Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...but isn't that true for men as well? I think it is.
This question came to mind after I finished reading a book titled "Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage." It is a fascinating read. It reveals that a lot of behaviors among the poor that seem self-destructive actually make sense given their circumstances. But that's another discussion.
What is relevant to this post is what the authors found out when they investigated why more poor women didn't marry in order to escape poverty. This was an important question, since married couples are far less likely to be poor than single women.
The answer: the better off, more economically stable men wouldn't marry poor women. In fact, in all of the communities the authors studied, the best off, most economically stable men and women tended to marry each other. No one, male or female, was interested in marrying anyone below their own economic level. On the contrary, both women and men consistently married partners who would enhance their own household income and raise their standard of living.
A bare education would be important though. I know pretty successful guys who married women who haven't had much of a career to speak of, but had at least bachelors degrees. If they had to make it on their own, they'd be struggling.
Some of the guys I know did marry women who are as successful and rich as they are, but they'd probably have been willing to give it up for someone who was really pretty with a bachelors.
...but isn't that true for men as well? I think it is.
Yes. The point is that love is NOT blind and deaf. Real Life is the back drop to one's whole life. Stability relieves an awful lot of stress from a relationship.
Quote:
This question came to mind after I finished reading a book titled "Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage." It is a fascinating read. It reveals that a lot of behaviors among the poor that seem self-destructive actually make sense given their circumstances. But that's another discussion.
What is relevant to this post is what the authors found out when they investigated why more poor women didn't marry in order to escape poverty. This was an important question, since married couples are far less likely to be poor than single women.
The answer: the better off, more economically stable men wouldn't marry poor women. In fact, in all of the communities the authors studied, the best off, most economically stable men and women tended to marry each other. No one, male or female, was interested in marrying anyone below their own economic level. On the contrary, both women and men consistently married partners who would enhance their own household income and raise their standard of living.
I think this is an interesting revelation...
Not disagreeing, but where would these disparate populations meet?
Of course it is true, I married a women from a poorer background that had a dead end job, despite me being on a career track towards being very successful. She was pregnant when I married her. I was pulled aside from many family members and friends and begged not to marry someone from a family like hers with limited job potential in the future. In fact some of my closest friends handed me referrals to abortion doctors so that if she got an abortion I would not have to marry her.
Most of my friends either married up or at least the same level of family when they did get married, it also makes some sense in the grand scheme of things, as dealing with someone who was not raised in a similar manner when thinking about education and money there are many problems trying to work together for the good of the household.
My wife has proven over time that she is different from her family, and is now accepted by my friends and family, but the older I get and the more I watch what has happened with many in her family, I am glad I got the one good one, and that we live far enough from her family to limit their input into my childrens heads.
I think so too. My ex-husband made double what I did, but because of my income, it afforded us more opportunities than covering just the basics. His first wife never worked and he worked 2 jobs to provide.
My SO (fiance) and I make almost the same, and he's thrilled that he has an equal partner, who also has the same views on saving and spending. We made enough to cover our own respective homes, but combining everything into one house has allowed us more breathing room and ability to save, and splurge on occasion.
When children enter the equation, it often doesn't make sense for both spouses to work, if the second income is merely covering daycare expenses. But beyond that, I really don't know any men or women who want to be with someone who isn't financially stable.
It rings true. People might have sex with someone of a "lower" status (the politician with his secretary; the executive with her trainer) but they're not marrying those people.
Its understandable that no woman wants a man who's a broke deadbeat but what the woman needs to focus on is making sure that they're financially stable first and foremost before worrying about the mans finances.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
