Age Gaps & Money - under a microscope!

[Misha]

But, to shine the light on the PINK ELEPHANT that is sitting in the middle of the room ... many happy marriages are only happy (and still in existence because of the underlying fact that the man is providing a better life and expanded choices to the woman.

Why do you write using such a large font size?


But, to answer your question, yes a happy marriage should provide a better life for both and expanded choices for both. However, better need not be defined solely in financial terms, and choices need not be restricted to more ways of spending money.

[Slumba]

I think saying "money" is only part of it... once you have a stable enough life, money may not be the primary factor. 

In the USA there was a study and once people were earning (I think) 1.5x the median income, happiness did not increase, even if the person was a multi-millionaire.

Wanting children, wanting to be in a society that isn't as chauvinistic, where thugs aren't running all the politics (well, USA may not be better), these are all factors also.

There is a "total package" aspect that is about more than money... and I can think of 2 guys who are married, who don't make a lot of money, but seem happy enough and their wives appear OK with the situation.

[Misha]

I think saying "money" is only part of it... once you have a stable enough life, money may not be the primary factor. 

In the USA there was a study and once people were earning (I think) 1.5x the median income, happiness did not increase, even if the person was a multi-millionaire.

Exactly! My wife and I are planning to go spend a few months in Russia this winter. She is already dreading it. She is happy with her life in Canada, and is already cringing at the thought of staying with her family, in a cramped apartment, with no dishwasher, no dryer and all the other amenities she takes for granted...

[Muzh]

But, to shine the light on the PINK ELEPHANT that is sitting in the middle of the room ... many happy marriages are only happy (and still in existence because of the underlying fact that the man is providing a better life and expanded choices to the woman.

Now this occurs in a matter of degrees, and is not necessarily wrong, or evil.  But, it is a truth; one the is rarely acknowledged.

Again, one more time. Please define "better life" in your sentence. Is it monetary, or spiritual bettering? Or both?

You can have three different answers.

[IAmZon]

Again, one more time. Please define "better life" in your sentence. Is it monetary, or spiritual bettering? Or both?

In the context I am using it here, and the thrust of this thread, I am certainly referencing the betterment that comes through financial resources.  The issue that I would like to discuss is the surprise that befalls many men who do not properly calibrate this fact.

[Misha]

In the context I am using it here, and the thrust of this thread, I am certainly referencing the betterment that comes through financial resources.  The issue that I would like to discuss is the surprise that befalls many men who do not properly calibrate this fact.

What exactly do we have to calibrate? It is possible to be happy even if you are not rich.

[Faux Pas]

In the context I am using it here, and the thrust of this thread, I am certainly referencing the betterment that comes through financial resources.  The issue that I would like to discuss is the surprise that befalls many men who do not properly calibrate this fact.

It's not a fact. It's only your opinion that it's a fact. Big difference. The wider the age gap IMHO, the greater the possibility  that the betterment is indeed financial. One size does not fit all and speaking in generalities will get you proven wrong

[YoungBuck]

I'm at that age (30 y.o.) where 90% of my friends are engaged or recently married or probably will never marry.

It is my impression that all marriages are "marriages of convenience". Critically thinking, why would anyone in their right mind marry if it's inconvenient?

Some friends gave up promiscuity for love, trade money for looks, freedom for children, etc. In the end, we give up something to gain something. The motivations to look abroad are usually related to money and looks, but everything still functions on that trade-off system. In our current Western system, assortative mating is really taking a hit (i.e. smart,educated girls want hot,dumb guy as opposed to smart guy). I know guys who juggle 3-4 different women, have kids with them, essentially have a soft harem, leaving 2-3 guys empty handed even though they have nothing to offer except a perceived alphaness. In traditional Christian countries, they value marriage and a stable nuclear family more, but realistically, you cannot/should not marry a woman out of your league, where the league is define by your looks, personality, financial situation, youth, etc.

All these essentially dictate where on the N/2 + 7 age gap rule you can fish in.
From the male perspective, the N/2 + 7 rule is the minimum age you can date without a huge amount of generational issues  (I'm 30 so I could date at most a 22 year old). We would probably still like the same music, movies, etc. and were shaped by the same current events and pop-culture.

[Gator]

May I add that their inevitable "change" is accelerated by the new environment?

Yes, for some.  A RW who has faced difficult times may have placed stability and security at the top of her "wish list."  She moves to the West where stability and security abound, and her "wish list" changes.  She perhaps sees opportunities that she never thought possible, and those climb to the top of her list. 
 
OTOH, maybe all a RW ever wanted and still wants is to have a happy family with 2-3 rug rats.  And when the rug rats leave the nest, she may want a brand new life.  We see that with many AW, and I do not suspect that RW will be any different. 
 
