One thing I like about the dating site I am on is that when doing a search for your matches you can specify what level of income you would like them to have. This may sound shallow to most, but after living in LA for four years and realizing you must have a small fortune in order to own even a mediocre house in the valley, it is an important consideration to some. Like me.
My experiences with Muscles and Millionaire, and my past relationships, have caused me to notice a certain trend among the “haves” and the “have nots” that I have dated. Typically, the guys who are well off are held to less stringent physical attraction standards than those who are renting crappy Hollywood apartments and living paycheck to paycheck like me. The question I’m asking myself now is: is that a bad thing?
Relationship studies show that among the top five things couples fight about are, you guessed it, money and sex. What is more important to the success of my own long term personal relationships: a feeling of security and financial stability, or a red hot sex life?
Having dated both rich and poor men, I have learned a few things about myself that, to some, may not seem romantic or embodying the true meaning of love.
Money, to me, is more important than sex. There. I said it. Let the judging begin.
This is not an easy thing to admit and it’s something within myself that I have fought against vehemently. But this dating experience, and this blog, are forcing me to think about issues that aren’t the most Harlequin romance novel friendly.
Sex with Millionaire is good, don’t get me wrong, but do I have those “oh-my-god-I-want-to-rip-his-clothes-off” feelings towards him? Nope. I’m attracted to him, yes, and I could never be with a guy I was repulsed at the thought of touching, no matter how many zeros are in his bank account. But could I be with a guy who’s bank account came dangerously close to zero any time a financial emergency happened (a dog gets sick, a car needs a major repair, etc)? Nope.
While I am very much a “I am woman, hear me roar” type, I am also ok with the old fashioned notion of the man as the provider. Am I willing to sit at home making sure I have dinner on the table at six and hand him his Manhattan when he walks in the door, forsaking all interests of my own? Hell to the no. Do I feel more secure and protected in a relationship with a man who’s wealthy? Absolutely. I am not supposed to admit this because it supposedly sets the feminism movement back 20 years.
Also, when I think of the reality of sexual chemistry, I just don’t see it as sustainable long term. After 20 years with a person, sex is going to become a bit routine. Yes, there are ways to spice it up, and there is a comfort in that routine-ness that only comes with being with the same person day in and day out. But when you’ve lost your job and the mortgage is due, that chemistry is going to get put on the (Bunsen) back burner real quick.
Does this make me uncomfortable to think about? Sure, because I don’t want people to be “sayin’ I’m a gold digger.” I still have standards and wouldn’t ever want to be with someone as crazy as Glenn Beck or Bill O’Reilly simply because he’s got millions. But, in the long run, I think that a key to success in my long term relationship/marriage, will be in the form of financial security and not just sexual satisfaction. I am not sitting there passing the time until I find a man who can take care of me, but I also don’t have grandiose ideas that my current job is going to allow me to buy a house and live the comfortable life I look forward to living. Is hot sex going to be able to take the place of a roof over my head with someone I love hanging out with but don’t feel the need to throw on the kitchen floor and have my way with him? For me, the answer is no.
Et tu, Brutus?
Somewhere there is the most beautiful woman in the world….and a man who’s tired of sleeping with her,
LL
No comments:
Post a Comment