Realities of FSUW

[goforit]

Let's see, Scott does state that his wife was satisfied in Ukraine because she saw herself as being equal or higher in status monetarily than her friends, acquaintances, but becomes very dissatisfied in the United States when all of a sudden she sees people that are living a much richer life than her (sorry Scott if I badly paraphrased your words). Interpret it how you will, but I see it as an example of a woman who used material status to define her happiness. I may be wrong (this is a forum after all where you get second-hand information at best), but Scott seems to be indicating that he overlooked the indicators that were there (the jam story as a case in point).

You mean the RW in this thread shut it down on their wedding night? Hmmmm......perhaps I am confusing threads.

[Sculpto]

But do not listen to Sculpto - his case is rather unique... also he knows that if things were really bad, his family would rescue him. He would not starve, go barefoot , freeze under a hedge or die for lack of proper medical care. And let's wait for the development of his saga - I reserve my opinion for now...

Do you take some perverse pleasure in offending me?  Why would you think my family would help me?  For the record...

My parents are divorced.  After my Mom was so browbeaten by my jacka** of a Father and left her with nothing I completely disconnected from my Father.  He was more than capable of paying for my education but chose not to.  I worked full time for the five years it took me to graduate from art school.  The man is greedy and selfish and extremely lonely with his money and cars and big house with all the amenities.  In the last ten years I have seen him once, when his lesbian wife (not a joke) called me to tell me he had been diagnosed with Alzheimers.  I went to visit and lucky me I got screamed at the same as he did before he was sick.  Sure I could go there and beg a job, but, and this is no exageration, I would live under the damn freeway before I would do that.  

My Mom has nothing.. I help her now.

So, don't listen to me, I don't know anything.

[Misha]

With only a few notable exceptions, RW don't wish to participate in her husband's plowing, planting, weeding, watering and otherwise tending the crops, they want to only be there for the harvest.  Therefore, older men seem to be more of interest to them than in other cultures.

Though, I generally agree with you most of the time, here I would say that it is important to distinguish those women that marry foreigners from the average Russian woman. Most Russian women do not marry or even seek to marry much older foreign men and are happy to marry younger Russian men.

[Sculpto]

Let's see if we can try and understand this in its best sense, which is the way you should take someone who is saying something you think is controversial, rather than continue to fall prey to the western "literalism" that seems to have gripped some in this thread. All things being equal, if she finds both men equally attractive and equally competent, and has no particular preference of one over the other but enjoys the company of and is reasonably happy in the company of both men, she will choose the man who has enjoyed greater financial success (assuming they are not both financially wealthy). Hmmm...I think that would be true of almost all woman, Russian or otherwise. Now she might draw straws wearing a blindfold, but I think it is highly unlikely.

Actually, I think you are completely wrong.  First of all, if she is indiferent about either man then what the heck is she doing getting married to either one?

Second, all things being equal she will marry the one she has Chemistry with.  If she chooses the one with money over the one she has chemistry with she is nothing more than a gold digging whore.

[goforit]

Yes, maybe I've misunderstood, but if I have then so have several RW here, and I'm in good company.

When I said you didn't see it either, I didn't mean you missed something or misunderstood something, rather that I was agreeing with you that no one in this thread has said that all RW are in for only the money, a clear distortion that others have made.

Here's a summary of my understanding what Zhena has said or inferred in this thread; money for most maybe all RW is important when choosing a partner and if they deny this they are delusional or lying.

Correct, and for the life of me I don't see how that is a problem. The amount of money necessary will differ from person to person, both men and women, but to say a woman thinks it is unimportant, even if it only takes very modest means to satisfy her, is just not consonant with any reality where physical needs must be met. It is only a problem if you give some funky definition to what it means to consider money important. If you decided tomorrow to take a vow of poverty, unless your soon-to-be wife was on the same page, you would find out in a hurry how "meaningful" money is to her.

All else being equal between two suitors (not really a possibility of course) the most wealthy will be the obvious choice.

