Women who behave like whores will be treated like whores - used for pleasure, then tossed away.

Man, are there sooooo many misconceptions in here.

1) Men need money so they can provide for their women.
Hello, is this the year 2009 or 1909? Women have their own careers now, they're independent, they can earn their own money. A fair and equal relationship means both partners provide for each other.

2) Women only want men who can support them financially.
If this is your only perception of women, then you're hanging out with the wrong people. There are plenty of mature and independent women out there - but then again, you're not likely to date them because you're immature.

3) Rich men are more confident, therefore more attractive to women.
Boy, you really haven't lived much, have you? Plenty of rich people are miserable, and plenty of average working-class people are lead happy, satisfying lives. Wealth is only a symptom, not a cause.

Both sides are arguing extremes here - one side says "Money is important!", the other side says "Money is not everything!", then that side says "So you want to be poor izzit?"

"Important" is not the same as "Everything".
"Money isn't everything" doesn't mean "I'm happy to be poor".

There's so many straw men being thrown around here - y'all really need to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

In any case, I fall more on the side of "money isn't everything". It's especially antithetical to love, which is all about compassion and sacrifice and doing the right thing instead of blindly following some "biological imperative". It doesn't mean that financial problems won't affect relationships. It does mean that financial problems can be overcome, as long as the love and trust are strong.

I don't need to try. Lived in KL all my life, every girl I've dated has been from KL. Not one has ever judged me by my job, car, or bank account.

---

Added on May 7, 2009, 11:18 amAgain with the misconceptions.

Do you really think poor guys don't deserve love? (Let's not even talk about 'stingy', that's not even relevant.) And do you really think money is so easy to find? There are people out there trapped in a never-ending cycle of poverty - things like house and car that you take for granted, they're far beyond the reach of these people. Are you so inconsiderate, so insensitive, so lacking in empathy, that all you can say to them is "wake up and find more money"?

Money = Quality? I show you Guy A, who works as a car workshop mechanic, earns about RM2k a month, saving up as much as he can every month so he can buy a partnership share in his workshop. Now I give you Guy B, son of a rich timber tycoon, lives in a penthouse apartment and drives an imported sports car, has never held a job for longer than 6 months, and is now just bumming around until his father scolds him again for the umpteenth time to get a job.

Is Guy B a better person than Guy A? In every way? Really??

Okay, I admit, I'm throwing out straw men too. Not every rich guy is a spoiled slacker like Guy B. But the difference here is character. Is that not more important than money, in judging a person? If I had just said Guy A is a kind and decent man, Guy B is a spoiled and arrogant jerk, then asked you who is a better person - do you really need to know who has more money before you can answer that question?

I'm not saying money is not important. You're saying that money is the most important. You're wrong. You could not be more wrong.

I have a cousin. Smartest and most successful amongst his siblings. Worked in the oil business, conducted multi-million dollar deals, had a beautiful wife and son. Then one day he was arrested by the FBI in the States, on suspicion of having ties to terrorists, because of his business contacts in the Middle East. He was in jail for a couple of years while his case dragged on. His wife divorced him and took his son away. He was finally released, and right now he's trying to rebuild his business, and has since married a divorcee with a son of her own.

If you think money lasts longer than love... you're just flat-out wrong.



This post has been edited by n00b13: May 7 2009, 11:18 AM

Moorish, if you read XKCD, I might have to revise my impression of you.

Right. I shall now attempt (foolishly, probably) to put in the last word on this debate.

The phrase "money-minded" seems to be a particularly loaded one for both men and women. Men find it offensive, and use the term as an insult. Women, in turn, are offended when the term is used insultingly. Clearly, it means different things to both men and women.

What it means to women - we shall refer to this as Definition A:
- Girls who are attracted to smart, successful, independent men with bright futures.
- Girls who want the security - both financial and emotional - of being with such a man.
- Girls who dislike unmotivated, directionless men who can't hold down a job.

Now, what it means to men, is the following Definition B:
- Girls who judge men by the car they drive.
- Girls who demand that men spend on them beyond their means - nicer dates, more expensive presents, more spending money.
- Girls who value expensive clothes, jewellery and supplementary credit cards over love and affection.

