Women Who Earn More Than Men – And The Men Who Resent Them!

From the New York Times

For Whitney Hess, a 25-year-old software designer in Manhattan, the tension that ultimately ended her recent relationships was all right there, in the digits on her pay stub.

The awkwardness started with nights out. She would want to try the latest downtown bistro, but her boyfriends, who worked in creative jobs that paid less than hers, preferred diners.

They would say, “Wow, you’re so sophisticated,” she recalled. A first look at her apartment, a smartly appointed studio in a full-service building in TriBeCa, would only reinforce the impression. “They wouldn’t want me to see their apartments,” she said, because they lived in cramped surroundings in distant quadrants of Brooklyn or the Bronx.

One of them, she said, finally just came out and said it. “Look,” Ms. Hess recalled him saying, “it makes me really uncomfortable that you make more money than me. I’m going to put that out on the table and try to get over it.”

But he never got over it, she said.

“The sad thing is that I really liked the guy,” she said. “If that hadn’t been an issue with him, we’d probably still be dating.”

Ms. Hess’s quandary is becoming more common for many young women. For the first time, women in their 20s who work full time in several American cities — New York, Chicago, Boston and Minneapolis — are earning higher wages than men in the same age range, according to a recent analysis of 2005 census data by Andrew Beveridge, a sociology professor at Queens College in New York.

For instance, the median income of women age 21 to 30 in New York who are employed full time was 17 percent higher than that of comparable men.

Professor Beveridge said the gap is largely driven by a gulf in education: 53 percent of women employed full time in their 20s were college graduates, compared with 38 percent of men. Women are also more likely to have graduate degrees. “They have more of everything,” Professor Beveridge said.

The shift is playing out in new, unanticipated ways on the dating front. Women are encountering forms of hostility they weren’t prepared to meet, and are trying to figure out how to balance pride in their accomplishments against their perceived need to bolster the egos of the men they date.

A lot of young women “are of two minds,” said Stephanie Coontz, director of research at the Council on Contemporary Families, a research organization. “On one hand, they’re proud of their achievements, and they think they want a man who shares house chores and child care. But on the other hand they’re scared by their own achievement, and they’re a little nervous having a man who won’t be the main breadwinner. These are old tapes running in their head: ‘This is how you get a man.’ ”

YOUNG affluent women say they are learning to advertise their good fortune in a manner very different from their male counterparts. For men, it is accepted, even desirable, to flaunt their high status. Not so for many women.

“Very, very early in a date,” said Anna Rosenmann, 28, who founded a company called Eco Consulting LA, in Los Angeles, and earns up to $150,000 a year, “a man will drop comments on how much his sales team had made for the year, which meant his bonus was blah, blah, blah.”

But, she said, “that’s not how we were raised.”

Instead, she said, she starts out dates being discreet. “I don’t talk about myself,” she said. “When people ask me, I’m going to be very honest. But I definitely don’t say, ‘My name’s Anna, I’m 28 and I own a business.’ ”

Ms. Rosenmann said that dating considerably older men helps her avoid innuendos from younger men who feel threatened by her professional success. She said that when she has gone out at night with men her own age and has to turn in early to be fresh for work, they have commented , “Oh, Anna’s an adult, she has a real job.”

So as not to flaunt her own salary, Lori Weiss, a 29-year-old lawyer in Manhattan, has found herself clipping price tags off expensive clothes she buys on shopping binges, or hiding shopping bags in the closet just so men she was dating would not see them lying around and feel threatened by her spending power.

“A lot of guys don’t want to admit they have a problem with it,” she said, referring to income disparity. “They don’t want to be ‘that guy.’ But I think it’s ingrained.”

She said one boyfriend “wasn’t too comfortable with me paying for things” on dates, so to make him feel better, she would surrender to his wishes. The two would just “stay home and cook, or just get something cheap,” she said. “We’d skip a movie.”

Women said the income disparity becomes obvious in all facets of dating: where you live, what you like to do for fun and how you travel. It often comes down to minimizing who they are — successful, focused women — with their dates, who may be lagging a bit behind.

Although these women often say it is men who have issues around their higher salaries, sometimes it is the women themselves who are uncomfortable with the role reversal.

Hilary Rowland, 28, bought her first condominium when she was 18, using money she had earned from an online business started when she was 15. Last spring, Ms. Rowland, who lives in New York, started dating a 34-year-old musician.

“I usually always fly business or first,” she said in an e-mail message. “The one trip where he paid for the flight — we stayed at a friend’s place — he didn’t tell me the details, then flew us economy on a 6 a.m. flight with a two-hour stop-over, from Salt Lake City, to save money. I would have rather paid myself and flew business at a regular hour.”

“When we broke up,” she added, “he was upset that I gave my ‘ex’ more gifts than I gave him. Meanwhile, the only gift I’d gotten from him was a small notepad.”

Ms. Rowland, like some other women interviewed, said that she has come to the conclusion that it would be easier to date someone in the same economic bracket.

“I love traveling, going to the opera and good restaurants,” she said. “It doesn’t have to be Per Se, but good food is important in my life. It’s sometimes hard to maintain the lifestyle I’m used to when I’m in a relationship with a guy who makes less than me, since I don’t want to be paying for the guy I’m with all the time.”

The discomfort over who pays for what seems to be not really about money, plain and simple. Instead, it is suggestive of the complex psychology of what many of these women expect from their dates (for him to be a traditional breadwinner) and what they think they should expect (Oh, I just want him to be a nice guy).

On a first date at a lounge in Hell’s Kitchen, Thrupthi Reddy, 28, a brand strategist in Manhattan, watched her date down several cocktails to her one, then not even flinch when she handed the waitress her credit card. Initially miffed, she recognized her own contradictions.

“You wonder if you’re being a hypocrite,” she recalled, “because all date long I’m telling him how independent I was, and how annoying it was that men wouldn’t date strong independent women.” (The relationship ended after six months.)

Michael R. Cunningham, a psychologist who teaches in the communication department at the University of Louisville, conducted a survey of college women to see if, upon graduation, they would prefer to settle down with a high school teacher who has short workdays, summers off and spare energy to help raise children, or with a surgeon who earns eight times as much but works brutal hours. Three-quarters of the women said they would choose the teacher.

The point, Professor Cunningham said, was that young professionally oriented women have no problem dating down if the man is secure, motivated in his own field and emotionally supportive.

At least, that’s what their responses are in surveys. Talk about the subject with women a bit older — those who have been out of college long enough to be more hardened — and what you hear is ambivalence, if not downright hostility, about the income disparity.

Jade Wannell, 25, a producer at a Chicago ad agency who lives in a high-rise apartment building, started dating a 29-year-old administrator at a trucking company last year. “He was really sweet,” she said. But “he didn’t work many hours and ended up hanging out at home a lot. I was bored and didn’t feel challenged. He would finish work at 3 and want to go to the bar. The college way of life is still in them at that age. All they want to do is drink with the boys on Saturday. I was like ‘Let’s go to an art gallery’ and all he wanted to do was go to the bars.”