As I said before, if it was the case that all things were truly equal, she was comfortable and reasonably happy with both men including having the same affection for both, she might pulls straws to see who wins, but most likely she would choose the one who offered more financial stability. But as you note, this isn't really a realistic situation, at least in most instances, since rarely are all things equal.

If the guy is unable to provide after the fact he's a loser and she would leave him. There's more of course but let's leave it at that for now.

Again, the ability to read into these quotes is amazing, and its even more amazing because there has been constant clarification since the original quote, which does provide a context in which to understand what was said. The OP said a lot of woman (the context being a young woman in a RW/AM relationship) would do such a thing and therefore a WM should give up on RW. Ooops, she didn't say that. She said to look for an older RW or at least someone close to your age OR be very careful who you choose to avoid such a scenario. Covers all the bases and sounds like pretty good advice, and frankly that is equally true of AW, IMO.

Here is some of what she said:

What to do? Probably,dont marry the women from FSU Or marry the older ones,same age as you are,cos they are wiser. I am serious. I dotn criticise anybody,especially Scottin. But this is just a sad truth,do you like it or not....Women like the money. This is not the reason to divorce a husband in the difficult times,but many will do. So you better be rich or look very carefully for a life partner.

Note:

1. Not all woman, but younger women (and not all younger women, see #3).
2. Many, but not all or even most will divorce in difficult financial times. That is true of AW as well.
3. Be rich (presumably if you got a thing for the younger women, and rich is something that will be defined per the woman) or choose a life partner carefully (which means that not even all younger woman fall into category #1, you just have to be more careful).
4. The OP says divorce during difficult financial times is not the answer, but many a youngster (un-wise) will think it is the answer.

Again, can't see much that is wrong with that advice.

[goforit]

To continue my thinking, some of Zhena’s, et al words got twisted in the discussion and she got pushed into a corner.  Also, he debate did not focus on such core issues as providing for kids.  

For example, your words “All else being equal between two suitors…the most wealthy will be the obvious choice”  is biased, not just because the situation is unrealistic.  It is misleading because RW can not measure true wealth (assets, debt, income, expenses, etc.) to the degree necessary to compare one man vs. another.   Second, RW know there’s much BS in the world so they likely would dismiss what a man would say.  All they can really trust is their intuition.

The more likely decision process is to meet different suitors, become attracted to a couple, and become serious with one.   They would marry this man if they felt confident about his financial stability and generosity plus a number of other factors.  

Thus, there is no way to categorize Zhena as exemplifying the mercenary RW whom AM need to avoid.  IMO, reading between the lines, Zhena, Doll et al have revealed part of the mentality of RW who put family first.  They are included in the 75% below:

Excellent!

[brucen36]

Second, all things being equal she will marry the one she has Chemistry with.  

This is an error.  If all things besides the finances are equal, then chemistry being a part of all things is also equal.

[Sculpto]

Most Russian women do not marry or even seek to marry much older foreign men and are happy to marry younger Russian men.

Before my last trip I would have been inclined to agree Misha.. but all of "A"s friends are dating much older men.. well in fact so is "A", that being me.  

"A" is well aware of my financial status and is in no ways put off by it and is very anxious to "build the garden" with me.  Maybe I found one in 140 million, but, somehow I don't think so.

My opinion, not backed up by any solid evidence other than the four RWs I know the best, is that given the right circumstances and the right man any RW is capable of marrying any man that suits her fancy and meets her ever evolving needs, be it emotional security, financial security or just really good sex.  

[Sculpto]

This is an error.  If all things besides the finances are equal, then chemistry being a part of all things is also equal.

yeah that happens all the time.   

[Misha]

Before my last trip I would have been inclined to agree Misha.. but all of "A"s friends are dating much older men.. well in fact so is "A", that being me.  

And, all of my wife's friends, acquaintances, relatives, are dating or married to men their age or within a few years of their age   But, fine, if you guys want to believe that RW are inherently attracted to older men and dream of marrying much older men, I won't rain on your parade.

