Honest question for women. Would you get ever get into a relationship or get married to a trust fund baby who doesn’t need to work ?

[joseline]

Growing up we’ve always been told that a hard working man is what we should seek when getting into relationships. We should seek provider men. A man who doesn’t work is a man who doesn’t eat.

but what if you come across a guy and he happens to have it all. The looks and the wealth but doesn’t need to work hard for a living. What if a man doesn’t work hard but can provide for you and also buy you flashy gifts, take you on lavish trips, buy you whatever cars you want ? Would you take him or would the fact that he doesn’t work still bother you ?

I literally don’t think that I was ever told to look for a hard working man, or a provider. I was told to make sure I’m financially secure and did not need to rely on anybody, which is the case. So I’m not sure your experiences/assumptions about what women are looking for are correct.

He would need a passion/interest/hobby. A work substitute.
Otherwise what is there to talk about? Humans need something to do with meaning of they don’t do so well longterm.

I would get into a relationship and/or marry anyone that I had a proper connection with romantically regardless of wealth/need to work.

I don’t know if I would have such a connection with someone who lazed around spending money all day with no purpose just because he could, but maybe that’s a different question

Growing up we’ve always been told that a hard working man is what we should seek when getting into relationships. We should seek provider men. A man who doesn’t work is a man who doesn’t eat.

Did you time-travel from the mid-Victorian period or something? I'm in my 50s and didn't grow up being told any such thing.

As regards your question, it wouldn't be the deciding factor on whether or not I entered into a relationship with someone. It probably wouldn't work for me, because one of the things DH and I and most of our friends have in common is a real passion for what we do, but I suppose it's possible that your trust fund baby might use the fact that he doesn't need to work for a living to do things he's passionate about, like creative projects or working for the common good.

It depends what he did with his time. I retired at 25, so I don't work, but I do a lot with my time, I'd need him to also have something to talk about and things we can do together.

Never told that and I agree with this. What is he going to do all day?

I wasn’t taught to look for a provider.

i wasn’t taught any such thing.

i got into a relationship with someone I went to uni with and we both worked.

No-one ever told me that.

And yes, it would entirely depend on the person, if we enjoyed each other's company, and if our lives would work together.

I'm lucky enough to be in a position where I could retire if I wanted, but I have two secondary aged kids, so I've got responsibilities that would come first for example, so I couldn't just up and travel willy nilly for a fair few years yet (although that is the plan once the kids have flown the coop)

You start by assuming that "having it all" is looks and wealth. I never looked for either of those things.

I looked for hard working (min wage fine) because that indicates they will work hard at our marriage and pull their weight with the kids. I looked for someone community minded, because that indicates they are not selfish.

I would have actively avoided anyone who didn't think they needed to contribute to society, either in paid work or voluntary work. I would also have avoided anyone happy to sit on a pile of unearned wealth whilst others rely on food banks.

In theory, neither DH nor I ‘need’ to work. We do it because it’s what you do and we like it.

In this scenario, what does this man actually do all day? Just buy stuff and go on trips? No, I wouldn’t want to be with that person.

Growing up we’ve always been told that a hard working man is what we should seek when getting into relationships. We should seek provider men. A man who doesn’t work is a man who doesn’t eat.

I was never told this.

Being wealthy and not having to work wouldn’t stop me choosing a man as my partner. Other things would like lack of drive, laziness, bad attitude to money etc. I wouldn’t date someone who was poor though.

I would marry the Hugh Grant character in About a Boy. (Not Mr Grant himself of course because of his prostitute habit.)

Flashy gifts? Lavish trips?? Where do I sign? 😆

Honestly, it's not something I've ever thought about. It's about the person - do they have integrity, drive, kindness......I couldn't be with someone who just lounged around playing video games all day, but if someone was rich enough not to work but used his time well, and had the qualities I look for, then I wouldn't really care.

