But seriously, are there really women who talk about men in those terms?
Yes. Personally, I see it as the mirror image of the “tradwife” thing where toxic men see their partner as a subservient maid. Seeing men as primarily an income source comes from a similar place imho.
Yep, they’ve been called ‘gold diggers’, for quite a while now.
There is still a huge portion of American women across the political spectrum, across wealth classes, across religious or irreligious beliefs, who ultimately have a huge part of what they want in a partner be ‘how much stuff can he buy me’, who will bully or shame or guilt trip or emasculate or outright violently abuse their male partner, regardless of how hypocritical this is with their other espoused beliefs, to get them to pay for things for them or cover their debts.
Just get on tiktok or instagram, you basically can’t miss it.
Its more than just the opposite number of conservative tradwives. There are plenty of self described liberal or leftist, feminists or social activists of one kind or another that ultimately still want their male partners to provide far more for them than they provide for their partner.
The “trad wives” (traditionalist / paleoconservative middle class women who believe that their religion is good for women) are looking for a husband in the traditional sense, a type of business owner / patriarch who owns them and provides for them; see: husbandry. That’s so that they can produce a lot of offspring while pretending that raising kids in near or full homeschooling is a good thing and she’s very successful (culturally).
They’re the homologues of incels and traditionalist bros who want to be rich so that they maintain some informal harem. And they deserve each other.
Yeah, and we shouldn’t suppose women can’t degrade as much as men, that’s unfair. r/femaledatingstrategy had an overblown fame for being a femcel den before it got banned, you can read on them in the media. But you can discover more than that on chan-boards, as they are probably the origin of a lingvo natural to this discourse. Just like with in incels, there’s a typology of women and men adapted to biological and social context a typical ciswoman is in.
As for IRL, I’ve heard such terms only as a joke, but that means there’s some penetration into higher net.
Every gold digger ever. Books about it, subreddits. You been living under a rock? Literally, good how to marry a rich man, and there will be digital or printed guidebooks
Idahoan here - yeah coming from a fairly mormon-laden family tree (and community), it’s pretty common around here. And like others said it typically goes both ways - the guys treat it like the gals are helpless without a man to carry the income. This place is fucking backwards and culturally prehistoric.
Don’t even get me started on the bigotry & maltreatment towards trans/gay folks. If there were a progress bar for moving toward healthy / compassionate behavior towards those groups this place would be at fucking 0%, genuinely. Obscenely disrespectful.
Lol this whole thread is so funny to me, as someone who regularly dates millionaires.
Ya’ll are not a cash cow. Don’t worry, real gold diggers go after gold. You’re safe from gold diggers. That of course does not make you immune from financial abuse but that’s different than gold digging.
Second, these dating forums are all roleplay. There’s a pretty big chance those are men role-playing as the greedy women of their stupid nightmares. No woman ever gets in proximity to a man only based on money. The idea is laughable to women. Even full service sex workers decline men and have actual correspondences with each other blacklisting men in the area to keep everyone safe. No woman ONLY cares about the money. They can’t afford to. However, men engaging with other men think like that because they don’t have to worry about the risk of violence as much. That’s why I think this is probably roleplay.
Third, I hear men talking about their potential future wives like this all the time, including financially, if they’d date a fat girl, if they’d date a girl who doesn’t do oral, etc etc etc. Even if women are doing this, men do it too (and i bet you never called it out). Marriage is a contract that ties finances together so it matters. Personally, I’m never getting married but for those who do, it can really affect their ability to get housing or other stuff. It’s a sad feature of capitalism.
And yes, capitalists gain a lot from this structure. They fish for sex workers in every industry, including modeling. This causes women to br traded like commodities and so the most valuable women per their standards they can eugenics into their line, will be the one they marry. A lot of men’s attraction for women is just based on how valuable she is as a human commodity. This is why “objectification” gets brought up so much.
Last, the above is the attitude of real gold diggers, which is open and frankly discussed with their actual source of gold. It is not financial abuse and to be clear financial abuse is wrong - it is instead a negotiation so that she can live at the same comfort level as him and enjoy her life. No rich man is confused about this. Most would be kinda embarrassed to not take care of her, like going to a fancy restaurant and she orders a small appetizer+water in her budget while he gets a wine tasting and a steak just makes him look bad. That’s how I know none of you are actually near this lifestyle, because you don’t innately understand this.
Again, I am not getting married, I’m never having kids, and I’m poly; I demand these aspects specifically to bypass the interpersonal dynamic of me being treated as a commodity, and instead this forces my partners and myself to love in the moment, to actively choose each other, and to give resources freely and not coerced through a contract.
Ooh, I’m a cash cow apparently.
But seriously, are there really women who talk about men in those terms?
Yes. Personally, I see it as the mirror image of the “tradwife” thing where toxic men see their partner as a subservient maid. Seeing men as primarily an income source comes from a similar place imho.
These two groups deserve each other.