[goforit]

Never said I could do it without money and no I am not one of these "people".  Money allows me to travel and buy material things, however can money buy the look on your child's face when they are happy to see you at an important event in their life? Can money buy you time to spend with your loved ones?

You are making points no one is really arguing. Although to the extent that having money frees you to show up at those important childhood events, then it can be beneficial in that sense or as another poster noted if it allows for a healthy childbirth.

I have seen the worst society has to offer and I have seen the best and I can tell you money is not the final answer everything that people think it is.

Nobody said it was. 

People have different values and goals, some are more materialistic then others.

Agreed, and in searching for a life partner you best take this into account, which is what the OP/Zhena pointed out.

[brucen36]

And, all of my wife's friends, acquaintances, relatives, are dating or married to men their age or within a few years of their age   But, fine, if you guys want to believe that RW are inherently attracted to older men and dream of marrying much older men, I won't rain on your parade.

This was the point.  It's all anecdotal whether you've been to the FSU a hundred times or none.  There are no legitimate statistics on this as far as I know.

[Sculpto]

And, all of my wife's friends, acquaintances, relatives, are dating or married to men their age or within a few years of their age   But, fine, if you guys want to believe that RW are inherently attracted to older men and dream of marrying much older men, I won't rain on your parade.

I dont think there is anything inherent about it.  I am quite sure there are many variations on the topic.  "A" is dating me and I am alot older than her.. but.. her Father was 6 years younger than her Mom... so, who knows where she got the "taste" for older men.  I am not the first guy my age she has dated.

I think people date who they feel comfortable with, regardless of age.  I do think there may be a slightly higher percentage of FSUWs open to the idea of dating older men compared with AW, or, at least not automatically eliminating them as many AWs do.

[goforit]

Let's see, at least three other Russian women have sided with my interpretation, and you are still harping on me?  

First, truth isn't determined by counting noses. They like you could easily be making the same mistake and in fact are making the same mistake. It isn't a small one either because what this has essentially boiled down to, at least regarding you, is "I don't care what is being said, I'm going to believe what I want to believe no matter what somebody is saying." Very poor argument, and rather useless to engage someone who insists on arguing at that level.

Second, get off the cross. No one is harping on you. This is a discussion forum after all. If you don't want me to answer what you said (i.e. "harping on you") don't respond to my posts. Those who have engaged me, I have answered (or will answer soon), so if you don't want me "harping on you" then discipline your fingers on the keyboard.

As I said, I have no objections to men and women marrying who believe that money is "foundationally" important to them  :usdeyes:

Unless you have taken a vow of poverty, its important to you as well. Further, your ideas about women who think money is important are pretty clear in this thread, your personal objections one way or the other notwithstanding.

Yes, I agree that there should be compatibility when it comes to money as well. A woman who wants a man who will spend unconditionally, should definitely seek a man willing and capable of spending to her liking 

Strange. You just got through accusing me of making extreme statements, and then you turn around and make extreme statements.

A woman who wants a man who will spend unconditionally

isn't characteristic of the statements of anyone in this thread. However it is a back door way of trying to sneak in your continued mis-characterization of several Russian women in this thread when you have repeatedly tried to suggest that they said that RW are in this marriage thing only for the money. It was wrong then, it is still wrong now.

I wouldn't be that guy, but I have a right to my opinion as well.

It is interesting why this has riled you so much. It seems to have touched a nerve  :evil:

The only person who appears to be riled up is you, appearing to be defensive and taking things personally. First, you complain about me "harping on you." Then you talk about how you "have a right to your opinion" which no one has even come close to remotely denying, after all this is a discussion board. And now you are trying to psychologize me and read my heart, something only God can do, by saying that you "touched a nerve" and asking "why this has riled you so much" when you haven't produced a shred of evidence from any of my posts that a pejorative phrase such as "riled up" describes my posts.