TO her, his lack of income masked a greater problem: a lack of drive.

“I have to say that I didn’t like his career, I didn’t think he had the goals of someone I would eventually like to be with or have respect for,” she said, adding, “It wasn’t the job, it was the passion.”

Unyi Agba, 27, an advertising executive with a small firm in Boston, almost always dates professional men, but when she goes out with someone earning less money, there is tension. “This is a topic that’s traveled in my own female circles a lot in the last year,” she said. Across a restaurant table with a man who earns less, “it’s never explicitly said, but there are nuances,” she said. “Things are said like, ‘Boy I’m going to be really broke after this dinner.’ ”

And her response?


Okay, guys, what are YOUR thoughts on this thorny issue?


Join our conversation (168 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.


  1. 1

    I do think men find it very threatening to be with a woman who is more successful. I remeber when I was in my 20s my boyfriend was constantly pointing out how feet “left behind” because I was acheiving more in my career than in his. I think it is very sad that men are put off by their partners’ acheivements when they should be celebrating them.

    1. 1.1

      Why should we ?
      Why should we celebrate FORCED “achievements” ?
      You didn’t get where you are of your own merit, society was BULLIED by feminism to give you everything on a silver platter and TAKE IT AWAY from men.

      1. 1.1.1

        WHat crazy? These are women who have bachelors graduate degrees or PhDs and who clearly excel at what they do. It wasn’t handed to me on a “silver” platter. I went to 6 years of college, took out loans, and I went in my spare time and got 2 real additional licenses and have 2 jobs because I enjoy advancing my career. In addition I invested in stocks and real estate. But I guess working 2 jobs for years and investing after graduate school is “being handed everything”. Grow up and start taking responsibility for yourself and your own career path. I have had many sexist interviews (including being asked if I had kids or was married) but I didn’t stop and constantly Persued my goals and have a lot more to go!

      2. 1.1.2

        Your exactly right Zap…I’m 33 and don’t date & will never get married… These females have a “horrible, stuck up, entitled attitude” nowadays…Women easily and always get “their cake & eat it too”, nowadays, through tons of “forced social/economic” achievements….I supposed to apologize for being born “higher up on the food chain”…Women, nowadays think that financial status is the “new” food chain…But the food chain is who is built tough enough to survive w/ less….That’s men biologically hands down….Let them keep their expensive condos & bistros & shoes & clothes…I’ll just keep eating Ramen noodles w/ tuna fish every night, go to gym, work some dumb job, & minimize my expenses….Why should I care? I got internet porn and espn…& we’re all gonna die someday & nothing goes w/ us….”Good riddance”!

        1. EmeraldDust

          Dave, you probably don’t date because wearing a mask and toting a gun are not that attractive to most women.

        2. Massau

          You’re hostile because society no longer has any place for idiotic macho men. Worth in today’s society is tied to earning and ability in highly specialized fields. No one needs a cave man with an IQ of 50 to beat up non-existent invaders or wild animals anymore. Your type has been phased out and is not only deemed unnecessary in today’s market but actually a burden.  You and others like you are holding back the evolution of society. Sorry bout it.

    2. 1.2

      Do NOT listen to Zap.  These women take classes side-by-side with men and are held to the same grading standards.  I’m 30, working on my second Master’s Degree, no one asked my gender on the application.  I joined the Army to pay off my loans after undergraduate school.  And the army was 85% men, so don’t try to tell me I was “taking anything away” from them.

  2. 2

    I’m a high earner with a graduate degree so I faced this myself when I was dating. I found the comfort levels depended on socioeconomics: I am most compatible with other secure professionals with graduate degrees who, like me, came from a white collar, middle class background. When I dated people from blue collar backgrounds, who had less education and less drive/ambition/passion for what they did, even if they were in white collar jobs themselves, things were prickly and uncomfortable and I grew to resent always having to pay for everything. I never dated anyone at the same income level as myself, however the guys who were secure within themselves, secure about their accomplishments, secure that they had reached a good point in their chosen professions, tended not to make an issue of the income disparity. Emotionally secure people made the best partners — imagine that.

  3. 3

    I’ve dated female doctors and finance professionals who earn several times what I earn and it never bothered me because it’s not like I have a crappy job and I can’t afford to take them to nice places. I’m a lawyer. I do well enough to afford I nice night out for two in NYC every weekend. So it’s not like an affluent woman’s lifestyle is taking a huge hit when I’m buying, even though she earns more. I think this issue really only arises when a guy is dead broke. I might not be able to keep a woman in Jimmy Choos and first class plane tickets year round, but I am more than capable of taking her to nice places and buying her nice things on occasion.

    If you earn a good salary yourself, but it just so happens your lady earns a better one, it shouldn’t be a big deal. For example: If a guy earns $100k and his woman earns $150k, they’re both doing pretty well, so who cares who earns more? I think the problem arises with a $35k guy dating a $150k chick. In that instance, you’re talking huge lifestyle difference. Let’s face it, even if a guy earns a fraction what a woman earns, our society says he should still pay for eveything. That’s a lot of pressure on the guy to maintain the woman, and is the crux of this problem.

    In my opinion, this issue goes away if we get away from the man pays for everything model of dating. But women will never allow that, even as their earning power surpasses that of men. Women claim they want equality, but they really don’t. When it comes to courtship and marriage, they want a return to the 1950s. They still want their man earning more than them, they still want him paying for everything, they still want an engagement ring while giving no engagement gift in return, and they still want the option of being a stay at home mom. The only reason some men have an issue with women earning more is because they know many women have an issue with their man earning less. So the vicious circle continues.

    1. 3.1
      Ms. Freddi

      Great response! I don’t anyone else could have explained this better.

    2. 3.2

      I used to believe it should be 50/50 even for first dates but honestly, my friend pointed out that women do spend more in maintaining their looks and in dressing for the date make up nails, hair, the amount of time we prepare for a date ect, it’s just appropriate for a man to pay for at least the first date or two as a way of saying I appreciate your effort at least, additionally woman will bear the children and a lot of educated women in good jobs do out their career on hold at some point for that (I see it at my job all the time) so they will have to depend on the mans income in that case (not always but I see it happen a lot.

