In the other thread there was a lot of talk about financial support and how a woman needs this to feel secure. Also, there was some discussion about how this need isn't met until after marriage and how that related to sex after marriage.

I've been thinking about this, and from what I gather women find it attractive if a man has the ability to provide, but I'm not sure how that plays out in actual dating.

Can I get some feedback on the following questions?

What is a woman looking for in regards to financial support? House? Car? Expensive dinners?

How can a man determine how much fiscal support the woman is looking for? I agree that providing is important and I can offer a comfortable life, but I do want to avoid super materialistic women, or a woman with spending issues.

For the man what level of spending while dating is appropriate? Do women expect the man to pay for everything (not that it's an issue for me), but I've herd that it's not good to spoil a girl either.

Thanks,
ak

What a great question!

I suppose it depends upon the girl: her age, her socio-economic level, family of origin, etc. It might also have to do with her self-perceived "market value," i.e. if she feels she is physically attractive, she knows men value this and will 'pay' for it. (not in a prostitute-y way, but she can be pickier in the dating world)

So...I'm just one woman, and I only have one person's opinion, and it boils down to "attitude." Here goes:

1. I expect the man to pay, because he is asking to spend time with me.
2. I will offer to pay after a few weeks of dating, but I'm usually disappointed if he lets me, unless it's something really small, and doesn't open up the 'sugarmama floodgates!'
3. He doesn't have to spend oodles of money (in fact, I prefer not to feel 'beholden' to him). I truly appreciate his gentlemanly picking up the tab, even on the little things like coffee or ice cream, or a bottle of wine at one of our places. OH, and I try to order very considerately: I stay away from the expensive stuff on the menu and have only one drink all night. I don't want to waste his hard-earned money!
4. I will cook for him after a few dates. This is my way of giving back. Plus he can see my home - and decide whether he could 'keep' a woman like me (I have sort of a large, nice home. I don't brag - I got it for a song. But I am doing fairly well financially)
5. I will be watching for signs of financial responsiblity, and his attitude toward money: does he talk about money problems, or does he talk about investments? Where is he in his career? If he says he's not 'materialistic' is this just a way for him to be a cheapskate? Does he understand and appreciate the difference between what women value and what men value - or does he seem to have a chip on his shoulder about women 'wasting money?'
6. I am much more attracted to men who are financially well-off. That's just the way I'm wired, I guess. I admire them - unless they are total d-bag personalities! I am looking for a man who can afford to retire fairly young and have plenty of money saved up to travel and have fun. But, I'm 41 and that's sort of where I am in my life. Younger women might be grateful that the guy can afford to help buy diapers!
7. I will care for him. I am watching to see if he is capable of caring for me: emotionally and fiscally. I want a man who 'enjoys' caring for a woman, who gets a charge out of meeting her needs. I don't want someone who is going to be a reluctant giver: that wouldn't be fun for him or me!
8. If he makes even one joke about finding a woman to take care of him financially, I will run for the hills! I can't explain it, but this just repels me.

Well its all a matter of perspective.
If you marry an African tribeswoman she will be happy with a washing machine and a bathroom with indoor plumbing.
But if you want Ivana Trump she demands lots of money, millions.

Is suppose you want someone in between

Ak, this is an interesting question! My FS needs aren't huge, but I want someone who works steady in a field and a workplace that's going to support not tear down our home life. And who is a good steward of the resources he has. My fianc� was helping his mom out financially, and that was a big positive sign for me.

A high quality woman will not be looking for cars or dinners.

She sees life as an investment of her (finite) time and energy and will be looking for a relationship with the potential to make this worthwhile.

So a person who can provide a secure financial future in partnership with her.

And someone who is responsible with money. I agreed with NED's 'good steward'. I always tell my daughters to stay away from men with inherited money as they usually have no clue about how to create wealth. It also generally brings a strong sense of entitlement which causes independent behaviour.

I have a very high FS need - I fill it mostly myself, though, I'm not looking for someone to pay my way.

I want my guy to have a stable job (or at least the skills to have a stable job - I get that the economy and circumstances can play into it).

I want my guy to live beneath his means. Save something, don't over extend. I like that "good steward."

I want him to have enough to do fun things with. I don't look for weekends away - but dinner and a movie, yep. And I don't expect him to pay always. I've been dating the same guy over a year now and we pretty much alternate paying.

Just some thoughts on this:

In order for a man to retire fairly young and have plenty of money saved up you really only have a few possibilities:

1. The guy took a big risk and it paid off. Started a successful business. Invested a lot of money into high earning investments. Those types of things.

2. The guy got an extremely good job and was very smart with his money. Dr, high end sales, dentist, etc. Something more than a just a manager or engineer.

3. The guy inherited a business or a bit of money.

Now lets look the things that can diminish this wealth:

Divorce. Child support. Typically a successful man is the bread winner and ends up paying 30% or more of his income to his ex, and this is after giving her more than half.

I guess my point is to say that I view being well off and able to provide a comfortable life a log way short of retiring early with plenty of money, that very few careers can support that, that it's even more difficult to do while raising a family, and nearly impossible to do after a divorce.

So have you met anyone that you think can retire early and offer all of this? How did he achieve it?

Oh, and answer 8. What if they guy made a comment that you do well and he does well, and together you would do REALLY well? Not at all hinting at you supporting him, but hinting at how well of two career minded people would be.

Thanks for your thoughts
ak

It's hard to give a generalized answer because every woman is different. So I'll answer based on myself.

Financial "support" isn't as important to me as Financial independance and future planning. I don't expect to retire early, but I also don't want to work until the day I die.

