Online dating - do you look at income?

[Ladylouanne]

I know the title sounds shallow, but please bear with me! I'm equally interested in both male and female opinions on this.

I've recently registered for online dating having been single for several years. Over the last few years, I have worked hard, been promoted and have built some savings. Having had my fingers burnt in a previous relationship, I've always felt that anything I earn now is mine and my daughter's.

I'm very much of the view that I would never be with a man purely because he had money. However, I also feel that I shouldn't have to completely subsidise him and that we should each pay our way. To be clear - if he were better off, I would still insist on paying my share for nights out, holidays etc.

So, does income matter when getting to know someone? I'm at a stage in my life where my DD will soon be leaving home and I'd love to meet someone I could share experiences and travel with. However, if one persons old afford stuff the other couldn't is that likely to become a problem?

Sorry, I know this sounds materialistic, and I'm really not like that it. It's just that for many years I was married to a complete spendthrift and it caused me huge amounts of worry and stress.

Fritter: "waste time, money, or energy on trifling matters"

Investment: "the action or process of investing money for profit"

Commitment: "the state or quality of being dedicated to a cause, activity, etc."

Id definetely look at income. I don't do broke, and especially not for love. I don't care how worthy some may feel it is to do that. Id say love soon goes when you have to support a man financially...furthermore looking at a couple of friends Ive seen pick up a Mr Broke, Ive come to the conclusion that broke men don't go for broke women hence THEY are the ones who are materialistic.

Having said that, a man putting his income on a dating site would make me think hmmmm...is he trying to reel women in by showing off? Then again why shouldn't he show he is solvent? So I guess the answer to that aspect is, I don't know if its right or wrong

You appreciated male & female views, so: I'm a lesbian woman & I prefer a similar decent income bracket. It makes life easier, plans smoother, a future brighter & clearer, it's not mercenary.

I guess this is difficult really, no experiance of online dating at all but I don't think I would look at money really although it is different if you have kids and need to safeguard it for them. Also different as you get older I think. Currently I am the poor student sponging off a man, didn't intend to or start out that way but he wanted me to move in and there is no way I could afford the rent and he wouldn't take anything off me anyway, he pays for nearly everything at the moment and we are planning to marry now.

I'm male and find that a good percentage of women seem to view money as their number one (or close to number one) criteria in a partner. Of course they try to wrap it up in wholly unconvincing language such as "I don't want a lazy person", "someone with no drive/ambition/career" etc etc. It's pretty obvious in most cases though, that if a multi-millionaire came along with no ambition, no job, no drive, no whatever it is, they'd still be queuing up for him. I don't have a problem with it, I think that the man with most money is the modern day equivalent of the man who hunted the biggest animals hundreds of years ago. Money is security, many women just won't be honest about it.
As for me, if I were looking for a partner, I wouldn't care how much money she did or didn't have. If I wanted to be with her, we'd get along whether it meant living in a mansion or a terraced house, holidaying in the Maldives or Skegness. When I have been looking for a partner, I always make myself out to be less well off than I am in order to sift out the aforementioned, which usually works.

Sleepsoftly -

I wouldn't want 150k+ either as they'd probably want a SAH trophy wife to cook company dinners and do golf teas and I like being independent.
I want an equal, financially and intellectually.

Sorry but I disagree with Sleepsoftly's criticism of that.

I'm not a trophy wife and I want (have got) my equal. OK, he has a degree and earns more than I do. We are equal partners and have been since the beginning.

avoiretre - I get where you are coming from. A lot of blokes are sceptical if they think a woman just wants to have her lifestyle funded.

Although I hear plenty of tales of cocklodgers from women on this site.

I once heard someone remark that you need a minimum of thirty grand to raise children and that was 15 years ago.

I didn't realise blokes actually put their earnings on dating site profiles. Isn't that the financial equivalent of a female in a seductive low cut top and short skirt ? We have already established what she is, all we are negotiating is the price.

If a blokes social skills are so lacking that he has to promote himself by advertising his salary, that just about says it all to me.

Thirty grand a year minimum salary is what I meant. That was 15 years ago. It's not my intention to derail this thread though. Back on topic please.

Not income, no, but he needs to be working and self supporting, be working in a job he enjoys or working towards something he enjoys and not have mountains of debt
The last guy I dated had a boring job and no ambition, he stayed in the job because he got on with his colleagues and couldn't think of anything else he wanted to do. I thought that was boring and immature to be honest and it wasn't attractive to me.

I don't mind lack of ambition. Lots of people stay in their jobs because they like their colleagues and can't think of anything else they'd rather do (that they are capable of doing)
If a man is otherwise interesting and I enjoy being with him then the fact that he just saw his job as a way to earn money would be fine.
I'd prefer that to a work obsessed workaholic I rarely saw.
Sometimes men who are passive and unmotivated about their job can be the same about the rest of their life though and that would put me off.

I discovered that the more he earned the less he cared what I earned. Men who earned average or below average were looking for a partner who could supplement their income. Where as high income earners could solely focus on wife/mother material qualities.

That was what I was alluding to earlier. I see this as a disadvantage of a high income earner. They often want house keepers/ maids/ nannies rather than independent women.

It matters to me to a degree, I would want a man to be able to pay his way, I'm not bothered about mega bucks.
Job type dosnt bother me, as long as we could have an intelligent conversation, that's all that matters.
I wouldnt want a work shy layabout, nor would I want a corporate workaholic, both are equally unattractive to me.

I don't think having your own standards is wrong. I would be interested only in men who worked hard and could support themselves. I can't stand lazy arses or people who think the world owes them.

I'm not sure if men feel the same. Maybe some do and some don't just like some women will and some won't. I do know fellas who won't consider anyone with kids and that's their choice I suppose. Limits choice though!

It's pretty obvious in most cases though, that if a multi-millionaire came along with no ambition, no job, no drive, no whatever it is, they'd still be queuing up for him

I completely disagree with this. Can't imaging anything worse than being with man who has plenty of cash and not much about him.

I'm with you, Lady. Quite a dark view of women there - I'm not like that at all and neither are (most of) my friends. I want to work and be financially independent. And I think it's fair to expect that from a partner, unless there's a specific reason they can't.