Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Choosing money

34 replies

RealHousewifeUK · 17/05/2020 00:31

Ok so a very controversial post. .

Have any of you entered into a relationship for the added benefit of financial security or lifestyle that your partner or spouse could bring?

Have you ever maybe forfeited some of your wants or ignored some things you dont like for that security or lifestyle?

If yes, did it all work out in happiness or quite the opposite?

(Im new here and created an account to ask this hence the unoriginal username)

OP posts:
pixiecircles · 17/05/2020 00:35

I know someone who did. They regretted it.

chandlermbing · 17/05/2020 00:54

I have choose financial stability for the last 6 years OP.

My DH is the breadwinner, I chose to take a career break and stay at home with DS until he started school. I am now back working full time.

Mortgage in DH name and he pays all the bills. Seeing DS every day and financial stability have been my two main reasons for staying. There is nothing romantic about our relationship.

Over lockdown I have realised that happiness is first and foremost and I do not want my DS basing his future relationships on ours as it's the opposite of what one should be. I am now securing rented accommodation for me and DS and will move out in the next few weeks.

ViciousJackdaw · 17/05/2020 01:08

Good god, no. You may as well become a prostitute. You still have to have sex for the money but you don't have to wash their skiddy pants or make their dinner. Marry for love and earn your own money.

arrowhearts · 17/05/2020 01:22

Yup big mistake!

I left and would never sacrifice true love and connection for money again. He was a good man, treated me well but you truly can’t buy happiness.

Yankathebear · 17/05/2020 05:51

No because I can look after myself financially.
I’m not looking for a bank.

SimonJT · 17/05/2020 07:15

No, if I did I would be barely better than a rent boy.

dontdisturbmenow · 17/05/2020 07:29

It's not black or white and depends on many factors. I think many couples stay together and do find contentment if not happiness despite not being in love any longer and their live being based more on companionship than romance.

What is wrong is starting a relationship based only on security and love isn't there. It's also wrong to stay if one genuinely despises the other but stay anyway as it's almost inevitable that some sort of abuse will take place. You can't remain nice and pleasant to someone you despise and resent.

Your question is about entering in such a,relationship though, so no, definitely not, it's pure manipulation.

PaterPower · 17/05/2020 07:33

And people wonder why wealthy men end up distrusting women.

LadyMuck111 · 17/05/2020 07:53

OP are you a journo? Your wording sounds like one??

Shuttup · 17/05/2020 07:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LadyMuck111 · 17/05/2020 07:58

@Shuttup it's someone from the daily fail looking for a non story

venusandmars · 17/05/2020 07:59

Well, not quite that, but many years ago I was head-over-heels in love. We were together for about 18months but although he earned a good salary (well paid doctor) he was a nightmare with money. So much else about the relationship was great - communication, humour, leisure, hobbies, work, intellect, but I knew that I could not live with someone who had different values about saving / spending / debt.

My dh and I did not have the thunder-bolt falling in love thing. But we are on the same page, stable, equal, best of friends. It's good and I don't regret any of it.

It's not 'marrying for money' but many financial stability can be important and many relationships have a compromise in them somewhere.

RingaRosie · 17/05/2020 08:04

No. I had a few chances of marriage before my DH. Super guys with great jobs, nice house, car etc... DH is not that guy, and we’ve lived through hard times. But I love him.

sofato5miles · 17/05/2020 08:27

There are so many variables in one's relationship market value. And some are generic and some are personal. Definitely money, height, looks come into it. We know that from sociology and biology.

When i was younger, a professional man, who was comfortable in my social setting and would be able to support us during creating a family was important. As were other factors such as attractiveness and sense of humour. Our marriage failed after 15 years as we failed in other areas; namely communication and the different emotional needs.

I now do not need a man to be financially secure as I am. But i do need a warm, physically affectionate man and that is what i am prioritising when looking for a furture partner.

Babdoc · 17/05/2020 08:38

As a PP has pointed out, this is effectively prostitution. You are selling sexual services for money, to someone you do not love.
Why would anyone choose such a sordid arrangement over a genuine loving marriage? What price is worth the loss of your self respect and happiness?
I imagine most women would end up regretting such an arrangement. And once the man realises he is being used, he may well dump his gold digging partner for someone genuine.

PicsInRed · 17/05/2020 08:52

Stop calling other women "prostitutes" for doing what the patriarchal system funnels then towards. It's insulting to women and using this as an insult is also extremely disrespectful the women who find themselves needing to engage in actual prostitution.

Funnily enough, you never see wealthy men chasing younger women called "Johns".

SimonJT · 17/05/2020 08:55

Men who use prostitutes are often referred to as ‘Sugars’ as in sugardaddies. So it is recognised that the set ups are similar.

PicsInRed · 17/05/2020 09:05

In all scenarios the contempt is directed at women, which is disgraceful, given the balance of power and exploitation is firmly with the men.

Don't use another's womans circumstances as an insult for women who make choices different to yours.

It's even worse and more callous than using "homeless" or "bum" as an insult then having a jolly laugh at the top insult you've levelled.

Zenithbear · 17/05/2020 09:15

No. I've always paid my way and I have more money than I need.
Apart from appearance I'm attracted to my dp's loyalty, kindness and wit.
Having said that someone who was reckless with money or in lots of debt or a freeloader wouldn't be for me.

Shuttup · 17/05/2020 09:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RantyAnty · 17/05/2020 09:20

No, drug addicted work shy cocklodgers are the best.

MrsGrindah · 17/05/2020 09:25

@PicsInRed I don’t think people were hurling insults. They were saying it’s comparable..ie a transaction where sex is involved for the exchange of money.

PicsInRed · 17/05/2020 09:48

MrsGrindah

If it was meant as a neutral comment, then there would be no need for the OP to avoid it as a "profession" would there? But she was told that she would be the equivalent of a prostitute and that was why she shouldn't do it.

A significant proportion of marriages worldwide are based on sex/reproduction in exchange for financial protection. This is due to patriarchy. We really don't want to wander down the road of calling the women of such unions "prostitutes".

LadyMuck111 · 17/05/2020 09:49

@Shuttup haha 😂 not subtle at all

sofato5miles · 17/05/2020 10:23

PicsInRed i completely agree with you