Check out some similar questions!

JoeCanada76 · Apr 19, 2006, 06:47 PM

If people are using others just for their money. You are only hurting them. Is that what you want? Love is more important then anything in this world. If you do not have love then the purpose about this life is lost.

Joe

NeedKarma · Apr 20, 2006, 04:17 AM

"fredg disagrees: "don't plan to achieve your own independence" is just a guess; not always a true fact."

Yes Fred, you always post true facts not your opinions. :rolleyes:
Sigh... It's OK, I was expecting this.

Catseyes · Apr 20, 2006, 12:22 PM

I agree with everybody here who said that " loving " someone for their money is WRONG!
I mean how can somebody call this love?

Even IF it was a criteria of selection ( to start dating someone ) ( and that can the case in some classes of society ), then after a couple of dates, if ONLY money is the interesting thing about that person, a " normal " person wouldn't stay in this relationship . If you do, you are either a masochist, or you will cheat your spouse/partner later on !

However, if money is not the ONLY good thing about that person, and you truly love ech other, then it's the icing on the cake !

My two cents...

Hypatia · Apr 20, 2006, 01:36 PM

For endless amounts of years people have married for money. I have dated men who werent completely my type because they had money. The thing is, everyone knew the reason. You people act like he has to follow some christian value system or that dating for anything less than love is horrible.
Gee, I thought open mindedness was a rampant thing here, guess not.
I think you should date who the hell you want no matter if they are poor, rich or wealthy. Money is sexy! It can turn an ugly man into a beautiful man. The thing is if you are Using them for the money, well thats a big no no. But if it is a sex appeal thing, like a nice pair of legs, a nice ***, great tits, wit, personality, then why is it such a bad thing. Its like if a guy only dated singers or dancers. If money turns you on and it makes the ugly or stupid women seem more appealing, go for it. It might be their only chance for a relationship with a good looking man.
We must be realistic. Some people only have money going for them. And they will marry, screw or date people all of their lives who enjoy many things about them including their money. No one should be ashamed for this. Love stems from many things.

Hypatia

phillysteakandcheese · Apr 20, 2006, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Hypatia

For endless amounts of years people have married for money. I have dated men who werent completely my type because they had money. The thing is, everyone knew the reason ... Money is sexy! It can turn an ugly man into a beautiful man...

I totally disagree. This line of thinking is the ultimate form of vanity.

talaniman · Apr 20, 2006, 02:26 PM

If two people agree on what kind of relationship they want built on their needs who cares how they do it if they both are adults. What's important to me is not necessarily important to you so make yourself happy. The problem starts when we start to judge one another instead of minding our own business. I don't agree at all that money makes ugly people beautiful but that's just me.:cool: :eek:

ScottGem · Apr 20, 2006, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by Hypatia

The thing is if you are Using them for the money, well thats a big no no.
Hypatia

And that's my point. If the only reason you are marrying someone is because they have money, then you ARE using them. If money is just part of the attraction and there are other factors that may create a different issue.

And let me differentiate between dating and marrying. Clearly, the two are different. Dating is the process of getting to know someone. I don't deny that money is clearly a attraction. Its enough to start a relationship, but its not enough, by itself, to sustain a relationship.

DrJ · Apr 20, 2006, 03:57 PM

Everyone is going to have their own opinion but she is right about the reality of the world. Sure, money "shouldnt" be what attracts one to another... but in reality, for a lot of people, IT IS! How many true loves have found one another solely because of the one's BIG bank account? Just like a true love finding its other because of the ones's BIG ***, ****, or **** (I made the * myself... but you get the point).

And as for it setting back feminism, we can't assume that ONLY women are attracted to men's money. The thread starter alone is proof of that.

Money is sexy? Well sure... or maybe its what money can give a man that's sexy.. maybe it's the confidence, the power or money that one finds sexy. Or maybe it's the fact that if one HAS money, they must have the attributes & characteristics that allowed them to obtain money... smart, business & success-minded, goal-oriented, a go-getter, etc. That's definitely sexy!

