The Student Room Group

There is nothing wrong with girls going for the richest guys

I think it's wrong how many sexist threads I've seen here about how women are immoral for going for money in a long term partner above all else. This is their decision to make and their desire for a comfortable life is a perfectly rational one.
If you don't like it then you should have worked harder at school and got a highly paid job. You can't blame someone for not wanting to be with a supermarket worker or garage attendant etc.etc.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
I'm not sure why anyone complains about this either. Why would anyone want to date a low quality girl who prioritises money over everything else? Just let them pair off.
Reply 2
Original post by ilem
I'm not sure why anyone complains about this either. Why would anyone want to date a low quality girl who prioritises money over everything else? Just let them pair off.


Yeah exactly. The money obsessed girls are not the type you want anyway if you are sensible.
a lot of billionaires have really ugly wives ?
There's nothing wrong with a guy sleeping around and cheating on his girlfriend. If she didn't try hard enough to impress the guy then it's her fault.
Depends what sort of people you want to be around and what sort of life you want for yourself.



If you are one of these girls who tries to tag along with rich guys/guys really into the club scene, like promoters, that is completely your prerogative, at the same time, if you are only around him for that reason he will know and there is no reason why he shouldn't **** the rest of your Gucci bag crew too.


I don't like the word hypergamy, because it is always used by "redpill" posters, but if you are hypergamous, you are not special.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 6
Original post by bittr n swt
There's nothing wrong with a guy sleeping around and cheating on his girlfriend. If she didn't try hard enough to impress the guy then it's her fault.


Not quite the same thing.
Reply 7
Original post by the bear
a lot of billionaires have really ugly wives ?


I haven't seen this. Any picture of a billionaire I've seen has him with a model wife. ie Roman abramovich
Original post by lucaf
Not quite the same thing.


I know but I felt like posting it
I created most of those threads and I never complained about it, I just said it was true and that it was sad that it was true.
Then it's equally fine for a guy to only go for a girl with the biggest boobs or butt or w/e? :smile: Sweeeet, I feel a lot better about my standards now!
Girls can go for whoever they want.
Reply 12
Original post by alexschmalex
Then it's equally fine for a guy to only go for a girl with the biggest boobs or butt or w/e? :smile: Sweeeet, I feel a lot better about my standards now!


No. That is shallow. Money is a recognition of hard work and talent, it shows how much a person contributes to society. Judging a woman on her looks is not the same at all as judging someone on their wealth. I see that feminists still have a lot of work to do changing the obnoxious caveman attitudes that some men have.
Original post by mario2
No. That is shallow. Money is a recognition of hard work and talent, it shows how much a person contributes to society. Judging a woman on her looks is not the same at all as judging someone on their wealth. I see that feminists still have a lot of work to do changing the obnoxious caveman attitudes that some men have.


I don't think having money means girls like Kim K & Paris Hilton are hard working, talented, or contribute to society...besides looking good can come from hard work in the gym, it's a shame you can't appreciate that!
Reply 14
Original post by mario2
I think it's wrong how many sexist threads I've seen here about how women are immoral for going for money in a long term partner above all else. This is their decision to make and their desire for a comfortable life is a perfectly rational one.
If you don't like it then you should have worked harder at school and got a highly paid job. You can't blame someone for not wanting to be with a supermarket worker or garage attendant etc.etc.


I think it's more that it's "shallow" than "immoral" but i actually completely agree with you, if you want to marry someone for security then what's wrong with that?

Personally for me, it's a very big thing also, i don't want a rough life at the end of the day and i want someone who can look after me and my family, point blank. However, it's definitely not the most important thing for me, for me it's more personality and how we get along and their character, but money is still important, just not key. And i do not think there's anything wrong with that.
Original post by bittr n swt
There's nothing wrong with a guy sleeping around and cheating on his girlfriend. If she didn't try hard enough to impress the guy then it's her fault.

:ahee:
Reply 16
Original post by Lulu24
I think it's more that it's "shallow" than "immoral" but i actually completely agree with you, if you want to marry someone for security then what's wrong with that?

Personally for me, it's a very big thing also, i don't want a rough life at the end of the day and i want someone who can look after me and my family, point blank. However, it's definitely not the most important thing for me, for me it's more personality and how we get along and their character, but money is still important, just not key. And i do not think there's anything wrong with that.


They give you money. You make them a sandwhich everyday. Everyone ends up happy. That is the epitome of personality compatibility, a couple that gives and takes. Nothing beats a woman that can make a perfect sandwhich.
Reply 17
Original post by alexschmalex
I don't think having money means girls like Kim K & Paris Hilton are hard working, talented, or contribute to society...besides looking good can come from hard work in the gym, it's a shame you can't appreciate that!


Kim K is harder worker than she lets on. I bet she makes kanye west some quality sandwhiches.
Original post by Lulu24

i want someone who can look after me and my family,


this statement alone already suggests men are the head of the house, breadwinner, superior to women etc or do you disagree and think you can can look after a man, take control and your family
Reply 19
Original post by bittr n swt
this statement alone already suggests men are the head of the house, breadwinner, superior to women etc or do you disagree and think you can can look after a man, take control and your family


The man wins the bread. And the woman turns it into something appetizing. You sound sexist if i'm folllowing your line of argument correctly.

Quick Reply

Latest