What is interesting is that you continue to dodge issues, offer iffy support for your contentions, look for other people to support your position as if somehow that makes it right, and then try to throw out a red herring by offering up something that has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

So, are you actually married?

Normally I would answer that, but since it is such a weak and blatant attempt to sidestep what we are talking about, I think I will just ignore it.

[Ade]

I don't think you are being overly romantic, I just think you are saying two different things. If money matters not one whit, then why wouldn't most woman want to marry a man who is destitute?

It seems to me you are applying your idea of how much is enough to everyone else, and if they don't agree with it then they are attaching too much meaning to money.

Because there are two processes at work; there's the logical side, as Doll has been stating, where a woman needs to know that she's not walking into a debt ridden struggle for the basics and then there's the emotional side where a people will walk through fire with the person they love no matter what.

With local dating, the woman is on her own turf and doesn't need to concern herself too much with the former but, as we know, in international dating there are far more concerns because the woman is, at least initially, totally dependant on their spouse. Now that I fully understand but this is just not what Zhena has been saying; she wants as much as she can get at the outset and will pick a partner with that criteria foremost in her mind and even after the relationship is fully established, when the emotional connection should override any thoughts of financial preferences,  she would still leave him if he didn't provide. At least everything she has posted has indicated that to me and she confirmed as much back on page 28 or so.

[Sculpto]

Goforit..

You make a good argument, but, you are missing a lot of the subtext in this thread relative to ongoing situations for other members of this forum that are being discussed in other threads.

One very respected member is currently going through a divorce that no one expected because his wife turned out to have unreasonable monetary expectations.  

In that context many of us are already sensitized to this particular issue because there have been plenty of other disasters documented on this board where money is at least a big part of the formation of problems.  Read some of the other threads to get a clue what I am talking about.  

It is good to have new members who take an active role in the ongoing discussions, but, it seems to me you are more interested in the debate itself than the actual content of the debate and the meaning of that content to those of us seeking marriage, in the process of getting married, married, or getting divorced.  

I am not an unreasonable guy and have at least a small ability to comprehend what people write, and, beginning with Zhena's commentary about money I have been disgusted and turned off.  Her opinions have raised light red flags about this entire process for me.  The other member who is going through a divorce where money is at the center of the problems has also raised flags for my situation.  

The comments most of the male members are making in the context I described are not only relevant but far more valuable than the drivel of one spoiled married girl who apparently considers her marriage to be a business arrangement by which she gives "love" when she gets gifts from her pussywhipped husband.

Sorry Zhena.. but thats how I see it.  I am sure you do not, but, this is what I have understood from your words all day.  

[goforit]

Actually, I think you are completely wrong.  First of all, if she is indiferent about either man then what the heck is she doing getting married to either one?

Forgive me if I wasn't clear, but I wasn't suggesting that she was indifferent to either man, rather that she is into both men equally.

Second, all things being equal she will marry the one she has Chemistry with.

Then all things aren't equal.

To be clear, the only inequality I have posited in this scenario is a financial one.

If she chooses the one with money over the one she has chemistry with she is nothing more than a gold digging whore.

I guess it probably wouldn't help to say that if this did happen, maybe the "chemistry" guy was unable to provide for her and her kids? Naw, I didn't think so

[Sculpto]

in international dating there are far more concerns because the woman is, at least initially, totally dependant on their spouse.

SJ, I want to go on the record as totally agreeing about this part.  In my own situation when "A" and I sat down and started putting things on paper I also showed her how I do my budgeting.  From my reading here and elsewhere I expected her eyes to glaze over and her ears to grow a thin layer of skin.. but.. she did not and in fact was listening attentively and asked excellent questions about how finance works in the usa.. the availability of credit.. the security of my apartment from eviction and tons of other relevant things.  