Now, there is a wide gulf between Definitions A and B that most men and women can comfortably find middle ground in. Most men are not shiftless slobs, and most women are not gold-digging parasites. Men should understand how women are naturally drawn to successful men. And women should understand that men are naturally offended to be judged solely by their bank account.

In fact, here's an analogy. Let's say someone starts a thread titled "Guys are sex-minded... and proud of it". The TS goes on to say how it's men's nature to go after sexy women - and if you're fat, don't wear makeup, don't wear revealing clothes and don't know how to giggle like a Japanese schoolgirl, you're simply losers in the game of love.

Wouldn't you, as a woman, be offended by that? That's how men tend to feel, whenever this "money-minded" topic crops up.

Well, that's just what I'm trying to say - guys who feel insecure aren't necessarily bums. They're simply protesting the implication that money is the only thing women look for in men. You're saying it's one of the things, and that it's important - they hear that it's the only thing, and the most important. I'm pretty sure even the most successful guy would resent hearing that.

Whatever happened to making yourself look good so that you feel good about yourself? Is attracting men the only reason? I exercise, because being healthy gives me confidence and self-assurance. If a girl finds me attractive because of that, that's just a bonus - it is not the end to which exercising is the means. Same reason why I dress well, wear deodorant, comb my hair every morning - or, for that matter, why I work hard at my job.

This post has been edited by n00b13: May 10 2009, 08:31 PM

Talk about missing the point.

Why are you defending Guy B? He is a hypothetical construct, he doesn't exist. He's a jerk because I created him that way, to compare him to Guy A who isn't a jerk. The question I asked is, who's the better man, a rich jerk or a poor but decent guy?

The fact that you answered "The rich jerk, but he's not really a jerk!" isn't only missing the point, it says a lot about your values.

I have no intention of passing judgment on my cousin's (ex)wife for divorcing him. I can never understand what she went through. I told this story to make the point that money doesn't last - even smart and successful people make mistakes, and misfortune can strike even those who don't make mistakes. It could happen to you, Mr. Links Everything - and when it does, you'll be praying that love is stronger than money.

I can only hope you're a callow kid no older than 22, so that you still have some growing up to do. If you're not - well, then I hope you find exactly the kind of woman for you.

Arbuthen?

That video is made of epic LOL and ROFL.

Proof once again that Chinese are the most materialistic race on the planet.

Quite likely.

...

I've known people like this too - guys and girls. People who've never been able to hold down a job. People who couldn't face life and hid behind alcohol or drugs. People who are well into their 30s and never found their feet in life.

The ones I've known all come from rich families. Yes, their families end up supporting them.

Something else to think about for any woman thinking about marrying for money.

Wrong.

Very, very wrong.

I risk invoking Godwin's Law here, but that kind of thinking leads to Nazism.

Seriously.

U is made of fail.

Moorish, why don't you try answering this simple question:

Which is more important, money or love?

Bear in mind that if you choose one, it doesn't mean the other is not important. Just pick the one that you would prioritise over the other.

Which is it?

<sigh>

Moorish, I don't think you really understand what you're saying.

I don't think you mean what you're saying.

Because if you do, then you must live a very, very miserable life. It means that you married your husband solely for his money. It means that the thought of him does not make you smile; he has never done or said anything that touched your heart; and you want nothing from him other than his supplementary credit card. It means that if he were to suddenly lose all his money due to some tragedy, you would leave him in an instant. It means that he could die tomorrow and all you'd care about is that his will is in order.

I'm sure you don't. I'm sure you love your husband deeply, and he loves you. I'm sure you know what love means - you who recently had a baby.

What you don't seem to understand is that all your talk of money is deeply anathema to love. Forgive me for using such bombastic words; what it means is that your point of view about money is the very opposite of what love means. If Kuan Yin, the Goddess of Mercy and Love, were real, she would be offended to hear what you said. A girl who took your advice to heart would not be smart - she would be, as Dickson says, a prostitute.

You are not a prostitute. You are a lucky woman who married a wonderful man - a man who means more to you than his net worth. Yet here you are telling everyone that the only thing a woman should look for in a man is his bank statement.

