For love or money? Who would you rath...

Avatar for cl_shywon
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2003
For love or money? Who would you rath...
40
Sun, 01-28-2007 - 11:33am

For love or money? Who would you rather be with?



  • a man who I love deeply, but doesn't look good "on paper"
  • a man who looks good "on paper" yet I don't love deeply- I simply care for him


You will be able to change your vote.


iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2003
Mon, 01-29-2007 - 6:41pm

This was such an interesting thread for me because I'm currently dating a guy who makes a lot less money than my last couple of serious boyfriends. He looks bad on paper because he works as an independent private teacher (makes proabably $35-40K a year) while pursuing a more creative passion. He hadn't held even this stable a job until a few years ago and having gone back and gotten a Master's in teaching. (And for the record he does smoke pot once a week though doesn't drink alcohol that often). He appears to live within his means and be financially responsible (for instance he pays for his own health and dental insurance and he bought a used car outright rather than a new car with payments), but his means are a lot less than I'm used to. And, I do worry/acknowledge that financial stress can stress romantic relationships.

I know that I would prefer someone that paid more attention and valued me more highly than someone who could provide me with more financial benefits but not be there for me as much. I also feel more secure with someone that might be less desirable in some way and so make me less easy to replace. I also think to some extent that if you make the same or more money in the relationship, you have more leverage to implement a less traditional family lifestyle (father and mother providing equal child care). This is something I find desirable. I had to laugh at the comment about money becoming more imporant as she gets older because I am finding the opposite is true for me. As I become more confident of my own ability to make money, I feel less need to meet someone with more money than me. But, as I said above, I realize that financial stress can lead to relationship stress and I'm the type of person who needs the security of knowing that I have a year's worth of expenses in the bank.

Anyway, I voted for love, but my opinion varies depending on how I feel about my own career.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-15-2005
Mon, 01-29-2007 - 6:56pm

<<< I had to laugh at the comment about money becoming more imporant as she gets older because I am finding the opposite is true for me. As I become more confident of my own ability to make money, I feel less need to meet someone with more money than me.>>>

I don't think anyone here has said they want a sugar daddy, or suggested they want to drop all financial responsibility for themselves.


iVillage Member
Registered: 09-27-2004
Mon, 01-29-2007 - 7:49pm
What I meant about not treating you well is someone who is a couch potato or works after hours on projects all the time, ignoring you but being there and not wanting to talk or relate to you, not someone who beats you etc etc (that is obvious, of course no one would want to be with someone like that). My preferance is to be with someone who really goes above and beyond to relate to you, do romantic gestures, spend quality time with you, being affectionate and not just being PHYSICALLY PRESENT if you know what I mean.
I can understand how in your position you may want someone who makes more money. It's all a matter of past experiences and preferances. I used to think that money would make me happy and what not but honestly, it really hasn't. I do want to offer my children the best and that's why I try to save as much as I can and not spend too much and the guy I'm with does the same. He doesn't make much money but he tries his best not to overspend and save for the future and I think that to me is very important.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-27-2004
Mon, 01-29-2007 - 7:53pm
I do think the guy who makes less and plays it on the safer side is more attractive than the guy who makes more and doesnt' know how to manage his money and is an overspender because I tend to be on the more frugal side myself and more cautious with money so I'm attracted to the same sorts of types :-) I think it's a complete turn-off to me when a guy is in debt up to his eyeballs and has to have all the fancy toys that he doesn't really need.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2003
Mon, 01-29-2007 - 8:00pm

And I didn't mean by my comment that anyone was. It's highly unrealistic to look for that unless you are very good looking and willing to be with someone much older than you.

I simply was noticing that, on a practical level, wealth in a potential mate becomes less valuble as a trait (relative to other traits because of course extra money is always nice) as you get older and have more personal wealth yourself.

Avatar for cl_shywon
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-20-2003
Mon, 01-29-2007 - 10:39pm

I was very surprised by the results...but then again, I'm not.


To me, "on paper" doesn't just mean money.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-27-2004
Tue, 01-30-2007 - 12:41am
If it's not just the money that makes the person look good on paper then yes, I do have to have some certain "look good on paper" qualities, such as intelligent, kind, generous, good looking (to a certain point) etc etc. I used to think that I had to be with a certain guy and I even had a whole list of must-haves and bonus traits but now I'm beginning to believe that sometimes you don't really end up following that list or the person you end up with is different than the one you thought you would be with. It's really hard to explain but sometimes a lot of those traits just go out the door when you meet someone you feel for and sometimes when you are different from that person in certain areas that you thought wouldn't fit with you, that person somehow compliments you and it's just easy to be with them.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-12-2007
Tue, 01-30-2007 - 5:51am

You've pointed out a very important factor in this whole 'rich and respect or poor and love' debate. It is completely naive to expect ANYTHING BUT his job being the absolute number one priority for a man who is making enormous amounts of money - after all, that is the only way to make ££££££££££s. You do not become very rich or even very comfortably off by doing a 9 to 5 job Monday to Friday and forgetting all about it during evenings and at weekends which you can then devote totally and completely to the woman in your life. That is simply not possible and a contradiction - a man who is on over £60,000 a year (around $120,000) will be 'married' to his job, chained to his job, a slave to his job and his company, on call more or less 24/7 and no human being can maintain that kind of professional efficiency AND find sufficient amount of time for their SO. I have worked with people on that kind of money and I saw this first hand, not just read it in a book. Thanks but no thanks indeed.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-27-2004
Tue, 01-30-2007 - 12:47pm
Yup, in these sort of cases it is "For love or money" literally. All the wonderful trips, large houses, fancy dinners can't replace love in my opinion. In fact I've never been one to even care about those things. I've noticed that the older I get the more I want to live the simple life and the less I care about having all that stuff because I've seen materialistic wants destroy relationships and people in general and what they thought could make them happy didn't really make them happy for the long haul. I have some really great things that I'm grateful for like a condo but not a whole heck of a lot compared to other standards, my boyfriend has even less but we are both happy and ok with that.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2005
Tue, 01-30-2007 - 3:47pm

"It is completely naive to expect ANYTHING BUT his job being the absolute number one priority for a man who is making enormous amounts of money - after all, that is the only way to make ££££££££££s. You do not become very rich or even very comfortably off by doing a 9 to 5 job Monday to Friday and forgetting all about it during evenings and at weekends which you can then devote totally and completely to the woman in your life. That is simply not possible and a contradiction - a man who is on over £60,000 a year (around $120,000) will be 'married' to his job, chained to his job, a slave to his job and his company, on call more or less 24/7 and no human being can maintain that kind of professional efficiency AND find sufficient amount of time for their SO."