In dating, I expect the man to pay on the first date but I do always offer to pay and for me, personally, it does not turn me off at all if he lets me. I always try to at least pay the tip, if we go to the movies I get the snacks and he the tickets, etc.

With the man I'm dating now, I'm looking for signs of his financial health. He lives well and doesn't seem frugal. He isn't careless either. We don't necessarily go "out" we do tend to stay in and cook or do things that aren't expensive. When we do have the money talk, I need him to not drowning in debt or at least have a plan in place to eliminate it. I come from a family who made the worst possible financial decisions and it affected me well into my 20s. I've worked very very hard to eliminate those credit cards I accumulated during college and I own my own condo and I carry very little debt. So I'm not looking for someone to carry me; I'm looking for someone with the same goals and who I can pair well with - like you said, live a great life, financially, TOGETHER.

I wanted to reply on this in the SF thread AK, but I didn't as the thread is branching too much already.

I think it is an outdated clich�e, men want sex while woman want financial support as an ultimate fulfilment of emotional needs/commitment. Here in Western Europe woman have been joining the active workforce since the 60ts and most single woman are perfectly capable of supporting themselves (including a morgage for a small house)
There is plenty of statistical evidence to support this.

Ofcourse FS plays a BIG part in the dating game, but most woman I dated are satisfied if a man can hold a job and own a property with a morgage� and is more than willing to pick up the tab.

Livy made an excellent remark though:


My personal situation is a bit off, as I own an IT-company and would actually endanger my family if I would make my wife a partner in my enterprise. If we would go bankrupt, we would be carying the debt together for the rest of our lives.
I would not have a pension for my old days either� and there is no such thing as 100% trust I've learned (the hard way)

To avoid this situation it is much better to have business finances seperate� while going all-in for PERSONAL finances.
In that way creditors/the state cannot touch the family resources to fill the bankrupcy debts� at least that is what i learned in business-school.

As for my PERSONAL finances I would be willing to share my capital entirely with my wife.
As a matter of fact I was saving personal finances in my previous relationship to allow us to "take it easy" for at least a couple of years" if the planned baby would be born. Yes, I would like to be able to spend time with my newborn too while it was not sleeping when i got home from a hard days work.

A planned life-long stay at home mom -by default- was never on the table though;
I have met exactly ONE woman in the West that has planned THAT future for herself�
�and I found that akward and a red flag.
But it is perfectly normal and acceptable in thirth world countries though�
Exactly the place where that date had been living the last descenium.

Maybe i should be prepared to support a woman and family for life from a single income.

But I know I will be unable to fulfill ALL my wife needs here in the west�

There are plenty of us long-term SAHMs in the 'first world', it's a personal choice and for some of us, it's actually part of our husband's needs. He doesn't want to worry about daycare, chores, cooking, laundry, hasn't lifted a finger to clean in 4 years and that's how he prefers it. We don't have a lot of money but we also don't have as much stress as my working friends.

I am the least materialistic woman I personally know. I have no desires other than a few clothes a year that I get from charity shops, good food which I like to grow myself(making it free) books (which I get cheap of amazon) and art materials.
Obviously a house but I live very simply.
I am currently studying to change career path as I am bored with what I do.
When I had my young children there was nothing more that I wanted to do than be a SAHM.
The part that riles me is that men really do want to try before they buy with sexual fulfillment but when it comes to offering that same thing financially before commitment they wouldnt dream of such.

I really have a hard time seeing this as a direct comparison. What if a man was really "willing" to earn a good salary. And promises to get a job once you are married. But until you are married, doesn't believe in having one.

Or are you talking more along the lines of a guy who has money, but after marriage refuses to share it with his wife? Now that I can see more of a direct comparison to. Still not the same thing, but I can see it.

I'm talking about men who want to have sex with women to see if they can meet their need for sexual fulfillment before they are committed to her but would never dream of offering the woman financial support until fully committed.
It just seems like total double standards, but I am new to this so any other long-termers who understand this way more than me I am more than open to being corrected,

Fight the Fight, I think Livy is talking about that the cultural standard that women are expected to "pony up" so to speak but the man is not expected to provide financially before the wedding. Livy, hang in there hon, there are lots of men out there who have only been with very few women and would be very relieved to find someone without a partner list a mile long.

I don't think you are wrong to feel that way at all. I totally see your point.

I think IG's point in the other thread was that there are a lot of women out there who will fake the desire for sex because they think that's what the men they are dating really want. After marriage (or earlier), the truth is revealed because it's an impossible charade to keep going indefinitely.

I wonder if that doesn't happen with FS as well? Guys who put up a front of being well off only to find out later they were financing it all on their maxed out credit cards. they did this of course for the same reasons. That's what they thought the woman wanted.

I'm just not convinced that is a double standard.

FS is not an intimate emotional need. All EN's are not created equal.

According to Dr H, there are only four emotional needs that typically create romantic love. Without those four, you don't have a romantic relationship for most people.

They are:

1. IC
2. RC
3. AF
4. SF

Two of those (IC and AF) are generally at the top of the list for most women.

The other two (SF and RC) are generally at the top of the list for most men.

See where I am going with this? Comparing FS to SF is not even the same thing as far as I am concerned. It's like saying there is a double standard because women expect men to pony up the affection without her doing his laundry (DS).

I'm sure it does happen the other way round too FTF.
NED - sometimes I wonder if I am ever going to met a guy that truly gets where I am coming from

Does AF stand for affection?

That's what I meant it to be.

I would really love to hear what other people who understand these principles have to say on this matter as it is something that has always riled me.

If there is no connection between the two then why do so many men exchange money for sex?

I don't know the answers I am just wanting to understand this.