      1. 3.2.1

        This is incredibly sexist: “I used to believe it should be 50/50 even for first dates but honestly, my friend pointed out that women do spend more in maintaining their looks and in dressing for the date make up nails, hair, the amount of time we prepare for a date ect, it’s just appropriate for a man to pay for at least the first date or two as a way of saying I appreciate your effort at least.”  The way a partner expresses their appreciation for their significant other should not be dependent on the amount of money they spend.  Likewise, a person’s personal appearance doesn’t do anything specific to show their partner that they are appreciated.  In fact my current boyfriend complains when I do wear make up and prefers me to wash it off (he’s not a fan of make up on anyone).  How someone prepares for a date should have nothing to do with who pays or who doesn’t.  I once dated a guy with a better fashion sense then me–a guy who ironed his jeans.  His fashion sense alone didn’t make me feel like I was more appreciated by him.  I am absolutely offended by the idea that men should pay for “at least the first date or two” based solely on the fact that women spend more time on appearance and some day may give birth to their child.  You can’t hold child birth against men–it’s not an option that they have the ability to exercise.  Also, it degrades their contributions as hopefully active fathers to the child you both did your part to produce and raise.  Therefore you can’t use childbirth as a reason for why men should pay for dates.  Unless of course you want him to use your uterus as a reason for why you should do all the cleaning, cooking, and child-rearing.  The “he pays and she runs the house” dichotomy has worked for many happy couples and, I’m sure, will continue to.  However, not every woman wants a relationship built on ideas like that.  

        If a man would like to make a gesture and pay for the first few dates–that’s his decision to make.  However, I would never think that it’s his responsibility to pay because I spent time on my looks and have a uterus.  A relationship should be 50/50 from the beginning, and that comes out in different ways for different couples.  There isn’t one “right” way to have a equal relationship and one “wrong” way.  I would not resent a man for having to pay for my own meal on a first date.  That’s not insulting to me in any way shape or form.  What’s insulting are ideas about women that were dated in the 1950s.

        1. Luna83

          your man makes you wash off your make  up??? That’s  bit controlling don’t you think? It’s your face, you can do what you like with it.

      2. 3.2.2

        In most cases I agree with you 🙂

    3. 3.3

      Youre crazy. Men dont have to pay ”for everything”. Nowadays its half half. GET REAL  

    4. 3.4

      Craig, you just said that women want their cake and eat it too.  In short, they have taken so many jobs that men IF it were the 60s, would have; then women could live as it was back then however, there’s is no way they are going to give up their Careers.  Vicious circle?  I call this mentality, irrational and perhaps insane of women.  I can totally see why young men want nothing to do with them.  I am not young anymore but if i were, I would be the same or look outside of western culture for a life-long mate.  Children, whom I really love, I’d only agree to IF a pre-nupt were carved in stone and ALL members on both sides of the family agree to it…SCREW the Family Courts that are the most Evil system in this land.

    5. 3.5

      Wow. Your first two paragraphs are sensible and then accurately describe society. Your third falls off a cliff. It’s like a different person took over the post.

  4. 4

    It’s true that if you’re both earning high salaries or at least salaries that are in the same ballpark that it’s not as big an issue, however, in the long run, I don’t believe that most men are comfortable with their woman earning more than them. Men have been socially conditioned for a gazillion years that they are hunter gatherers and providers. If it appears that the woman is doing the providing and doesn’t appear to have that ‘need’, then it upsts the gender balance. It doesn’t matter that we’re supposed to have evolved and it doesn’t matter that we’re supposed to be equal, it is very difficult to undo years of conditioning and instincts that are hardwired. The fact the woman earns more really shouldn’t matter but it often does.
    As Craig suggests, there is also the widespread acceptance that the man does the wining and dining, but the thorny issue is with men that don’t work or are on a significantly lower income. This is where the applecart gets tipped because if they are already dealing with their own insecurities about what their financial status represents, going out with a woman that can provide for him will only enhance these feelings. Much like there are female golddiggers, there are male ones too, and they reap the benefits of being with a woman with dough and take her for a ride.
    Also what women who complain about this issue don’t mention is that often they allow their money to sit there like the white elephant in the room. Before the guy even makes it an issue, THEY make it an issue and after a while it becomes blurred about who really is bothered about the money. And women who habitually go out with men who earn significantly earn less than them have to ask themselves why they continue to do it if they come up against the same problems?

  5. 5
    Kat Wilder

    I’m pretty amused by this issue. How much a man makes has never been an issue with me because that’s not how I measure a man, and I would never want to be with a man who measured himself that way, either.

    I’m more interested in the man, what he stands for and how he views the world. Who cares about who pays for what? This is where things like having open, honest discussions with yourself first! come into play.

    But I’ve come to see how it plays out in a marriage once kids come along who stays home, who doesn’t and why? What has been interesting for me to observe is some of the resentments that occur when women are the breadwinners in their family and the men stay home (and I blogged about it at

    My mom sure didn’t have the “problems” we women have today because she didn’t have the options. And isn’t it ironic that the more options men and women have in how to shape their lives, the more confused we all feel?

    1. 5.1

      Kat, you can say this but when children enter a relationship, it is only natural to breast feed REGARDLESS OF WHAT ANYONE SAYS, and this means a mother must be at home for extended periods PLUS when their teeth come in children want MOTHER HOME TOO !  I am not mad using capitals.  For centuries this was not even debated because it was NORMAL and NATURAL.  For a woman to make more with children on the way, is not healthy in any which way and not long ago (a few decades), was never the case.  So, is the past 5 decades lifestyle more sensible than all the centuries before this?  Hardly.  It is no wonder the family life is in chaos today.  Many know what is coming and for anyone to be in denial, is feeding their own self-deception

  6. 6

    The 1950s get dissed an awful lot — considering that the divorce rate then was 10%, compared to well over 40% today. One in ten babies was born out of wedlock versus one in three today. Yeah, I can sure see why we wouldn’t want to go back to those bad old times. Down with traditionalism! Fire up the torches!

    Seriously, though… if it makes a man feel good to pay for everything on the first few dates, or even all the dates, and the woman is graciously receptive and eventually reciprocates at a level that is comfortable for both, I see nothing wrong with the traditional model. It certainly worked the best of any for me. The difficulty arises when the man pays and pays and pays, and the woman takes and takes and takes and doesn’t so much as offer him a bologna sandwich when he’s spent the whole morning hooking up her stereo. Lopsided giving and receiving never works, regardless of who in the relationship has a trust fund, and who has to wait for double coupon day at the dollar store. Although playing Lady Bountiful for some ingrate who is always whining about how he can’t afford her lifestyle gets mighty old, too.

    Balance, people. Find folks you’re compatible with emotional health-wise in the first place, and a lot of these issues will be nonexistent.

    1. 6.1

      Yeah the divorce rate was lower because woman we taught to accept crapy marriages and no control or say. And if they wanted a divorce they were scorned. Also, it was harder for women to get equal jobs so many women felt trapped and controlled through dependence on a man. Those all weren’t happy and loving relationships

      1. 6.1.1

        Then just enjoy your Independence without complaining or having to come to sites like this; if you truly are happy then why bother reading articles like this.

  7. 7

    I believe MOST men don’t care a bit about what a woman earns, be it $10,000 per year or $1,000,000. Men come in many different shapes and sizes: Some may feel threatened and some don’t care. You can’t put all men or all women into one category about their take on it. Part of dating is finding out who you are compatible with and a few bad experiences with men who feel threatened by female success actually is beneficial because it teaches you about what type of man really is best for you. In the long run, it simplifies matters, albeit it at the cost of narrowing the dating pool and experiencing people who may be threatened and don’t have long term potental. But can’t we all agree quality is better than quantity when dating? Not to mention how many people do you date who actually end up as a partner (1 in 5? 1 in 8?)? It comes with the dating turf.

