to feed your family and support your parent's daily expenses.
*
i am a bit lost in here... i thought the thread title was girls are money minded and proud of it.... hence my simple reasoning and statement of girls being shallow minded if they only think of money..

but i see 2 divergent views here... or is the TS skirting the issue? someone explain that to me.

in anycase, my opinion is simply this. the man MUST provide for the family and when i say family, it means wife and children and even his in laws. NO EXCEPTIONS. as a matter of fact, i feel that ppl should not even get married unless they already have enough money to pay for everything at least for 10 years into their marriage. and this should fall squarely on the man's shoulder. what the wife earns is the wifes!!! a man should have no right to her earnings unless its an absolute requirement as in an emergency and even then i would think he is useless. and btw, women are not sex machines. they are not there to spread their legs when the husband needs sex nor are they maids to clean up and do household chores. at the same time, husbands are not cash machines either!!!

a wife cannot expect that her husband will shower her with diamonds and a bmw or otherwise he is a good for nothing. is it not enough that he is able to provide a shelter for your family and all your necessities and enough money in the bank that you ppl dont need to beg in the streets? does he also needs to make sure that he fulfills your every whim and fancy?

think about it ppl. money is subjective. it will never be enough no matter how much of it you make. what will be enough at the end of the day is how much satisfaction you derive from your life.

btw debbie, if your statement implies that i CAN call girls shallow if i feed my family and support my family's expenses then again i say girls who think in this way are shallow because i am more than able to support my family's expenses.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 04:33 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Apr 28 2009, 04:20 PM)
You sir, are one confused person.
*
pray do tell me Dickson, why am i a confused person? i would certainly like to understand the logic behind your statement before commenting further.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 04:39 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Apr 28 2009, 04:34 PM)
Sure thing!

Start a new thread and I'll explain why over there.
*
i imagined you would say something along that line. its much easier to run and hide behind rhetorics to making a stand and stating your view for all to see and judge. come now, surely this could be as simple as you revealing here your reasoning right? or are you going to say now that you dont want to hijack someone else's thread and therefore ask me to start a pointless thread of why you think i am a confused person?

lets get back to the point of discussion and please this time try to speak your mind on why you might think my statement is misguided as your logic obviously implies.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 04:49 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Apr 28 2009, 04:41 PM)
If you start a new thread I PROMISE you that I will tell you why I think you're confused.

Does my assurance satisfy you?
*
Dickson, frankly speaking, its not that I dont trust you but its simply the fact that I dont see the reason why you cannot speak your mind here.

in anycase, i would like also if possible that TS who started the topic and all the other women who are like minded to state their opinion in this, because sincerely the postulation that money will guarantee your happiness is not something that i agree.

btw TS, IMHO when having a banter, the discussion should be intellectual and not sink to low blows.

This post has been edited by cyrixMII300: Apr 28 2009, 04:52 PM
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 04:55 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Apr 28 2009, 04:51 PM)
Well, I assumed that you wanted a real answer, fully fleshed out and furnished with examples?

I could write a tl:dr post of course but it would never do your enquiry justice, and for a matter as worthy as this surely it deserves an entire thread to itself.
*



bravo bravo!!! rclxms.gif you argument is as impeccable as it is flawed. but i admire you for that but lets for the moment continue this discussion first.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 04:59 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(moorish @ Apr 28 2009, 04:54 PM)
pls read back, I've never ever in my life says money guarantees happiness, however

If you kena cancer, rich and poor who will have the upper hand?
If your husband divorce or has a fling outside, rich and poor who would have the upper hand?

I'm not talking about remedy fixes, just that the rich always has the upper hand or at least some consolation prizes.
*
moorish, isnt that a rather pessimistic approach to life? for all of mankind, love has been the eternal flame that has burned the brightest. it has propelled man to do the impossible at times and money has only tempted him to do the worse.

just as an example, do you not think that the simplistic view that a rich husband when he has a fling outside marriage can be easily discarded with the comforting thought that you have the money at least? do you think that all the money in the world can heal your pain and anguish in that moment of despair?


Added on April 28, 2009, 5:01 pm
QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Apr 28 2009, 04:57 PM)
How can it be impeccable and flawed at the same time?  doh.gif
*
impeccable since you have at least in the moment of discussion stated your views eloquently with a moral high ground and flawed because you still have not addressed why you feel my views make me a confused person without opening a different thread. cool2.gif

This post has been edited by cyrixMII300: Apr 28 2009, 05:01 PM
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 05:09 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(beautyfocus @ Apr 28 2009, 05:04 PM)
in my opinion, yes. with his money, at least, i can have a better life. since, somehow, he is going to spend on another women.
*
then i say to you beautyfocus, that this is not merely the thought that money is important and necessary for a happy life but more a materialistic view where you can see past all the flaws of the person and only see the bags of money behind him. is it then love at all? if indeed this is how most girls view life now, i can say nothing more than that the man who uses and abuses women has won and the true gentlemen has lost.