Yep, they’ve been called ‘gold diggers’, for quite a while now.
There is still a huge portion of American women across the political spectrum, across wealth classes, across religious or irreligious beliefs, who ultimately have a huge part of what they want in a partner be ‘how much stuff can he buy me’, who will bully or shame or guilt trip or emasculate or outright violently abuse their male partner, regardless of how hypocritical this is with their other espoused beliefs, to get them to pay for things for them or cover their debts.
Just get on tiktok or instagram, you basically can’t miss it.
Its more than just the opposite number of conservative tradwives. There are plenty of self described liberal or leftist, feminists or social activists of one kind or another that ultimately still want their male partners to provide far more for them than they provide for their partner.
That sounds like 99.9% of population in developing countries like mine
I don’t think that’s a fair comparison as Nerd is usually seen as a negative trait, where having good traditional traits is seen as a positive.
It’s taking a nerd and using that negativity despite not liking it to exploit gain.
Where as having traditional wife is choose a positive because you like that positive.
If I can’t be a milk cow, then at least let me be a cash cow
How did you find a picture of me?
The “trad wives” (traditionalist / paleoconservative middle class women who believe that their religion is good for women) are looking for a husband in the traditional sense, a type of business owner / patriarch who owns them and provides for them; see: husbandry. That’s so that they can produce a lot of offspring while pretending that raising kids in near or full homeschooling is a good thing and she’s very successful (culturally).
They’re the homologues of incels and traditionalist bros who want to be rich so that they maintain some informal harem. And they deserve each other.
Matches for men who talk about women in those terms
Yeah, and we shouldn’t suppose women can’t degrade as much as men, that’s unfair. r/femaledatingstrategy had an overblown fame for being a femcel den before it got banned, you can read on them in the media. But you can discover more than that on chan-boards, as they are probably the origin of a lingvo natural to this discourse. Just like with in incels, there’s a typology of women and men adapted to biological and social context a typical ciswoman is in.
As for IRL, I’ve heard such terms only as a joke, but that means there’s some penetration into higher net.
Every gold digger ever. Books about it, subreddits. You been living under a rock? Literally, good how to marry a rich man, and there will be digital or printed guidebooks
You have been sleepwalking through life…
Idahoan here - yeah coming from a fairly mormon-laden family tree (and community), it’s pretty common around here. And like others said it typically goes both ways - the guys treat it like the gals are helpless without a man to carry the income. This place is fucking backwards and culturally prehistoric.
Don’t even get me started on the bigotry & maltreatment towards trans/gay folks. If there were a progress bar for moving toward healthy / compassionate behavior towards those groups this place would be at fucking 0%, genuinely. Obscenely disrespectful.
Lol this whole thread is so funny to me, as someone who regularly dates millionaires.
Ya’ll are not a cash cow. Don’t worry, real gold diggers go after gold. You’re safe from gold diggers. That of course does not make you immune from financial abuse but that’s different than gold digging.
Second, these dating forums are all roleplay. There’s a pretty big chance those are men role-playing as the greedy women of their stupid nightmares. No woman ever gets in proximity to a man only based on money. The idea is laughable to women. Even full service sex workers decline men and have actual correspondences with each other blacklisting men in the area to keep everyone safe. No woman ONLY cares about the money. They can’t afford to. However, men engaging with other men think like that because they don’t have to worry about the risk of violence as much. That’s why I think this is probably roleplay.
Third, I hear men talking about their potential future wives like this all the time, including financially, if they’d date a fat girl, if they’d date a girl who doesn’t do oral, etc etc etc. Even if women are doing this, men do it too (and i bet you never called it out). Marriage is a contract that ties finances together so it matters. Personally, I’m never getting married but for those who do, it can really affect their ability to get housing or other stuff. It’s a sad feature of capitalism.
And yes, capitalists gain a lot from this structure. They fish for sex workers in every industry, including modeling. This causes women to br traded like commodities and so the most valuable women per their standards they can eugenics into their line, will be the one they marry. A lot of men’s attraction for women is just based on how valuable she is as a human commodity. This is why “objectification” gets brought up so much.
https://youtu.be/3n-yU_BpA4M?si=-CwuVC_45nn5vKUD
Last, the above is the attitude of real gold diggers, which is open and frankly discussed with their actual source of gold. It is not financial abuse and to be clear financial abuse is wrong - it is instead a negotiation so that she can live at the same comfort level as him and enjoy her life. No rich man is confused about this. Most would be kinda embarrassed to not take care of her, like going to a fancy restaurant and she orders a small appetizer+water in her budget while he gets a wine tasting and a steak just makes him look bad. That’s how I know none of you are actually near this lifestyle, because you don’t innately understand this.
Again, I am not getting married, I’m never having kids, and I’m poly; I demand these aspects specifically to bypass the interpersonal dynamic of me being treated as a commodity, and instead this forces my partners and myself to love in the moment, to actively choose each other, and to give resources freely and not coerced through a contract.