(yeah, yeah... of course theirs the spoiled little brats that live off the family money... but Im not talking about them)

ScottGem · Apr 20, 2006, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by DrJizzle

Everyone is going to have their own opinion but she is right abotu the reality of the world. Sure, money "shouldnt" be what attracts one to another... but in reality, for a lot of people, IT IS!! How many true loves have found one another solely because of the one's BIG bank account? Just like a true love finding its other becuase of the ones's BIG ***, ****, or **** (I made the * myself... but you get the point).

I agree and disagree. I agree with the reality. I disagree that money shouldn't be what attracts. I don't see any problem money being all or part of the initial attraction. What I'm saying is that money ALONE cannot and should not sustain a relationship.

Hypatia · Apr 20, 2006, 11:05 PM

Philly, how would this be an ultimate form of vanity?
Vanity by definition is "excessive pride, especially in your appearance" .
Pride is "feeling of superiority: a haughty attitude shown by people who believe, often unjustifiably, that they are better than others ".

How is loving or dating someone because they have money, and this attracts you, vanity at all? The ultimate form of vanity would be overlooking money as an attribute to this persons attractiveness in favor of your own shallow perceptions of what is proper or personally moral to find attractive.

"NeedKarma agrees: It sets feminism back 40 years. Plus it's another form of using someone."

How?! I think it proves feminism is working. Now it is completely visible that men are taking the traditional role of a woman. In older ages the only way a woman could move up in the world was to marry up. She couldnt attend college and be independent.
this guy is admitting to doing what women have done for centuries to move up as a reality in his life. It proves that the playing field is becoming even when men take the roles of women and women take the roles of men. I see feminism at a penacle!
Using someone? So it is ok to marry or date rich if you want to have sex with them, like to hang out with them or find them funny or smart? Arent we all using everyone to a fault? We use the ones we love daily. We use them to love them, we use them to partner with us and split chores, financial obligations, raising of the kids etc. Everyone uses and is used. Just because you find one morally wrong and one morally right does not make it ok. We all have different standards and views that must be respected or at least should be. When people begin to force right and wrong depending on their moral views they miss the experience of freedom and will only see either likeness or opposition.

Scott said "What I'm saying is that money ALONE cannot and should not sustain a relationship."

I think anything ALONE so long as it is an attraction is a good reason to go on a date. What if this guy meets a woman people define as below average in every way and falls madly in love with her? Money ALONE attracted him to her but her traits would have won him over in the end. If love isnt there more than likely she will dump him or he dump her. Nothing is harmed in the experience or trying. I think money alone will not ever sustain a relationship but then again, who are we to know who havent experienced it? How can we define something unknown to us other than in theory?

Hypatia

NeedKarma · Apr 21, 2006, 03:36 AM

Based on the previous post I am going to find me a sweet college girl and pay her $200/month for 'companionship' - how can that be wrong?

talaniman · Apr 21, 2006, 03:53 AM

Where do you think you can get a sweet college girl for $200/month? You'd better ask your wife for a substantial raise in your allowance!:cool: :eek:

ScottGem · Apr 21, 2006, 05:22 AM

Originally Posted by Hypatia

Scott said "What I'm saying is that money ALONE cannot and should not sustain a relationship."

I think anything ALONE so long as it is an attraction is a good reason to go on a date. What if this guy meets a woman people define as below average in every way and falls madly in love with her? Money ALONE attracted him to her but her traits would have won him over in the end. If love isnt there more than likely she will dump him or he dump her. Nothing is harmed in the experience or trying. I think money alone will not ever sustain a relationship but then again, who are we to know who havent experienced it? How can we define something unknown to us other than in theory
Hypatia

So you agree with me! Thanks.