Added on April 28, 2009, 5:13 pm
QUOTE(moorish @ Apr 28 2009, 05:07 PM)
Because I've seen too many poor family the husband still have a fling outside and she is left with nothing plus have to take care of kids.

Obviously we need a balance la, I've never said to cling on to a rich man and find means and ways to be married to him,

as the topic start:
2 guys after that girl, both chasing her hot on her heals, the girl love the poorer guy but at the same time as the rich guy seems prospective as well. So she was confused.
*
in this case obviously you need to make the right decision by again striking a balance between your heart and your mind. if indeed the poor guy loves the girl so much and she too feels that it is he who is the right one, do you think it would be impossible that he can improve his financial status? naturally, if she were to feel at the same time that he regardless of how much he loves her cannot do so, and that financial securiy is important for her, she must choose the rich guy.

This post has been edited by cyrixMII300: Apr 28 2009, 05:13 PM
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 06:46 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(silverhawk @ Apr 28 2009, 05:36 PM)
Cyrix isn't confused, though he may sound confusing. He probably just didn't express himself properly.

Its simply his pride as a man that he must be able to support his family. There is nothing wrong in that, and its something I agree with as well. By increasing the bar for his needs, he sets himself up to be motivated to accomplish it. Being able to support his family is no longer an optional thing, its a necessity, and making sure he doesn't have to take money from his partner further strengthens this goal. There's nothing wrong in that.

Women will like guys like this, because they are good providers. Gold diggers will milk you for what you're worth, and that's the kind of girl cyrix will want to avoid. Gold diggers typically believe that money = happiness. That's why he was against such women. We men can give, the question is... when we give something, is it expected, or is it appreciated? If you expect something, it is no longer appreciated.

If you just throw money at a woman and get her, that doesn't guarantee anything in the relationship. You basically bought the girl, and there's no way I find that respectful to a woman I will want to call my partner.
*
i dont think even i could have put it in a more eloquent manner. i would love to elaborate further but its time for lunch. when i return i will comment more.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 08:19 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(ezralimm @ Apr 28 2009, 07:46 PM)
NOBODY is saying that men are evaluated SOLELY by how much money they have.
in the same way NOBODY is saying that women are evaluated SOLELY by how pretty/attractive/fertile they are.

That said, it is a stereotype because it's true. Men do leave women they are with if there is a hotter girl coming on to them. Women do leave men who are weak and pathethic in the game of life (in the modern sense, money plays a big part in this).
EVERYONE uses ad hominems.... But not all are hypocritical condescending SOBs.


Added on April 28, 2009, 7:51 pm

In practice, just about every man in his right mind would do that...and be proud of it whether they like to admit it or not. But not every man is awesome and can woo the attractive girls. MOST will have to settle for less than their dream princesses... Because Face The Truth™, they arent exactly dream prince's either.

EVERYONE settles for the best that is AVAILABLE to them.
...and what is available to a girl depends LARGELY (not solely) on how beautiful/attractive/fertile she is.

...and what is available to a guy depends LARGELY (not solely) on how socially dominant he is.
In the modern world social dominance is difficult, but not impossible, to achieve without money.
*
but really ezra, your views narrow minded and simplistic to say the least. what you are doing is essentially equating mankind to the animal kingdom. we are not mere animals whereby our needs for a mate is determined by the strongest or the most fertile.

unlike the animal kingdom where the strongest male takes over a pride and kills of all the offsprings of the predecessor, humans do not do this. neither do women leave their husbands when they see a richer man down the street. perhaps in your world or even mould women do that, but i for one feel that men generally do not do that. yes there are exceptions but these are mere exceptions rather than the norm.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 28 2009, 11:14 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


dear ezra, please retrace your own steps and what you have said. at one turn you say that men and women can and will leave their partners for someone else because the man found somenone more attractive or the woman found someone more socially dominant. then at the next, you say that ppl who are settled down by 40 dont do it. what are you trying to say here? that when you have been married for some time the only thing that is keeping you together is the fact that you cannot get out of it? come on. you surely dont believe that do you?

anyway, i do not care to repeat myself as i have already stated my opinion on the matter of the roles of man and woman especially financially and the fact is that i believe in this strongly.

what miffs me is simply the following statement in bold in the first post.