You may think I'm misconstruing your words. I'm not. You dissemble and say things like "love is also important", but yet you keep trotting out your point about lazy unemployed bums. You keep failing to understand that this is a false dichotomy. Teongpeng only just tried to explain it - you cannot argue your point with an extreme opposite.

Money is necessary to survive. Love is necessary to be happy. The more you confuse the two, the more you demonstrate that you don't understand what love means.

You do understand what love means. You see it every day in the eyes of your child. Look into them, and try to think about how much it costs to raise her. Think about the price of baby formula, of diapers, of her crib and her pram and her toys. Think about how much you and your husband will have to save for her education. Think about what you will have to sacrifice for all this - less shopping, less holidays, less facial treatments and spa visits.

I bet you can't. I bet that when you hold her in your arms, all your worries about money vanish. Instantly. You are incapable of thinking about money in the presence of the life you brought into this world.

That's why you're wrong. Everything you've said in this thread. It's just plain wrong.

What will work?

What can still be managed? The marriage?

Do you honestly think a loveless marriage is worth keeping? Do you honestly think a poor couple who run a wantan mee stall and love each other deeply is something that "won't work"? Do you honestly think they are worse off than a rich Datuk and Datin who despise the very sight of each other?

And in reply, are you going to trot out your "lazy unemployed bum" argument again? Why do you keep looking down on poor people? Why do you keep thinking that people who live in squatter houses and struggle to maintain their monthly payments on their second-hand motorbikes are "lazy unemployed bums"?

Don't you realize how arrogant you're being?

---

Added on October 5, 2009, 11:53 am Not you too, Debbie.



This post has been edited by n00b13: Oct 5 2009, 11:53 AM

No.

The ideal family is one where there is love. Even if both parents have to work. Even if every day is a daily struggle to scrape every cent. So long as the house is filled with love, so long as husband and wife and children can make all worries disappear simply by being together, that is a happy family.

You think you're being smart and pragmatic with all your talk about money. You're not. You're being mean, mercenary, superficial and arrogant.

Kuan Yin is offended by you. Jesus is angry at you. Your husband, who gives you so much more than just his financial prospects, is insulted by you.

Who's the one who keeps talking about "lazy unemployed bums"?

You're a lousy debater, Moorish. You're the one with the unreasonable prejudice against poor people. There are good men and bad men. There are wealthy men and poor men. There is no connection between the two. Rich doesn't mean good or bad. Poor doesn't mean bad or good.

But what you're saying now is that rich is everything. Rich automatically means good. Poor automatically means bad. That is the sum of this entire thread, the gist of your "advice" to girls. Isn't it?

And he would be disappointed to read what you've been saying, Moorish. I really think he would.

No, I never did. That's why you're a lousy debater - you don't really understand what people are saying to you.

I'm sure he is. I'm sure he knows that a husband's duty includes standing by his wife when her ego is at stake. Perhaps he read your post how loveless marriages can still work as long as there is money, and he thinks "well, that will never happen to us because we have love and money". I'm sure he's a very dutiful husband - but, like you, he simply doesn't understand what you're really saying.

I'm done with this thread, Moorish. You have an enviable life, but it's taught you nothing. You have happiness, but not wisdom. Not only are you not qualified to dispense advice, you are incapable of arguing your point. Go and be blissfully ignorant, with your great husband and your beautiful baby. You've won the game; you don't need the strategy guide anymore.

This does not make sense.

You could also say, the chances for true love to blossom are equal whether or not one is left-handed or right-handed, so why not take your chances with the right-handed ones?

The chances for true love to blossom are equal whether or not one is short or tall, so why not take your chances with the tall ones?

The chances for true love to blossom are equal whether or not one is Asian or Western, so why not take your chances with the Western ones?

If you choose to narrow your prospects so, you are expressing a bias. You are saying that you cannot look beyond your biases to love a person who does not meet them. You are being superficial.

But when your bias is for money, there's another word for it. It's called greed. You see, to be superficial is to be immature. You can grow out of it, or you can let the world knock some sense into you.

But greed is ingrained. Greed is a lot harder to get rid of. Greedy people are a lot less likely to change.