I told her how much I would give her each week and for how long, what i would pay for for both of us and what she would have to find money for on her own.  For example.. she likes alcohol almost every day and I do not.  I am not going to pay for her booze.. she is going to have to find money for that on her own.. unless I am in the mood to drink and then I would make an exception.  On the other hand, she has a full ride scholarship at her Uni and there is no way I can afford to send her to Stanford, so, since she is already on correspondence she will travel back to her city twice a year for exams.. at first i will pay for it but once she is settled in and earning on her own she will, because she wants to.

There is a lot more.. but.. I think you all get the idea.  But, my point is I did not leave ANYTHING to the imagination/interpretation in regards to finance so that she would have no reason for disappointment or surprise.  At the end of the day she is exceptionally proud about earning her own money anyway and will only accept "handouts" during her transition period.  I would postulate that this would be the same for any good FSUW irregardless of some of the spooge that has been posted here today.

[Ade]

Right, money wasn't a question because while you were not a "success" you weren't "poor by a long shot" and apparently she was happy with that. Money didn't matter or didn't seem "meaningful" because you had enough of it for her so that it didn't enter into the picture.

Right again. I don't think anyone has denied in this thread any of what you said above. Heck I know men who are just mercenary and their main concern is the money (or assets) a woman brings to the table.

The issue, at least in the part of the thread I am involved in, is whether a RW who places an emphasis on a WM financial situation (not a sole emphasis, since it is obvious to all that such a woman is a "mercenary") in searching for a husband, is a mercenary as you define it. The answer in my book is no. In fact I think it would be unwise for a RW not to take that into consideration. If he is younger she ought to be concerned about his goals and ambitions to see if they match with hers. If he is older then she only need look at the body of work he has already produced and determine whether she is comfortable with that. In fact I would be concerned about a woman who was not interested in such, thinking that she was still a dreamer, and did not really understand the reality and pressure of every day marital relationships.

As you saw from my previous post I know why women from the FSU will need some assurances about life style; my fiancée has even asked me about this for other women considering coming to Norway - "is this a sufficient salary to live on?" And that's the thing, the women that do not prioritize money over other things just want to be assured that there's enough for a normal start. There's also a difference between the woman that is solely interested in money and those that prioritize it way up their list of criteria and expect to be taken care of for the rest of their lives. The former is little different than a prostitute, and in all likelihood the latter is a brat with entitlement issues and will attempt to trade up if they feel hard done by; surely you've heard the term, "High Maintenance"?

And you are wrong about the situation with my ex - money was not an issue because she wasn't totally dependant on me and had nothing to do with me having "enough".

BTW, I'm 6 pages behind and at this rate I will never reach the end of this thread.

[Zhena]

Goforit,thank you so much for your clear head! Its like a sunshine after all I had to read here

[Sculpto]

Forgive me if I wasn't clear, but I wasn't suggesting that she was indifferent to either man, rather that she is into both men equally.

The entire premise is flawed.  A woman who is "into" two men equally isn't really into either one.  Plus, the concept is just, well, sorry for the harsh word, stupid.

I guess it probably wouldn't help to say that if this did happen, maybe the "chemistry" guy was unable to provide for her and her kids? Naw, I didn't think so

A woman with high level of ethics and self esteem will choose the man she has the best connection with regardless of his financial standing.  A woman with low self esteem and low sense of ethics will choose based on the ability of the man to pay.  And, in such a scenario I really pity the man.

BTW.. I was offered just such a scenario not long ago.  You guys remember when I posted that stuff from the woman in Dneprotrevosk about the voodoo etc ?  She wanted out of Ukraine desperately and was willing to do ANYTHING to get out.  She wanted me to marry her even though we had never met IRL.. I asked her "what about love?" and she replied.. "Love is included in the deal".  In other words she will give up sex for a ticket out of Ukraine and what amounted to sponsorship for her and her daughter.  I am sure she would have bolted as soon as she got her GC and was probably capable of pulling the entire DV scenario as well.  When I rejected her proposal she became VERY VERY VERY hostile.. "you not a man, you weak little boy not know how to take a woman"

Some of the Russian language dating sites have a category for the ladies to specify what type of relationship they want.. love, freinds, sex, sponsorship.  It is a pity that agency sites dont offer the same designations as I believe it would eliminate a lot of train wrecks.