QUOTE(moorish @ Mar 18 2009, 06:23 PM)
From the topic http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/967243 it made me think deep why are girl money minded.

Thousands of years ago, money do not exist, girl will choose their partner base on security, they look for well built male who can protect them from wild animals and wild man or whatever wild things,they're vulnerable when they;re pregnant, and the years when they need to raise children. This has been genetic in female.

Fast forward to today, we no longer require mr. muscle to protect us, security took a new meaning, security = money. So girl will marry a guy when he is rich and this is why the quote ada wang ada amoi.

So girls, be proud when you choose a rich husband, and to those girl who insist love is more important, they're just immature and the mother instinct not kick in yet, after few years of marriage they'll regret of their choice.

*
the same quote in bold is applicable to your last question happy4ever. before you start shooting from the hip, please take note that TS clearly says rich guy against poor guy instead of say.. guy who can provide enough against guy who can provide luxuries and security.


QUOTE(happy4ever @ Apr 28 2009, 10:29 PM)
If it is about the amount of money, then please state at which point the post mentioned about the amount of money?
*
are all of you women essentially agreeing to the above post that love is not more important than money??? how can it be that you can possibly believe that an abstract thing of value only on paper is much more important than lying in the arms of the man you love with your life and to whom you have just made love with and with whom you have borne children with? how can it be more important than the emotions you feel when he rushes to your aid when you accidentally cut your finger? how can it be more important than the all-engulfing emotion that you feel deep down in your heart when you see the love in his eyes?

can money possibly do any of this? can it make you feel this way? and if it does, is it human?

This post has been edited by cyrixMII300: Apr 28 2009, 11:22 PM
cyrixMII300
post Apr 29 2009, 01:03 AM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


come on silverhawk... commitment is a nostalgic word in todays world... at least from what i have read here.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 29 2009, 03:39 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


well well well.... it seems some light is coming after all in this discourse.. finally there is some true and real substance.

if you ask me.. a relationship needs two ppl to work on it. its the husbands job to strive and provide what his family needs in good times and bad times. its the wife's job to support his husband emotionally to do so and hold him together in good or bad times.

the problem with todays world is quite simply this and i do believe that this is absolutely true. most ppl today who were born in the 80's and late 70's have had life too easy. they feel that the luxuries of life is a birthright and not something that is earned. ps3, computers, pocket money big cars everything that they get from their parents since they were kids is something that is due to them and not something that they work for. subsequently they feel the same about marriage and love. they feel its their birthright to find the best candidate for love and marriage and not something that they have to work on every single day. if they dont succeed in it they move on and find someone else or resort to defeatist actions.

love and marriage and commitment does not come easy my friends. every single day you have to work for it and at it. the marriage is not going to work unless you work on building a lasting stronger relationship. the money is not going to come unless you work to get it.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 29 2009, 04:31 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Apr 29 2009, 04:07 PM)
Yup.

If you're Chinese then chances are you would have family who came from backgrounds of poverty. Aunts, uncles, or grandparents.

In the old days daughters would be married off into rich families in arranged marriages. This was something that women had to be rather stoic about, but it wasn't unheard of for a girl to cry and be very sad that she would be married off to somebody she hardly knew, chances are is quite ugly, just because of money that her family wanted. In those days women wanted the choice to marry for love, and to be with a man they liked, rather than have that choice made for them.

Malaysia is built on the backs of the poor. How many stories and examples do we know of, of hardworking, poor people who were constantly on the lookout for business opportunities and finally made it big, being able to afford nice houses, expensive cars and send their children overseas for education where a mere generation ago they came from a Chinese ghetto (I mean kampung baru), or plantation? Back in those days, a woman with choice would rather be with a man who would care and appreciate her and was hardworking, than go for somebody who already had the money - because the psychology of the latter usually meant that a poorer woman from a poorer family attaching themselves to such a man would only be used and then chucked like expendable goods.

But things have changed. They are no longer the same. People themselves have changed.

That was then. THIS is now. Old values no longer have meaning in a world that has changed so drastically in a mere two to three generations.

I can only exhort the menfolk here to also evolve with the times. Evolve, or be extinct. Clinging to past values will not save you or give you inherent worthiness - no matter how many people pat you on the head and coo at you the words "good boy".