  8. 8

    It’s not just money – men are accustomed to, and more comfortable with being the bigger, more established person. Most prefer to be with women who are shorter, lighter weight, younger, with equal or lesser levels of education and income. Most women prefer to be with men who are taller, weigh more than them, same age or older, with equal or greater levels of education and income. I’m flat broke, a PhD looking for an academic job while working part-time, but men find my education to be threatening if they don’t at least have a master’s degree. It’s silly, but seems to be true.

    1. 8.1

      I could write you a novel about how wrong you are. But i will not. I will just tell you this: This is exactly the type of anti feminist thinking that will get women to give up who they really are. This freedom we have is what the suffragists and suffragettes (men and women) fought for all these years. Stop believing this stuff. We must stay strong, stay smart, stay wise, stay educated and rich if the case and do not budge. Let the misogynists die childless, because honestly we cannot allow them to reproduce and create more men like them. And wait. There will be many changed men. They will have to change when they will see that their seed is going to waste. The men emancipation is in teenage years. They are rebelling against the new standards, but don’t worry and don’t budge. They will change when they start seeing that dying alone is really sad. And the women remaining unmarried are just collateral damage, but it will not be for long. The tables did not shift. They are still shifting. Before women were a man’s companion, to meet all his needs only, and now we are trying to head towards a culture where both man and woman are each other’s companion and the should fulfill each other’s needs equally and with love.

      1. 8.1.1

        ” women remaining unmarried are just collateral damage” wah??? You had me till that comment… I don’t get it at all…

  9. 9
    mrs. vee

    I agree that this is just another measure of compatibility, but it’s only an issue if one partner turns it into one.

    My husband’s ex-girlfriend tried to get him to switch careers so she could stay home with their future children. That was blatantly out of line in his opinion, and pretty much caused the end of them. It didn’t help that he hadn’t ever proposed to her and she was already approaching the subject.

    One ex-boyfriend of mine used to jokingly gloat about the fact that I paid for most of our expenses. Maybe it was his way of masking his discomfort, but he brought it up way too much to the point where I could tell he was struggling. Our relationship had other issues, but it came to a head when, after a particularly bad break-up, I initially offered to pay for couples counseling. But then he made some comment in a pseudo-jeering tone about how I was going to “foot the bill for therapy”, and it just made me crawl out of my skin. I can’t completely explain it, but for me it just signaled that we’d run out of reasons to try.

    Maybe I too had hangups back then about his inability to evenly contribute to our lifestyle. But at least I know my higher income isn’t an issue with my husband and me today (maybe ’cause I’d say he’s a high earner in his own right?). Point is, if it’s right…if you’re just INTO each other… this stuff flies way below radar as it should. My ex’s comment was just a tipping point for me and the fact that I let it make my decision to leave him probably just says I didn’t have the true will to be with him.

    Having said that, compatibility has everything to do with having common goals. It’s something to think about when picking your partner. You don’t want to feel like you’re carrying an unfair share of the load – male or female. So I guess my point is that income shouldn’t be a primary reason to pursue a partner, but if you can’t strike an easy balance with it, that’s probably a good indicator of more fundamental incompatibilities.

  10. 10

    I’d echo Craig’s sentiments, but flesh them out a bit more. Men in general don’t care what women earn. Women, on the other hand, care very much what men earn. Women still want men to pay for everything, which is a holdover from the Leave it to Beaver days and earlier when women were homemakers. They are raised to expect this. now, women want it both ways. They want to work the same jobs and earn the same as men (actually, they usually earn more — see Warren Farrell). This leads to women who seek men who earn more than men, regardless of their income. So, a woman who earns $150k is going to look for men earning $250k & up. Ms. Rosemann dates considerably older men who aren’t as apprehensive about the income. Funny how the article doesn’t mention the older men’s incomes.

    Craig is absolutely right. ” . . .women will never allow that, even as their earning power surpasses that of men. Women claim they want equality, but they really dont. When it comes to courtship and marriage, they want a return to the 1950s. They still want their man earning more than them, they still want him paying for everything,”

    Do you notice in the article that the frustrations and issues are driven from the women who still want the guy to pay for all the fineries? Welcome to the frustrations men deal with far more often…It’s worse for the men however. Men don’t expect women who make more to spend it on them. Women on the other hand….most men are resigned to this unfortunate circumstance.

    1. 10.1

      Men still want women who are young and pretty more now than ever? Isn’t that how “it’s always been? Because it costs women to maintain beauty and bear children they look for men who are financially secure in their own right and men don’t care what women make on averge as they put more emphasis in youth and beauty which is a byproduct of evolution as well (fertility) so it’s very similar as women wanting “stability” in a man since thy bear the children

      1. 10.1.1

        Now women perfer younger stronger more physically attrative men. Because we no longer need to be with old men to get the bills paid

        1. Just

          Yes Dina,and this is why a growing number of women have become pedophiles.  Those younger men won’t stay with them.  Get real instead of sounding like an immature yoke.  If your ancestors could read what you wrote, they’d disown you for immorality

  11. 11

    I agree with ‘Beenthruthewars’. The problem is that it has become politically incorrect to espouse traditional men/women roles. But, the traditional roles of men being providers and women being homemakers are very important, and there is a reason for that. The reason is, it works! Fact is, people are generally happier inside of that design. But lets look at the statistics since we’ve changed traditional men/women roles…the divorce rate was 10% back in the 1950’s, now it’s over 50% (not 40%), and one in three babies born to out of wedlock parents as opposed to 1 in 10 back then. Not to mention the things that have happened because Mom is not home anymore when the kids come home…how many young girls have been raped, how many kids have been exposed to pornography, had sex, started smoking, drinking, or were victom to violence ? Was it really such a horrible thing when your mother found out what you did before you got home? So you think the way we did things in the 1950’s were bad? I challenge you to look at what we have now – the women have a lot of what they thought they wanted, ie. more oppertunity, but at what cost? Even the little things like men not liking it when women make more money. Dahh ! Here is the reason girls…men are supposed to make more money! We are supposed to be the bread winners, the providers, the hunter/gatherers. We LIKE IT !!! And we like paying for your dinner and no, it’s not a trade off for sex. It’s not just a social norm, it is the way God meant it to be. Ever wonder why our shoulders are wider? It’s so we could drag back large animals we went out and killed…for you. It’s in our nature. Men are conquerers! Always have been, always will be, and that is the way it should be. It might be a fear, or a little white ball on a tee, but men are conquerers at heart. It’s how we find our strength. It’s a perfect design and needs to be celebrated, not changed. I know this is very unpopular, especially in a place like San Fransisco, but if you don’t like it, complain to God, because He is the one who designed us this way. It’s sad the way things have gone regarding this whole issue and I blame it squarely on the womens movement. The unforseen consequenses of the womens movement, and liberalism in general, have devastated our society and culture. Just because something is politically correct does not mean it is right! We now have folks who actually believe that it’s OK to be married to another person of the same sex ! It’s only been in the last 50 or 60 years or so this has been this way in our collective thinking remember. Before, everybody knew their roles. It was far from perfect, but sooooo much better than what we have now. So the next time your man seems a little funny with you making more than he, remember, you have an option of not having a career and being successful…he doesn’t. What he is thinking is that for every women who is out there making $50,000 – 100,000, there is a man who is not, and trying to support his family.
    We need more of the Leave it to Beaver mentality, not less. Men need to demonstrate more of the gentle leadership they were made to show, and ladies need to spend a lot more time looking up to, and respecting, their men. If both sexes did that, we wouldn’t have these problems in the first place. Sorry girls, but we need you at home, not out slaying the dragons, that’s our job.
    But don’t believe me…grab a bible and read proverbs 31 and tell me that is not what every woman deeply wants!