milliec · Apr 21, 2006, 06:34 AM

I looked back (not "...in anger".. ) to my 1st post on this topic, and now , after having read what's been said here, I feel even stronger concerning what I said then: honesty is the first ingredient we have to consider, in human relationships generally speaking, it's imperative in this specific issue, and before all that: one has to be first of all honest with himself.
And here's something positive I have to say about GenomeX:
He was at least honest with himself. That's a beginning.
I'm not sure if he was uneasy with what he found out inside him: that's not clear - he might have needed reassurance here- he might have liked to know if it's something common with others, it might have annoyed him - maybe he had other notions about love - all these things are not at all clear from his letter.
In any case, I MUST give him this credit: he started an interesting debate!
Millie

phillysteakandcheese · Apr 21, 2006, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by Hypatia

Philly, how would this be an ultimate form of vanity?
Vanity by definition is "excessive pride, especially in your appearance" .
Pride is "feeling of superiority: a haughty attitude shown by people who believe, often unjustifiably, that they are better than others ".

In this context, vanity refers to your own excessive pride in the exaggeration of how important money is to you.

Hypatia · Apr 21, 2006, 09:47 AM

" In this context, vanity refers to your own excessive pride in the exaggeration of how important money is to you"

Is he exaggerating its importance or merely recognizing it? Is it a shame to recognize a love for money as a factor in your attractiveness to others?

Hypatia

DrJ · Apr 21, 2006, 09:51 AM

Its kind of funny...

Lets say I am at the supermarket and I walk past this woman. The first thing that stands out are her incredible EYES! They're gorgeous! Instantly, I am totally entranced and attracted to her EYES. Without any hesistation, I appoach her and ask her on a date. And (despite the terrible cliche) I tell her about how I fell in love with her eyes. Ohhh, Im such the romantic guy, right?

On the other hand, "Lets say I am at the supermarket and I walk past this woman. The first thing that stands out are her incredible [BREASTS]! The gorgeous! Instantly, I am totally entranced and attracted to her [BREASTS]. Without any hesistation, I appoach her and ask her on a date." Now, if I were to tell her about how I instantly fell in love with her breasts, after I get slapped, Im likely to be told how shallow of a person I am.

And in the last scenario, lets say the first thing I see is this woman's Benz and expensive wardrobe... she's obviously wealthy. Instantly I am attracted to her for this reason. I apporach her and ask her on a date. Again, I don't think she would take too kindly to me telling her that I instantly fell in love with her bank roll.

In any of these scenarios, this woman and I could be meant for each other. We could be soul mates... in order for us to every meet, there would have to be SOMETHING that attracts one of us to the other, right? However, we have these ideas of what is morally right to be attracted to.

A relationship cannot work based on an attraction to the eyes alone, nor beasts nor money alone. But what makes one okay to create the original attraction and not the others?

NeedKarma · Apr 21, 2006, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Hypatia

Is it a shame to recognize a love for money as a factor in your attractiveness to others?

I'll go with Yes. But then again you knew I was going to say that 'cause you're psychic.

Hypatia · Apr 21, 2006, 10:01 AM

So I should bow my head in shame for falling instantly in love with my husband when we shared our first kiss and I got a bit of that huge c***?
It wasnt his personality that made me keep going out with him. Now we are best friends, soulmates, going on 3 unblemished years. Few fights, tons of love, and yeah, we still burn for each other just like the day we met. Crazy isnt it!
Im an empath, not a mind reader. I feel ya......really.

Hypatia

NeedKarma · Apr 21, 2006, 10:08 AM

I think the disconnect that we are feeling here is that the original asker said about girls with money:

I just want to love those type of girls (even if they have a bad personality or look ugly).. and the only thing that I think is the thing that makes we want to like them is their money.

He mentions nothing about getting to know the person and having an emotional bond, he says "the thing that makes we want to like them is their money".

I actually agree with most of the posts that say it can be a feature of attraction but to have the whole relationship based on that is where I want to object.

BTW Hypatia - you made me laugh with "I feel ya......really." :)