You must be able to tell apart the real and the fake.
*
dickson, i agree with you that ppl have changed and that society has changed. however, i beg to differ on the point that men have to discard past values and evolve to become one of the herd. why should we? what do we gain? acceptance into the norms of the society perhaps? it could be so, but does it guarantee happiness? does it guarantee self-satisfaction? why cannot we evolve and elevate our position in the society and the hierarchy while retaining our values? why cant we be both a true classic gentleman and a rich man all at the same time? i do not think that this is utopian nor is it futile to be attempted. in my own experience, i have had the pleasure of having a number of friends who are both very rich and yet so refined and these are the ppl whom i look upto and make an example of. i look with scorn to the scum of the society like chua soi lek and look with adoration at my friends whom i personally know.

i do not think that past values are irrelevant nor dispensable today. on the contrary past values in my opinion is what will lead us into a brighter future. a future where one is judged by the depth of the character and not the pocket. if there is anyone who feels that the past values should be discarded, i feel sorry for them.
cyrixMII300
post Apr 29 2009, 06:46 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(ezralimm @ Apr 29 2009, 05:58 PM)
Very well said. I've been saying pretty much the same thing all along. Social dominance, along with the charm, confidence and charisma that comes with it is very difficult to achive without money in the modern world.
If you have cash, you can spend on your dates. You can take her to places and spend more time with her...increasing your chances of clicking on an emotional level and building a relationship. If you are successful in your career, you would be a more confident person... and charisma is built on confidence.
Money and social dominance are very intertwined in the modern world.


Added on April 29, 2009, 5:59 pm

doh.gif dude, read the sentence properly lah... it was a RHETORICAL argument that I myself do not quite believe in.


Added on April 29, 2009, 6:02 pm

I agree... though you must admit that "depth of character" aka charm/confidence/charisma in guys that is just so appealing to women comes naturally when a guy is thriving... It is VERY DIFFICULT to build depth of character without money in the modern world...Without social dominance, you could have a very complex evolved character...but it would not be the right type of character that attracts women smile.gif


Added on April 29, 2009, 6:03 pm

HAhahahahaha. ROFL. Should be pasted into Jokes Haven..
*
sorry ezra.. i think you have it the wrong way around.... character comes first then the money.... see u all after lunch anyway before i elaborate further
cyrixMII300
post May 7 2009, 06:42 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
48 posts

Joined: Oct 2007


QUOTE(secretsquirrel @ May 7 2009, 09:00 AM)
strawman concept is great but i dont think it applies here on these kiddo's talk. I see it more obvious on RWI  whistling.gif

Allow this 80yo nanny blabbing and catching her breath to voice out one more thing:
The true WRONG concept u guys are having here is that: MONEY has only very little or surface influence to all Love/Relationship/Marriage/Romance.  It could be a factor that a girl/boy in love/want to be in love with the other richer boy/girl, even got married as long as two are happy... but at the end (where is the end? wedding day? divorce day? death?) if they are truly happy or not, and if they regret their choices or not, we wont know.

To many youngsters, not until u personally experience romance->love->relationship->marriage->divorce, you are NOT capable to get to know why is this old nanny trying to SEPARATE these few VERBs cos they all look miserable/complicated and yet SIMPLE to you cos they are all same, which she insist they are NOT the same one thing.

For young poor guys, when you notice 'most girls are money minded/handsome guys-oriented', i can tell you, it is only your Delusion.  U simply oversee some other who are NOT.  Or u might have received info wrongly. Remember? what girls tell might not the whole truth... yea women are complicated, especially to young kiddos.  The only piece of advice i can give u is that, Study hard, Work hard, if there are girls come along, swallow everything and gain experience, if not, let it be cos ur true love is out there somewhere When U R truly deserved her. Btw, please check out NLP so that u can climb a ladder to get messages across better.

For older richer guys, the way you posted msg here doesnt sound like a true wise old guy that Im looking for, therefore I believe there r still a lot more you ought to learn, which I believe you arent very old indeed.  Apparently life experiences is important when we are talking about dealing with love issues.  again, if u havent heard/started NLP, pls do so if u think u do have miserable life from time to time... it is usually the major cause of the majority to get angry easily/fast...

For gals, love and romance is everything to you till you are 80yo (like me).  When you are lucky enough to grab a handsome, young, rich, kind, romantic, wonderful husband, treasure it like TS said, but it still doesnt guarantee u for a life time happiness, like i said, when it the end? wedding? kids's family life? divorce? death?  LIfe is full of surprises... Please feel free to pm me for further girls talk - i long for it smile.gif

Be well everyone.
*
succient and to the point. but i doubt that ppl would still be able to go past their deluded emotions and fantasies to understand the intricate meaning of life as you have put it. i take my hats (only) off for you.




Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0693sec    0.26    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 30th November 2025 - 04:57 AM