    1. 11.1

      Again the problem was that many me. Controlled their women through their “pursesl so in a sense they were treated as lessors or not as “Free” or “equal”. It’s about maintaining a balance and knowing what you desire in a relationship and have clear communication.

    2. 11.2

      Well, I found ONE thing to agree with in your long rambling rant . . .
      “Men need to demonstrate more of the gentle leadership they were made to show”

      And I blame mens bullying of women who adhered to the traditional roles, for the feminist movement, which YOU blame for all of society’s ills. (I think society and all of it’s ills is way to complicated to simplify and pin the blame on any one social movement, person, ideal, etc, but you obviously are going to lay all of our societal problems at the feet of women)

      I remember growing up and witnessing the bullying treatment handed out to women who stayed home to be home makers. I started to feel that the whole thing was a con job. Lured in by fairy tales where the prince awakens the princess from her slumber, carries her off to his castle in the sky and they live happily ever after. Big pageant like ceremonies where the woman gets to be queen for a day. Promises to her prince to “love, honor and obey” and in exchange he promises to “love, honor, and cherish”. After the big showy ceremony, insert record scratch here, and before you know it, you realize you were queen for a day, and are now a slave for life. The wife wonders why she is compelled to keep her promise to “obey” when the promise her “prince” made to “cherish” has flown right out the window.

      Many men of that 50’s era, regarded their wives as little more than domestic servants, who could be bossed and bullied about, if they did not perform their assigned and never ending list of household chores PERFECTLY.

      I’ve witnessed in my home and in the home of others the most horrible screaming matches and sometimes physical abuse, because of a single unwashed dish, running out of catsup, sugar bowl not being full, porch not being swept etc. And God forbid if the children didn’t behave perfectly at all times. ALL the blame was laid on the woman if her children weren’t perfect little angels at all times. When many men came home at the end of their work day, they expected to come home to a spotless house, a perfectly prepared dinner, well scrubbed, perfectly behaved children, and a smiling wife with a drink in her hand to serve to her master. There was HELL to pay, if dinner was late, the laundry piled up, a single bed was unmade, and the cloth dinner napkins weren’t folded to look like swans. (Ok, maybe the folded napkins is a tad of hyperbole)

      One of my dear childhood friends (whose father was as big of a domestic tyrant as mine was) used to greet his wife when he came home at night with “Get the shit on the table ! ” HELLO ! How about “Honey I”m home, dinner smells delicious”, and maybe a kiss ?

      Perhaps if men are so upset about the “peasant uprising” among women, they should examine their own behavior and attitudes towards housewives. Women can NOT win in this battle of the sexes. If we are a mom with a successful career we’re considered ball busting, heartless bitches, who are abandoning our children. If we stay at home to nurture our children, we’re spoiled, lazy, gold diggers. Maybe the problem isn’t that women are trying to “have it all”, maybe the problem is that we are trying to please everyone.

    3. 11.3

      LOL, seriously? Do you ever have proof that God exists? Total irrationality. And yet I’m supposed to believe in fairytales despite empirical scientific evidence that asserts I should believe otherwise.

    4. 11.4


      First, you must be a lonely guy that thinks ultra conservative, Christian submissive women are going extinct. They are not! lol! There are plenty of them to choose from.. (just go to your local fundamentalist church.)  The career-oriented/progressive women aren’t available for you, so it’s counterproductive to try to change them.

      Second, not all women in the 50’s were able to stay and home and raise they kids. That was exclusive to women that married men in the middle/upper class. The rest needed to support their husbands financially ( who were working hard but not making much). Others didn’t necessarily do it out of financial need, but they sought work for an emotional need ( the desire for independence and a passion for more in life ). Just as you see yourself as more than a “breadwinner” ( or at least I hope you do), women also feel they have a greater purpose than being a housewife.

      Third, just because divorce wasn’t common back then , that doesn’t mean they were necessarily happy. Many stayed together out of desperation and a fear of “what will people say?”

      You seem to be  against women working because you want them to need you for survival  instead genuinely wanting to be with you…

      Your words give you away, Paul.The good news is that the kind of women you are looking for are more common than you think ( just make sure you speak candidly about these things so they will be able to recognize you).

      The rest of us are very happy  “slaying dragons”. .)



    5. 11.5

      ps. the bible was written by men so obviously it is gonna be in your egotistical way of thinking…. there were male rulers who even made changes to the bible to suit themselves…


  12. 12

    What utter rubbish, Paul!

    If you truly enjoyed conquest and domination, you’d welcome the competition introduced by having women in the workplace. You just want women to play helpless to create the illusion that you’re superior to them.

    You want to be respected by a woman? Earn it. Don’t whine about all the women taking the jobs that rightfullly belong to men. Don’t yearn for the days when it was frowned upon for a woman to express her talents (and earning power).

    Look, I don’t care how hypothetically unhappy or lonely I may become due to a sagging love life. I will never look at back and say to myself “Gee I wish I hadn’t gotten an Ivy League education and a satisfying career so I could have instead stayed at home adoring and depending on my breadwinner husband. Becoming a successful professional is precisely where I took a wrong turn!”.

    How is that supposed to work? And please try to apply a little common sense in your thinking next time. I know it’s hard to reason with a person who quotes the Bible and all, but I have faith in you, man.

    Thanks for the “oppertunity” to respond to your comment., and I gladly accept any “consequenses” my words may bring upon me.

    1. 12.1
      The Petite Polynesian

      I so loved reading this.  My sentiments exactly.

  13. 13

    Will not! Money is not a bad thing! 🙂

  14. 14

    To Paul..

    What God?
    You always use that as an explanation..
    I haven’t met him, nor am I likely since I am atheist.

