I'm taking about $200,000+ per year.
Some believe that this epidemic of men - more specifically, wealthy men - not getting married is due in large part to the "securitization" of the sexual process. They don't need to invest 100% of himself just to compromise purchasing some package deal. They can bifurcate the entire sexual process and carve out exactly what parts they want.
For example, they don't need to actually have sex with a woman in order to have access to her genetics, if her genetics is the only thing he's interested in. So, he can just pay $20,000 a bam! link Done.
For example, they don't need to get married or even date or have sex with a woman in order to use her as a surrogate for his child. All he needs is someone that has the same blood-type and is medically healthy enough to be a surrogate. Hire a nice woman from India, drop $30,000, and bam! Done.
For example, they don't need to get married, date, or get to know the person to have sex. Drop $200 - $3,500 depending on the uniqueness of his preferences and level of discretion that's important to him, and bam! Done.
For example, they don't even need to have sex if all they want to do is just get off. P*rn. Bam! Done.
And this goes on and on.
I'm just thinking, as guys just keep practically securitizing components of the sexual process, is that a good thing or bad thing for dating and male/female relationships as a whole?
On one hand, I think it chips away any leverage an individual woman has. Not wanting to be a mother or have children, or have sex? It doesn't pack any threat value anymore. The negotiating or bargaining power is gone. From a woman's POV, it's a bit unfair. It's not like women can bifurcate a man's financial resources from the rest of the man without needing to be in a relationship with him or have sex with him. Plus, if wealthy guys can get what they want and avoid any need to negotiate or bargain in order to get it, then what chance do women have in landing a wealthy guy?
On the other hand, there's the capitalist or free enterprise argument that natural selection and survival of the fittest is harshly fair. When those with controlling preferences have the power to control demand, only the supply that caters to their preferences will survive. But, that, to me at least, seems like a race to the bottom rather than a race to the top. Yes, we get superior genetics, and available fertile surrogates, and freely open and sexually honest people, but at what cost?
Thoughts & feelings on wealthy men bifurcating the sexual process?
I'm taking about $200,000+ per year.
What Girls Said 1
I don't think anyone should have to have sex or get married or date, to have a kid, Man, or Woman. Wealthy or poor.
I never thought of marriage or pregnancy or relationship as leverage. I don't think of myself as trying to trick someone into needing me. A person wants to be with me or they dont. and we don't have to be in a relationship to be together.
women have been getting sperm forever because they don't want to be married. why shouldn't men. I don't care and they have a right to.
it is not a threat to me, that men can find ways of getting w/e they want without being in a full relationship. I did not grow up assuming everyone wanted a relationship. I assumed more often than not they only did it because of feelings of obligation or illusion, and most are unhappy.
furthermore I wouldn't feel I was missing out on a person who would rather take pieces of relationships from different sources than be in areal relationship.
relationships have enough disadvantages.i wouldn't want to be with someone who doesn't even like real people. .. lolol what a catch. not.
i think its healthy to get what you need from different sources unless or until you actually find it in one place. nothing wrong with it.
ohh sorry. I just realized your question is geared towards women going after money. well id never do that,so my input is negligible.0
What Guys Said 1
A wealthy man picks the woman he wants, with her being willing and up to par. If she's not, he can simply move on to one that will because he's not likely to have a shortage. Women see the money and power, and either become attracted to him because of that or they hope to get a piece of it (however big or small they can get). The man recognizes this urge in some women and works that to his advantage. Though "work" sometimes is too strong a word, since often enough he can just let things play naturally.
A single and powerful man is not very likely to want one woman and a family, since he has probably got a taste of what he can do with himself. I think this whole theory of yours has been a bit over-complicated. "Normal" guy wants sex- has to display to a woman why she should choose him. Wealthy man wants sex- woman have to show him why he should choose her because he can easily afford to go without any woman in particular.0
- Show AllShow Less
Select as Most Helpful Opinion?
You cannot undo this action. The opinion owner is going to be notified and earn 7 XPER points.