Although it would be a bit irritating heading off to the office early doors while your partner sips tea in bed, so his trust fund would have to support me not working too.....😉

I wasn't taught to look for a provider but bloody wish I did!
It wouldn't put me off him, surely if he has so much wealth he doesn't need to work then he'll be able to provide for you if that's what you're looking for however what I would worry more about is with that lifestyle, he'll likely have a very "throw away" attitude, like nothing is irreplaceable, including partners!

I was advised to look for a man who can 'look after you' - i.e. a provider. Told by my grandmother who was born in 1900! I think it was an archaic attitude even when I was a child. My young self would 'marry for love' but that's not a very sensible attitude as it was blind to all else. Didn't end well. It's better to be sensible about who you want to spend the rest of your days with. What sort of person is he? He would need to have some kind of work, so I don't think I'd be interested in someone who didn't.

Doesn’t need to work is different than doesn’t want to work. You can’t help the circumstances you were born into. My family is dysfunctional as hell. I’d have been sad if Dh didn’t want to marry me just because of who my parents are and what sort of family life I had. I wouldn’t want to be with someone who had no drive and ambition though. We all need money to live, sure, but having passion for something you dedicate your life to is important. I wouldn’t want to be with someone who just laid around on their yacht snorting coke all day.

That said, I know someone of a very ordinary background who married a guy with a trust fund and a title. He’s like the 9th generation Earl of whatever to live in his family’s grand home with 300 acres. They both do pretty low earning jobs. The estate was turned over to them maybe two years ago and they are now renting a very ordinary house and trying to Airbnb it because they can’t afford the heating bills and it’s all too much for them to manage a 10 bedroom castle. They are constantly stressed about money. Doesn’t sound particularly grand!

I'd be taking a look at myself and wondering how the hell I'd turned into some one who needs a man to provide. It's not the fucking dark ages you know.

OP, really weird question. A whole bunch of random assumptions in there. Why are you asking?

I was not taught to seek a man at all. HTH

I was alway told to have my own source of income and never rely on a man. My Mother was married four times and was widowed twice. When my lovely Dad died, who she divorced, she said I have outlived them all now as he was the last husband standing. She both adored and hated men in equal measure. She had very high expectations and got bored easily, no man could ever match her energy. She looked down on anyone who didn’t work, man or woman.

I wouldn't contemplate ever making myself dependent on someone else's money, however he came by it.

Me. No. I know someone who did marry someone like this and they both “work”, fair play to her.

I know another trust fund baby who I dated for a short while and he was incredibly spoiled, didn’t work for the family firm (did charity work) and when he told me he was homeless for a month in New York which was more to prove a point to his family as he was the black sheep (of course his parents rescued him and the family get on) that gave me the serious ick. He also ate far too much rich and sweet food and drank a bit and was a bit overweight then wondered how he developed type 2 diabetes.

Is he funny, kind, honest, faithful? Does he turn my knees to jelly? Would he be a great father? Are our values/politics/outlook on life similar? Does he have a purpose/hobby/reason to get up in the morning and achieve something? That’s all more important than the money.

Nope. Especially not at an age where I'm likely to be having kids etc. The divorce rate is too high for this gamble.
Next thing I know, he's claiming half of my little bit, or my kids are choosing to remain with dad, because life is 'rosier' over there.
No thanks.

"We" were always told....?

I don't think I was ever told to seek a man at all, rather given the tools to support myself.

A friend had a boyfriend with no need to work, for a while, and it was a very nice lifestyle, but she said he had nothing to talk about because he never did anything, but maybe he was just boring.

Hmm, it doesnt bother me so much that he doesnt have a job as long as he does something.

Eg if he doesn't have to work for money but is passionate about keeping himself fit, starting his own projects, is writing a book, has a musical hobby, volunteers, is investing his money in various projects, gets involved in charity stuff, basically has interests, drive and commitment to something other than work - thats absolutely fine and I have no issues with that.

On the other hand, if he gets up at 12 noon every day, spends every day gaming with his mates for 12 hours, rarely leave the house and ends up melding into the sofa, marinating in crisp dust and left over pizza cheese then fuck no, EWWWWW. No way.

I find laziness and a lack of motivation/drive/evolution as a person to be literally revolting and could never date someone who does that as a lifestyle.