    Born out of wedlock isn’t a bad thing as such.. especially if both parents are in a steady relationship. Where do you need the church? The 1/4 illegimate children today don’t get teased like the 1/10 did in the 50’s.. and woman doesn’t need to stay in a miserable marriage when she can support her and her children, without (a terrorising of a narrowminded) man.

    Luckily you have no real say over matters and things have changed. I prefer today, to your “perfect past”. We can choose other ways, but of course it also means more challenges.. must be overwhelming for those men who are stuck in the past.

    1. 14.1

      Lili, and what do you say to all the mothers out there in alienate the fathers from their children too.  Also, someday you are going to eat your words when death comes knocking at your door.

      1. 14.1.1


        You must be Paul’s friend. You guys need  to get-together and find yourselves nice, decent, “moral” women to marry.  I don’t like imposing my spiritual beliefs on others but you asked for it. When death comes knocking on your door, you are going to meet the demiurge poser god. Keep feeding him /it that delicious loosh!

        See? We all have different beliefs. It is silly to go around preaching them on a dating blog.




  15. 15

    …you lucky men, women with a larger income than mine, are far and few in my world…..I keep hearing they are out there!….hhhmmmhhh, this blog made me salivate…

  16. 16
    Hadley Paige

    Disclaimer: I speak in generalizations. Obviously each person is an individual and individual experiences vary greatly. So girls, please don’t respond by saying “you are wrong bc my experience was not like that”. Your particular experience does not make the generalization generally wrong.

    Men already know that they can’t satisfy women with all their emotional needs. We also understand that we have other compensating attractions which tend make the relationship thing work. (your significant other being a palate of positives and negatives).

    One of the things we can provide ( which approaches emotional satisfaction) is the feeling of being taken care of (earn more than them). If I am going to invest time into a LTR I want the greatest likelihood of its success. Thus, being efficient, I screen for likelihood of success. And if she makes more than me, I assume that this means I am going to have to produce greater amounts of countervailing factors to make the thing work. (Greater pressure to produce emotionally which I already know I will fall short on)

    So there it is girls. We don’t resent you. Rather we think that its going to be harder to satisfy you.

    P.S. I don’t care what women say, I believe that they have a hard time (on some level) respecting men who make less than them. They may not want to believe this and they may tell themselves enough times that they sort of start to believe it, but they really don’t. And this fact translates to a greater likelihood of contributing to relationship failure.

  17. 17

    Well, Hadley, at least you are honest!

    I have no idea what to think any more….

    You grow up, you’re bright and you are encouraged to reach for the stars…. you get there (almost) and then you fall to earth with a bump!

    University education, professional job with senior responsibility and an income that has paid for my own condo in a city where real estate is not cheap. Does that intimidate guys? No brainer! I try not to say very much about my job when I am on my dates, but they always seem fixated on it and then they tell me about how they wish they had read more, or studied harder and how they are not as intelligent!!!! If it’s not the job, it’s the condo and my car…

    Is it my fault? I have tried to date guys (mostly online) without focusing on their income and I do not insist that they have been to university because some very successful people left school quite early on. For me, it’s a question of how they deal with the cards that life hands out – hey, it’s nice to have money but I need to be sure that I would still believe in my guy even if he lost his job.

    High income guy, low income guy, makes no difference it seems…

    Last guy I dated was actually working in international finance and he played with my mind big time (I’m sure you’ll come across my post elsewhere).

    Add this to all the articles online and in the press about highly educated, high earning women who are destined to live a sad lonely life because they dared to improve themselves, and it takes a tough cookie to remain positive in the rough and tumble of the dating game.

    Just an opinion!

  18. 18

    If what Hadley says is true: 1) that for most men, they don’t seek women for and long term relationship who make more than them because they believe that they can’t satisfy them, and 2) that for women, they really don’t respect men who make less than them ; or stated more positively as: women get more emotional satisfaction from being with men who make more money than then them because they feel “taken care of”; then it seems like the more successful a woman is the less likely she is to find a satisfactory mate. Base on all that being true my question is what do i say to my daughters and what do i encourage them to be when they grow up? Evan, Help!

  19. 19

    Interesting comments… I see truth in all of them, simply because we are talking about individual preferences in dating other people.

    It can be done. I have a Ph.D. and earn about 4 times what my husband does. My husband left college after one semester, because he partied too much and had to work full-time. Mistakes and other circumstances from his past determined his earning power today. It is what it is. Now, our finances are our finances. He loves me and our son. He has good qualities and bad ones -just like me. He is “real.” He doesn’t do dishes, cook (but he does do drive-thru) -or any of the traditional “female” things -but who cares? It works for us. Have I settled? No. It comes down to compatibility.

    Paul: If you want a traditional wife that stays at home -get one. Many social factors played into what is going on today. If all of our problems began with the womens rights movement -then the onus is on men to be “competitive.” If more women are getting graduate degrees -then it doesn’t take a Ph.D. to say, “get a graduate degree and get a high paying job.” We (women) are not taking men’s jobs. We are getting our own jobs.

  20. 20

    “Women get more emotional satisfaction from being with men who make more money than them because they feel ‘taken care of’ “?

    I highly doubt that. Women’s sexuality is, as Marc Rudov says, “not coin-activated, it’s voice-activated.” Anymore, women (unless they’re golddiggers) seek not men with HIGHER incomes, but rather men with incomes, period. A man need not “take care of” a woman, just so he pulls his own weight. What women desire more nowadays is men who know how to turn them on sexually, which is something men can do only with their VOICES, not their money.

  21. 21

    I’m not so sure I agree with the notion of Women get more emotional satisfaction from being with men who make more money than them because they feel taken care of Perhaps on some level, but I believe women are conditioned from childhood to expect to be ‘taken care of,’ not that they receive more emotional satisfaction from it.

    As a literary criticism, I believe this story to be poorly written in that it is completely one sided (only interviewing the higher earning women), neglecting the point of view of men who have dated women that earn more than themselves. As they say, there are 2 sides to every story, not just the conclusion that men resent women who earn more than themselves. By the way, have you noticed that by asserting men resent these women the author has made these women victims? Curious coincidence? Doubtful.

    Several things in the story caught my eye…”The awkwardness started with nights out. She would want to try the latest downtown bistro, but her boyfriends, who worked in creative jobs that paid less than hers, preferred diners.”

    Also, “Ms. Rowland, like some other women interviewed, said that she has come to the conclusion that it would be easier to date someone in the same economic bracket. I love traveling, going to the opera and good restaurants, she said. It doesnt have to be Per Se, but good food is important in my life. Its sometimes hard to maintain the lifestyle Im used to when Im in a relationship with a guy who makes less than me, since I dont want to be paying for the guy Im with all the time.

    Lastly, “On a first date at a lounge in Hells Kitchen, Thrupthi Reddy, 28, a brand strategist in Manhattan, watched her date down several cocktails to her one, then not even flinch when she handed the waitress her credit card. Initially miffed, she recognized her own contradictions.
    You wonder if youre being a hypocrite, she recalled, because all date long Im telling him how independent I was, and how annoying it was that men wouldnt date strong independent women. (The relationship ended after six months.)”

