Friday, 20 July 2012

Men who marry women for money

Mrs Merton famously asked Debbie McGee why she married the millionaire Paul Daniels- and it was funny-  but ladies how do we feel about men who marry women for money?

This sparked a discussion amongst a group of professionals I was with recently. While we've all been grafting a former peer has bagged himself a billionaire's daughter and can hang up his suit and tie forever- and get the tux out for charity dinners.

My thoughts aren't about individuals though. Enjoying drinks, rather too many drinks, with single girlfriends this week the discussion turned to men- as it often does. A friend had been advised to write a list of must haves and must not haves in order to focus on finding a long term partner- rather than lots of short term fun. The life coach/ guru type she's seeing said that the lists help you focus on what you actually want from a relationship- and actually once we started writing them down it does sharpen the mind.

It's very interesting to see what is actually important for different people. All of ladies present said that any man had to be financially independent, that at the outset we would not want to be financially supporting a man, though of course you never know how life will turn out and in a marriage I'm sure we all understand that might become necessary.

But this post is about men. If we asked a group of men to write a list would they now write a woman who is financially independent, probably, I don't think they would have in years gone by. I also think men probably mean able to look after herself for now financially at the moment, not forever.Whereas I think the women mean a man whose finances you'll never have to worry about, whose finances will hopefully worry about you. There is a difference.I pass no judgement on any of this by the way, I am neither endorsing nor cristicising.

There have always been wealthy heiresses, the Countess in Downton Abbey was fortune hunted from America to save the grand but cash poor estate- and though the story is fiction the fact that rich heiresses have always been sought isn't new. From Elizabeth I to Christina Onassis a woman of means must be mindful of suitors looking for money more than love.

Nowadays though there are also more women who have made their own money and there will be more men who earn less than their wives. There will also be more men thinking I'm a good looking chap, and I might get ahead better ahead in life meeting a nice girl with money than working 14 hours a day at the coal face? So perhaps good luck to those men- they aren't doing anything that hasn't been done for years, more by women but by both seces- and I am not rich enough to have to worry about it, but I do find it strange- and I find thinking about money when thinking about love strange- but I'm an old romantic. 

4 comments:

KarenG said...

I'm a romantic too. I can't imagine marrying for money!

Undina said...

"I also think men probably mean able to look after herself for now financially at the moment, not forever.Whereas I think the women mean a man whose finances you'll never have to worry about, whose finances will hopefully worry about you." - this is sooo against everything I believe in that I'm not sure if I even should start... Probably it's because I never dreamt of being a little wifey taken care of. I always wanted an equal partner who is capable and willing to bring to the union an equal share - not necessarily strictly in $$ figures. Only this way I can expect to be treated equally.

Of course, I'm not talking about super-rich people getting together with regular women/men. In that case, from my side, I would settle for just being able to maintain an independency once relationships go south (with 50%+ probability).

Metropolitan Mum said...

When we met, I think it was important to my husband that I completely supported myself, had a career and that (if all hell broke loose) I could pick up any kind of job and support the family. For now, it's not important if or if not I am making money, as I am taking care of the kid(s) and all things home. We are very old school in that way, and it works brilliantly for us.
I have been together with a guy who earned less than me once. In that special case it was down to the fact that he was much less ambitious than me. Not sexy. (Just realised, I am very old school in that way, too.)

Rose said...

Karen G- neither can I- but I'm afraid as life gets harder I see more and more people thinking about it

Undina- I was taught at school to be equal and my parents have always been equals, though I'm not going into the finances of that. Marrying the super rich is a different case isn't it, you can't hope to maintain equality finanacially unless you win the lottery but presumably you both go into the relationship knowing that.

MM- No I have to say a man who earns less than me currently is not sexy but it's not to do with the money, if they earnt less but were inventing something amazing or doing something wonderful with their time, fine. Just bumming around, not so much! Plus I can't really afford to support another person!