Change is inevitable, so why not change together!?   That seems the best pathway for RW/AM marriages.   I have seen this firsthand among my business partners and university fraternity brothers.   There are many husbands and wives who married young and changed together as they progressed through the four seasons of life.    In fact a majority fall in that category, and they are really happy people.   In the Winter of life they are still very happy together.  It is a different happiness than in their Spring, yet profound happiness nevertheless. 
 
In this circle I guarantee you that aspirations for more wealth was never at the top of the "wish list" for the wives of the most successful husbands.    The wives discussed options with their husbands at his career decision points, yet I do not recall any wife pushing her husband for more, more and even more.   
 
The wives have welcomed the wealth of their husband's success, such as second homes in desirable places.  The husband's success gave the wives time and resources to pursue their own interests.  Some advanced their education (e. g. one became an ordained minister),  pursued their own businesses (e. g., photography, jewelry), and others were contented with being a mother and then a grandmother, or just hanging out at the country club and art museum.   There have been a few divorces, yet these were amicable and win-win (e. g., she kept the house in the big city and he moved to the farm in the country, and that fact alone reveals the reason for their divorce).  A few wives became very ill and their husbands stayed at their side, as did the wives when the husbands became ill.   It seems so natural.

[Gator]

What exactly do we have to calibrate? It is possible to be happy even if you are not rich.

The mother of my sons was much happier when we were younger with rug rats, long before my business became highly successful.  This is perhaps unfair because she did suffer from clinical depression.   Her psychiatrist told her that the existence of his profession is ample proof that money does not buy happiness.

[IAmZon]

What exactly do we have to calibrate? It is possible to be happy even if you are not rich.

No. It should be obvious that wealth does not buy happiness.   Your comment is dismissive.


There are many men that were happily married that chimed in for years with prejudicial statements an opinions such as this.  They are now divorced to their Russian princesses. Again, we are only speaking in generalities, and societal tendencies.  But, these exist do they not?


While I stayed in Ukraine, I communicated with some Russian / Ukrainian women via email that were very frontal about this.  We are less so in our discussions here.  Of course, it is nice when the weather is sunny and calm, but life is not always this way.


Clearly, as age gaps and league gaps stretch so do these precarious tendencies.  If you are not a man that has put himself in such a situation, you need to calibrate less.  If you are a man that has put himself in such a situation, perhaps there is a greater need to calibrate.  Speaking, again in generalities, of course.

[Turboguy]

I have seen a lot of very rich, very unhappy people.   Sometimes the worry of how to manage money can bring unhappiness and sometimes people fall into the trap of spending more than they make no matter how much that is.   Look at all the high earning sports stars, actors and others who made a ton of money and went bankrupt the moment it ended. 
I have also known lots and lots of very happy middle classed people who were comfortable but really didn't do much more than just get by.  I have even known some very poor but very happy people.
For the most part I have seen few happy people whose financial condition had them trying to figure out how to keep the electric on or from being evicted. 
Happiness isn't about how much money you have.
 
 

[calmissile]

I have seen a lot of very rich, very unhappy people.   Sometimes the worry of how to manage money can bring unhappiness and sometimes people fall into the trap of spending more than they make no matter how much that is.   Look at all the high earning sports stars, actors and others who made a ton of money and went bankrupt the moment it ended. 
I have also known lots and lots of very happy middle classed people who were comfortable but really didn't do much more than just get by.  I have even known some very poor but very happy people.
For the most part I have seen few happy people whose financial condition had them trying to figure out how to keep the electric on or from being evicted. 
Happiness isn't about how much money you have.

+1
I have witnessed the same experiences.
And it includes several families in Ukraine.

[Misha]

No. It should be obvious that wealth does not buy happiness.   Your comment is dismissive.

I don't quite see it that way, but I would say the same of the comment that follows below.

There are many men that were happily married that chimed in for years with prejudicial statements an opinions such as this.  They are now divorced to their Russian princesses. Again, we are only speaking in generalities, and societal tendencies.  But, these exist do they not?

What prejudicial statements? It boils down to this: get to know a woman before you marry her and avoid the "princesses." Also, when dating, use your personality, intellect, character and a host of other positive features to attract women, not your wallet. If you do that, then you are much less likely to attract the wrong kind of women...

[size=78%]Clearly, as age gaps and league gaps stretch so do these precarious tendencies.  If you are not a man that has put himself in such a situation, you need to calibrate less.  If you are a man that has put himself in such a situation, perhaps there is a greater need to calibrate.  Speaking, again in generalities, of course.[/size]

Again, it always depends. The couples that seem to work with a large(r) age gap seem to be those where there was a commitment to establish a family together. People such as Ed and Simoni [or was it Simonis?] immediately come to mind. But, again, it comes down to knowing each other and having common goals in life...

[CanadaMan]

Read an article somewhere about an average russian guy sleeping with 25 women in their lifetime, and an average american either 4 or 8.

One has to assume that 'gays and pastoral folk'* have been included in that average.

* I believe that accounts for about 31.50% of the male population in America.

Vinny, if you are thinking that 'gays' pull down the averages, I think you are wrong.

From what I understand from casual reading, gays have much more sex and with more partners than do straight men.

I thought the same thing as you at first ML.
But upon further reflection, I believe that Vinny may be correct (if gays are included in the total sample size).

Note that Aloe was talking about men sleeping with women, not men sleeping with men.

Thus, a promiscuous  gay man would indeed pull down the averages.
This man would be taking the place of a heterosexual man who might sleep with 10-20 women, skewing those figures by sleeping with zero (0) women (despite their promiscuity).

[ML]

I know guys who juggle 3-4 different women, have kids with them, essentially have a soft harem, leaving 2-3 guys empty handed . . .

Quite to the contrary . . . they are not empty handed.

[ML]

In our current Western system, assortative mating is really taking a hit (i.e. smart, educated girls want hot, dumb guy as opposed to smart guy).

I believe this is a relatively rare situation.
Women give quite good attention to the probable smarts of their offspring.

[ML]

Thus, a promiscuous  gay man would indeed pull down the averages.
This man would be taking the place of a heterosexual man who might sleep with 10-20 women, skewing those figures by sleeping with zero (0) women (despite their promiscuity).

True in your specific example; but I think most such surveys are worded something like:

If you are a hetero male; how many women have you had sex with.
If you are a homo male; how many men have you had sex with.

[CanadaMan]

True in your specific example; but I think most such surveys are worded something like:

If you are a hetero male; how many women have you had sex with.
If you are a homo male; how many men have you had sex with.

It still doesn't matter ML.

The wording would have nothing to do with it.

They could ask the gay men how many women they had sex with (0), or they could ask them how many men they had sex with (100). The end result would be the same!

So long as the gay men were included in the sample size, they would still pull down the number of women the average man would be sleeping with.

[Vinnvinny]

I thought the same thing as you at first ML.
But upon further reflection, I believe that Vinny may be correct (if gays are included in the total sample size).

Note that Aloe was talking about men sleeping with women, not men sleeping with men.

Thus, a promiscuous  gay man would indeed pull down the averages.
This man would be taking the place of a heterosexual man who might sleep with 10-20 women, skewing those figures by sleeping with zero (0) women (despite their promiscuity).

Thank you for reading the post I replied to and my then understanding my subsequent response. 

[vwrw]

It still doesn't matter ML.

The wording would have nothing to do with it.

They could ask the gay men how many women they had sex with (0), or they could ask them how many men they had sex with (100). The end result would be the same!

So long as the gay men were included in the sample size, they would still pull down the number of women the average man would be sleeping with.

The question was probably worded without any reference to gender. Something like " how many individuals did you have sex with"...or may be they picked only heterosexual men for the sample.     

[Aloe]

On the money thing, well, it sure as hell is tempting to look for someone who is relatively mature and has a house paid off, so you as a woman don't have to slave for the rest of your life while somebody else is (half-assed) raising your kids     Rather do some part-time work 'for the soul', than have to slave all day and have no option of quitting, ever, because the mortgage needs to be paid. That sounds like a depressing life to me. In fact this gloomy prospect puts a damper on my moods every day!!

[IAmZon]

Happiness isn't about how much money you have.

With all due respect this skirts the thrust of this thread.   There are MANY factors that comprise "happiness."  There are MANY factors that go into a real, long lasting, "happy marriage."  I fully realize money is not the source of all happiness. (I have been the happiest when I have had the least. If you have more money, generally you have more headaches).


The point here is how much - to what degree - does financial benefit drive and sustain RW / AM marriages.  This is triggered by my deeper knowledge of Ukrainian / Russian woman (the good and the bad).  This is triggered by numerous long time members of RWD "surprisingly"' announcing that they are in the middle of a divorce ... and, then understanding that a shirt in financial outlook was a primary contributing element.


(it is only natural for those that are happily married to feel a need to speak out in contrast ... this is meant for only general purposes.  Let's not get red faced.   LOL)

[IAmZon]

Again, it always depends. The couples that seem to work with a large(r) age gap seem to be those where there was a commitment to establish a family together. People such as Ed and Simoni [or was it Simonis?] immediately come to mind. But, again, it comes down to knowing each other and having common goals in life...

AGREED!  To have children is a very different thing indeed.  All the cases that I am mentioning in the "pattern," those unions where childless.

[Ade]

On the money thing, well, it sure as hell is tempting to look for someone who is relatively mature and has a house paid off, so you as a woman don't have to slave for the rest of your life while somebody else is (half-assed) raising your kids     Rather do some part-time work 'for the soul', than have to slave all day and have no option of quitting, ever, because the mortgage needs to be paid. That sounds like a depressing life to me. In fact this gloomy prospect puts a damper on my moods every day!!

The trick is to find a job you enjoy doing.