    Sorry for the lengthy quotes. However, do you see a pattern emerge? These women are successful and have earned the right to go to nicer restaurants, travel, etc. I do not dispute that. However, do you see the resentment in these quotes when they pay more than the guy? The first 2 quotes reveal ladies who resent sharing their lifestyle of nicer restaurants with men who may not be able to afford them as frequently, if at all. At least the third quote represents a lady who understands the hypocrisy of such a position (but still feels the resentment nonetheless). I think the conclusion is that these women are selfish, in that they resent sharing their lifestyle. I would also submit that a truly strong independent woman wouldn’t care if she paid more during the dating (and marriage) process.

    Now reverse the genders, do you think there would be articles in the NYT about how women resent men who earn more than they do in the dating arena (and therefore taking women to the nicer restaurants, travel, etc.)? Of course not.

    I respectfully submit that the women referenced in the articles, and those who share the same viewpoints, are selfish hypocrites. I know this language is harsh, but the behavior is selfish, and the resentment definitely hypocritical.

    Women like Jamie are wonderfully emotionally intelligent. However, in my experience, they are also very few and far between.

    One man’s perspective…

    1. 21.1
      Dr. K

      When the lady wrote that her date downed several cocktails as opposed to her one implies that she might have either felt taken advantage of or that he was doing it to spite her for declaring how independent she was. Either scenario is not the beginning of loving feelings towards one another. The truth is that women who earn substantially more do end up paying more and this may produce some feelings of resentment because one may feel taken advantage of especially if he is not making it up in other areas like the bedroom or cooking/cleaning.  It’s hard to be a breadwinner because what the said breadwinner were to lose their job, then the livelihood of the entire  family will suffer. It’s better to have both working parents contributing the same percentage of their incomes.

  22. 22

    Just to throw some more information into the mix….


    Essentially, it says that 74% of 30-something American women say they would marry for money. It further states:

    “The survey polled 1,134 people nationwide with incomes ranging between $30,000 to $60,000 (squarely in the median range for nationwide incomes). The survey asked: “How willing are you to marry an average-looking person that you liked, if they had money?”

    Fully two-thirds of women and half of the men said they were “very” or “extremely” willing to marry for money. The answers varied by age: Women in their 30s were the most likely to say they would marry for money (74%) while men in their 20s were the least likely (41%).

    “I’m a little shocked at the numbers,” says Pamela Smock, a sociologist at the University of Michigan who has studied marriage and money. “It’s kind of against the notion of love and soul mates and the main motivations to marry in our culture.”

    Still, Ms. Smock has found in her own research that having money does encourage people to tie the knot. “It’s more likely that a couple will marry if they have money, and if the man is economically stable,” she says.

    Women aren’t the only ones with the gold-digging impulse. In the Prince & Associates study, 61% of men in their 40s said they would marry for money. Ms. Smock says that as men get older, they become more comfortable with women being the bread-winners.

    The matrimonial price tag varies by gender and age. Asked how much a potential spouse would need to have to be money-marriage material, women in their 20s said $2.5 million. The going rate fell to $1.1 million for women in their 30s, and rose again to $2.2 million for women in their 40s. Ms. Smock and Russ Alan Prince, Prince & Associate’s founder, both attribute the fluctuation to the assumption that thirty-something women feel more pressure to get married than women in their 20s, so they are willing to lower the price. By their 40s, women are more comfortable being independent, so they’re willing to hold out for more cash.

    Men have cheaper requirements. In the Prince survey, their asking price overall was $1.2 million, with men in their 20s asking $1 million and men in their 40s asking $1.4 million.

    Douglas Freeman, a tax and estates attorney in California who works with wealthy families, says the men’s numbers are lower because they would feel threatened by women worth several million dollars. “The men aren’t going to say they want $10 million, because they wouldn’t be comfortable with a woman who’s worth so much more than they are,” he says.

    Whatever the case, the prices for both men and women seem surprisingly low, given the new landscape of wealth. While $1 million or $2 million may sound like a lot to people making $30,000, it’s hardly enough to transform someone’s life or make them “rich” by contemporary billionaire standards. No one in the survey quoted a price of more than $3 million.

    Of course, when the mercenary marriage proves disappointing, there’s always divorce. Among the women in their twenties who said they would marry for money, 71% said they expected to get divorced — the highest of any demographic. Only 27% of men in their 40s expected to divorce.

    Says Mr. Prince: “For these women, it’s just another step on their journey to the good life. They want to be paid what they think they’re worth and then move on.””

    This article, based upon the survey results, shows why it is precisely not in men’s interest, generally speaking, to marry. As this relates to the original post regarding women who earn more than men, I think the theme still remains the same…. that women, no matter what they earn, actively seek men who earn substantially more in order that they may benefit from his higher earnings. My cynical side says this is so predatory and rapacious….

  23. 23

    “Men need to demonstrate more of the gentle leadership they were made to show, and ladies need to spend a lot more time looking up to, and respecting, their men.”

    I’m sure the latter will happen when the former happens. Not before. (After all, as you tough-o men say, “You gotta EARN respect.” Right? Right??)

    My mother taught me to earn my own living so I — and my children — would never be caught in a bad spot just because some man flaked on his responsibilities. I don’t see why men take such umbrage with this.

    All these men ranting about “it’s the women” COMPLETELY IGNORE the men making bitter comments to their SOs in the article and comments.

    “So the next time your man seems a little funny with you making more than he, remember, you have an option of not having a career and being successfulhe doesnt.”

    Based on what the MEN WHO FEEL THEY’RE UNDER-EARNING have been quoted saying in these articles, clearly they’re feeling they can take that “option” of “not … being successful”.

    “I place the blame squarely on the womens movement”

    Why am I not surprised?

  24. 24

    I just love comments like the ones from “M.” Her comment is one big shaming tactics, an emotional devices meant to play on a man’s insecurities and shut down debate. Her comments also demonstrate a disingenuous use of comments out of their context or a gross lack of understanding of the posts on this topic.

    Her tactic is simply to demonize men who ask hard questions which is basically an ad homimem attacks. Oh, by the way, it also argues nothing logically.

    M essentially uses 2 tactics that do nothing to address the valid issues posted, but are simply designed to shame men and shut down debate.

    First, she essentially calls the posters crybabies. – “You gotta earn respect,” and her unsurprised sarcasm at placing the blame on women’s movement (which by the way, is out of context).

    I submit that M’s post and similar ones indicates a happy, callous lack of understanding of the point these men are making. That point is women want men who make substantially more so that they (women have options (have kids, not have kids, stay home, pursue additional education, etc.) M and similar posters ignore this fundamental imbalance – that women, no matter what they earn, see having these options as their right (via men who earn more), but that men have no such option….it is simply their job to earn. I grant there are exceptions, but they are so few & far between so as not to be mentionable. The simple point is that we as men are just to earn so she has options.