[Zhena]

Actually, I think you are completely wrong.  First of all, if she is indiferent about either man then what the heck is she doing getting married to either one?

Second, all things being equal she will marry the one she has Chemistry with.  If she chooses the one with money over the one she has chemistry with she is nothing more than a gold digging whore.

Heck,Sculpto,use your imagination!
Everything-EVERYTHING is equal,and a chemistry too,as the situation is THEORETHICAL! And a chemistry is the same in the both cases. And this is after the first date when the woman decides with whom to continue. I just showed this model situation to show,that money matters.

[goforit]

Goforit..

You make a good argument, but, you are missing a lot of the subtext in this thread relative to ongoing situations for other members of this forum that are being discussed in other threads.

One very respected member is currently going through a divorce that no one expected because his wife turned out to have unreasonable monetary expectations.  

In that context many of us are already sensitized to this particular issue because there have been plenty of other disasters documented on this board where money is at least a big part of the formation of problems.  Read some of the other threads to get a clue what I am talking about.

Thanks for the heads up Sculpto, but actually I came back to this board because I had read about two of the long standing members on here having marital issues. One of them gave my a warm welcome when I initially joined awhile back and even private messaged me which I greatly appreciated. I read through both threads in their entirety, and my heart goes out to both of them. And I am very family with a number of RW/AM relational disasters both on the various boards and personally in my own sphere.

Nothing in my posts discounts what is happening with that particular member (Scott), nor has anything I said taken away from the reality that some women are more than capable of doing things just for money, including marriage. In fact everyone in this thread has agreed that happens, as I have painstakingly tried to point out.

It is good to have new members who take an active role in the ongoing discussions, but, it seems to me you are more interested in the debate itself than the actual content of the debate and the meaning of that content to those of us seeking marriage, in the process of getting married, married, or getting divorced.

Actually it is exactly the opposite. It is the content of this debate I find problematic. It is one thing to be sensitized to an issue, its another thing to continue to mis-characterize someone's post because of that sensitivity.  

I am not an unreasonable guy and have at least a small ability to comprehend what people write, and, beginning with Zhena's commentary about money I have been disgusted and turned off.  Her opinions have raised light red flags about this entire process for me.  The other member who is going through a divorce where money is at the center of the problems has also raised flags for my situation.

This isn't a referendum on anyone's intelligence or reasoning ability, just that some folks are getting it wrong IMO, which reasonable people, including me, can certainly do.
  

The comments most of the male members are making in the context I described are not only relevant but far more valuable than the drivel of one spoiled married girl who apparently considers her marriage to be a business arrangement by which she gives "love" when she gets gifts from her pussywhipped husband.

Red flags I can understand, but otherwise I'm not going to go there with you. That sounds like a serious personal attack to me. I will simply stand by what I said in the context of the various posts. People can do with them as they wish.

[Sculpto]

Goforit,thank you so much for your clear head! Its like a sunshine after all I had to read here

Zhena, you don't HAVE to read anything.  You started the debate with your comments and too bad for you but your comments have a really rotten smell for a lot of us men.  But, honestly I have to thank you because you have given me a big awareness of what to be aware of and watch for.  I am pretty sure I already made sure I will not have a woman who will make such demands as you do on your poor husband, but, I will triple check my assumptions because of what you have said.  So, thanks.  

[Ade]

Joining late, but here are my 10 kopecks:

SJ, you and Misha were the ones endeavoring to imprint this label on RW, and were using a couple of the RW in this thread as examples.  

Actually no. My recollection is that at the starting stages of this epic thread men were trying to paint the majority of FSUW as being primarily focused on wealth (among other things) and then Zhena chipped in to say that was the way is was. Misha and I have been trying to say that no, it is not the case at all and the majority of FSUW aren't at all focused on wealth.