    I actually had this conversation with my mother recently when she questioned why I do not want to marry. When I made my point about how I have no options but that women do, she said “That’s what you’re supposed to do as a man.” (Yes, even she knows the deck’s stacked in her favor.) I said, “Mom, they banned indentured servitude 200-plus years ago. It seems a better option for me to keep my freedom and options.” Her response…”Well, I don’t want to argue about this anymore.”

    The beehive analogy applies….the queen bee is served by the worker bees (drones, I think they are called). What M and the other women ignore is the divorce rate (see earlier post). This factors into things also.

    The second tactics M and similar posters use is to call men cowards, which is related to calling them crybabies. In doing so she essentially tells men they have an irrational fear of dealing with women. Specific examples are:

    “… or hiding shopping bags in the closet just so men she was dating would not see them lying around and feel threatened by her spending power.”

    A lot of guys dont want to admit they have a problem with it, she said, referring to income disparity. They dont want to be that guy. But I think its ingrained. (Note – Do you notice how they’re saying it exists even where there is no evidence of it?)

    “Women Who Earn More Money Than Men – An The Men Who Resent It”

    ” . . .but men find my education to be threatening if they dont at least have a masters degree.”

    “You want to be respected by a woman? Earn it.”

    I would respond to such a tactic by stating much the same thing as above – that there is a difference between courage and and stupidity. And blindly being the “worker bee” would fall into the stupidity category. Furthermore, in taking any risky action (such as dating and marrying), a reasonable person take only calculated risks. In taking these calculated risks, you weigh costs and benefits, and in doing so, many men are finding out that many (arguably most) women fail a cost-benefit analysis.

    Insofar as the stated sentiment of “You want to be respected by a woman? Earn it,” I would state that men have increasingly less respect for women on the whole the more they realize that women want their wallet for their own options, not for them as people. In other words, you gotta earn it too, ladies.

    One man’s opinion….

  25. 25

    Apologies for a few typos. It’s laborious enough to type, let alone proof…

  26. 26

    ……myself and many, many men, would like to date, more women, that, pay more tax revenues, than men do….we keep hearing that they are out there……

  27. 27

    Funny how I do not hear any contrary evidence how women do not seek men who earn more. In other words, women in general therefore seek men who can give them ‘security’ and ‘options.’ In other words, money or its equivalent.

    Hmmmmm. Companionship for money. I wonder what that’s called?

  28. 28

    Hi Verbosity,

    I would avoid absolute statements here. This is a very small community (if I would even call it that). It hardly represents everyone, in every situation, at every time… What would you call a man who pays for such companionship? Is he better or worse? Is he contributing to the “problem,” is he a victim, or did he cause it? Ironically, not too many posts above we had men calling women who supported themselves the cause of all social problems -rather, women should stay at home to be supported. Now, we have others that condemn women for wanting to be taken care of. Mind spinning, huh?

    Bottom line, we don’t live in a vacuum. We live in a social structure with a history. So many factors brought us to this place. Among this structure we have individual preferences/characteristics. Your synopsis of events: a woman that is supported by a man is a prostitute -her husband/boyfriend is a Jon. I see how you got there, but you left out a lot of the story along the way.

    Best to you,

  29. 29


    Thank you for your comments. I did not use an absolute statement. If it comes across in that manner that is not its intent. However, I, and most other posters do speak in generalities and ‘more often than not’ situations. Reading any of my previous posts clearly indicates that.

    My mind is most definitely not spinning. The theme of this thread is, however, about women who earn more than men, complaining about it and the challenges they supposedly face in dating. Those challenges include expecting men who make less than them to still shoulder the financial burden of dating. Mine and other posts above have already pointed out the hypocrisy of such a perspective, so I won’t restate them.

    You further wrote, “Ironically, not too many posts above we had men calling women who supported themselves the cause of all social problems -rather, women should stay at home to be supported. Now, we have others that condemn women for wanting to be taken care of. Mind spinning, huh?” Sorry, but that’s not an accurate paraphrasing of the points, and lumping in ‘the cause of all social problems’ into your point needlessly exaggerates the point to an illogical conclusion.

    An accurate paraphrasing is that women who can and do earn more than men are not condemnable for what they earn. However, women who expect to receive money (or its equivalent) for being with men are contemptible, no matter what they earn, particularly when they are unwilling to do the same for men in return (generally speaking). Even one of the women interviewed for the article acknowledged the hypocrisy of this. You, unfortunately, do not.

    Further, I wonder why it seems so difficult for the majority of female posters to acknowledge that women more often than not demand money for their company (not the best phrasing, but go with it). Ignoring it and blaming men that are dumb enough to do it (which are most men) does nothing to solve the issue. Of course, ladies have no vested interest in changing that rule of the game, since it favors them so…. It is a ‘pay to play’ game.

    I would again state that there still has been little to no contradicting evidence how women do not seek men who earn more. Yes, I know there are rare exceptions, but even a broken clock is correct twice a day. If you have read the previous posts you will notice an alarming lack of responsibility by most women for approaching dating in such a rapacious manner, just pointing at men for being dumb enough to do it, a tacit admission of rapaciousness in my book.

    Lastly, if you are trying to call me rude or impudent for my posting in order to shut down debate on the point, I must take issue with that. I provided article and survey cites that support my posts and conclusions. I have seen nothing to refute it. Simply attacking the messenger of a painful message does not make the message vanish.

    1. 29.1

      Hi please see my posts above regarding biology in dating, women want men who are stable because they bear children and oftentime the need arises to stay home to take care of kids even though she makes a good amount of money, men look for women w youth and beauty (fertility) ….on avg of course , so I myself as a highly educated and higher than average earner would still like a man to earn above a certain amount (I don’t ask for as much as me or expect him to pay all the time or that, but first date or few dates yes, especially when women spend more time and effort and money getting ready for a nice date 🙂

      (Hey, Shannon, you’ve made 6 comments on the same blog post in a half hour. Maybe take a breather… – EMK)

  30. 30

    Hi Verbosity,

    I hardly would call my sentiments illogical -but that’s your POV. I have no desire to “shut down” this debate. That’s kind of funny. I don’t think you’re rude. This is an online forum -not something I would waste a lot of time writing a dissertation in a response. There’s nothing in it for me. I do see many holes in your argument and detect some misapprehension of my post -as in mind spinning to us all not you personally -and the blame I see positioned toward women for having a movement toward liberation (I wonder why they would do that if life was so cherry between the sexes…hmmm ). Anyway, I would not condemn women -and I would not condemn men for getting into an adult relationship while having their full faculties about them -irrespective of whom earns what. I do not need to manufacture some general conclusions about the ways things are. Take an evolutionary psychology course, sociology, gender….. It’s been done.

    To each his own. I’ve explained before that I earn more than my husband and no biggy -it is our money. A number of my friends are in similar situations. You and I have very different worlds -I suspect.

    Best to you,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *