Why is it socially unacceptable for a woman to be with a man for his money but not for a man to be with a woman for her looks/body?

Question

Date, sleep with, marry... Why do you think this is okay in our society? Or do you even agree that this is a socially acceptable norm of our society? Here’s the Tweet I found today that inspired the question.

BluesheepOwl · Accepted Answer

It is never ok for a guy to use a woman for her body or he only wants her for her looks. Those type of guys are usually seen as the asshole fuckboys or wannabe players. The mature ones who want to get married usually want a girl they really get along with and who they see themselves married to. Definitely looks are still a factor for these mature men who want to get married. However, women also care about looks too. So it's like being a hypocrite. You don't want guys to put importance on looks however most women put importance in looks too.

I understand what you are pointing out. The double standard where it's ok for guys to use women and it's not okay for women to use men basically. Although, it was never ok. It was never socially ok for guys to treat women like trash. It was ok for them to sleep around however, they don't need to treat women like objects. That's just them choosing to be a piece of shit. Doesn't make it right.

If a guy treated a woman with respect and let her know he only wants sex and the woman agrees and there is that mutual understanding and respect between each other. And he treats every female with that respect then he wouldn't be perceived as a bad guy. As soon as he objectifies women then it does become sexist and messed up.

I also think there is a line to be drawn when it comes to shallowness and just wanting a better life for both partners. When it comes to a woman caring about money. If she only wants the guys money to herself and she plans on spending all of his money and doesn't contribute at all just basicslly uses him. That's messed up and she's definitely a gold digging bitch.

On the other hand, I think if she cares about her future husband having a good job while also she's working too and wants to have a comfortable life. Like her paycheck contributes and his paycheck contributes and they share a bank account together and it's mutual. To me that's ok. No one is using no one. They are working together.

Of course there's still that difference a woman can choose to work or not but a guy always has to work. That double standard. But in today's day in age most women want to work and help out with the bills. And I feel like maybe some women would want a guy who has a stable job and not someone who is fired all the time or quits all the time, he is always out of a job. I feel like that may be the same for men too. If they want their women to work, they wouldn't really care for her if she can't keep a job. But depends on the man or woman. So this is my opinion about it all. Hope it answers it.

Ellie-V · Accepted Answer

It’s not socially acceptable. That’s why people call them out as gold diggers and leeches and their parents end up disowning them.
But there are always going to be people who reject all of that and praise whatever the individual decides to do whether it’s seen as good or bad. Besides that, our history shows that we have not completely moved on from the idea that women should and need to be sold off to the highest bidder for protection and resources.
No, it’s not okay but humans are VERY slow and mentally limited, more so than we like to acknowledge.

weegin · Accepted Answer

I mean... this seems pretty clear cut to me.

Your looks are a part of you and your identity. Your looks are not a resource, they are not expendable, and they are not something just anybody can get through inheritance, thievery, or underhanded means.

Because of this, a person can be with a rich partner, acquire a bunch of their money, and then leave and still have that money. A person cannot be with a good-looking partner, somehow 'acquire' a bunch of their good looks, and then leave and still somehow 'have' those good looks.

Also, might I add that this is not a double standard, as this is a poorly worded question. It is socially acceptable for men AND women to be with a partner for their looks. It is socially unacceptable for men AND women to be with a partner for their money. It's just that men, traditionally being the providers for the woman and children, often have more money, so women are more often motivated to be with men for their money.

I'm not saying it's right for a man OR woman to be with their partner purely based on looks. But I believe it is more morally justified than a man OR woman being with their partner purely based on money.

ChurchOfIron · Accepted Answer

Same reason women say it's better to like someone for their personality than just their looks.

Money is external. It's not even a part of the man. It may suggest he has desireable characteristics, but it doesn't mean that necessarily. And, as phrased, "marrying FOR money, not FOR desireable characteristics which incidentally generate money."

The money is not him. She loves the money, not him.

The difference? A woman is certainly more than her looks, but her looks are still *a part of her*, even if they may be more external than personality.

Money. That is not part of a man, at all. It is even more external than only desiring appearance.

That said, it's not illegal. You can do whatever you want to do that doesn't hurt anyone else.

But, you're always going to have to deal with social judgement based on your behavior. Societal judgement is the basis upon which we establish proper behavior and improper behavior.

That said, I'm pretty sure most people look down on a man who goes for women based only on their appearance, do you disagree?

StingRayxoxo · Answer

I think that neither of those things are ok. But if they're both choosing each other, that's on them.

Logorithim · Answer

Depends on your social circle. If it consists of highly educated people they will definitely look down on that unless she is smart

OlderAndWiser · Answer

Why must social standards follow logic and reason?

Price511 · Answer

To be honest, I find both ideas shallow. Marrying somebody for their money and ONLY their money... That's fucked up. That's moreso a parasitic relationship if the woman abuses it. If it isn't really love, then it's a waste of time to get married.

What if they lose it all? What if you drain them of their money? What if they find somebody who is better overall who isn't there just for the money? What if they find out? So many what ifs are present that it makes it questionable.

And to be with a woman only for their body? Even those with basic knowledge about aging knows that external beauty doesn't last forever. I mean, the body is part of the attraction process, yes, but if it's only for the body, then it probably won't last.

I'm moreso inclined for a requited love based relationship. Love each other? Good. Love each other for who they are, not their property or their looks? Great! Now go fuck each other or get married.

(Seriously though, just have some morality. Have that and I think you'll be fine.)

Lliam · Answer

Because it used to be the social norm For centuries, women were dependent on men for financial security, whether as a wife or a mistress. Only a few, short decades ago, that began to change very slowly. But old attitudes still persist and I doubt i they will completely disappear. It's so baked into our psyches that the majority of both men and women still hold the traditional attitudes. After all, if women are smaller, weaker and, therefore, seen as dependent on men, what does a man look like when he is dependent on a woman for financial support? Society would see him as sub-male - a weakling, a laggard, a loser, a fop, a slacker, a parasite, a gold digger, a gigolo, an exploiter...

All that would discount the possibility that he might be a narcissist or a smart sociopath who is out to get rich without working.

I'm not saying that this is what I would necessarily think. Hell, it might just be a means to upward mobility. Maybe the two actually love each other. I don't know. I'm just saying how it might be perceived by the broader society.

SkyRez · Answer

I don't want to be with an ugly gal. Simple as that.

I don't want to paint my house an ugly green yellow for the same reason, I have to look at that shit every day.

And frankly, I'm willing to pay for it lol. I'd welcome a girl marrying for money, long as she's easy on the eyes and good in the kitchen. That's sounds disrespectful, but my point stands.

More to the question though. Men pay a hell of a lot of attention to fine details in a womans looks. It is a fine toothed comb looking for imperfections. You'll say "nah I don't do that" subconsciously, you do. It is an important aspect for a man.

You are tripping me up with the question. The vibe I get is that the above reasoning is completely sexist and I should be on a stake for judging if I'd want to be with a girl by her looks. You are saying that is okay. Which I of course agree with, it is okay. If a girl looks at me and says I'm ugly, she ain't gonna date me. Simple as that.

As for the money thing, I think because it is taboo and sexist to view the man as the provider and protector, and the women a nurturer and healer. It is being ground into our brains by the progressive media that we do not need gender roles. Women are heavenly discouraged, and told, and believe they don't need a man to support them.

I'm tired, and tend to rant at midnight

johnny_hustle · Answer

First things first, it is not socially acceptable for a man to be with a woman just for her looks. Anytime a man is with a woman just for her looks, nothing else, it is seen in an extreme negative light. A guy may hook up with a woman just for her looks just like women may hook up with a man just for his looks. So, that's pretty even stevens, but to be in a relationship with a woman just for her looks (trophy wife) that is frowned upon greatly. The trophy wife is typically okay with this because she's just with him for his money. So, frowned upon again, but at least it evens itself out.

Also, a womans looks may play a big factor in him courting the woman but that just gets him into the door, it doesn't keep him there. Likewise, how a man looks is just as important to women in general as it is to men finding womens looks important. That doesn't mean it's the most important but it does play a factor. You have to be physically attracted to your partner in some way, shape, or form otherwise it's just a friendship. I girl may get my attraction emotionally, but if I'm not physically attracted as well, then I'll see her as a friend. Granted the more emotionally attracted you are to someone the more attractive their physical appearance is. Whether or not it's enough to break it pass the platonic stage is another story.

So, women will date men because of their looks and men will date women because of their looks. (not saying only their looks but it always plays a factor). But the difference in your question is (of course we are speaking in general terms) women will use a mans income as a factor in whether or not to date a guy but men will not use a womans income as a factor in whether or not he will date her. Are there outliers? of course, but generally speaking that is the difference to your question.

Guanfei · Answer

Because look is always a part of love life. You can talk about personality all you want, but if you're not at least a bit attracted to someone physically, you'll probably not even consider dating.
Also, the guys who go after women for their looks do it to have sex with them. And they're clear about it. So there is no cheating here.
Then, you can realize than even if you go for a woman for her look, you can still have a normal life, with someone you like.

When you go after a guy for money, you can't straight up tell him, because he would reject you. So the "relationship" is basically based on you using him and his money, mostly by lying to him about what you feel for him, creating a fake relationship you'll end as soon as you got all his money. It's nothing but a scam.

And finally, men who go after women for money are also not really praised, on the contrary. And why didn't you compare men who goes after a woman for her look with women who do the same?
Because it exists and it's not rare.

Draxxi · Answer

It's not sexism, it's not gold digging, it's not any of these petty reasons. It all boils down to biological nature.

I know that a small but vocal community of my dear liberal party are doing all they can to erase biological imprinting and bias, but these things have been hard coded into our DNA since Lucy birthed us all. Biologically, meaning on a baser level of instinct, men try to select a mate that can carry on his seed, his name, and his bloodline. Also biologically, women seek a "protector" and "provider" who has the capacity to ensure her offspring are taken care of, and that she has the resources to be able to take care of them. Now, are every man and every woman like this? To some degree, yes--hard coded, once again. Can you strive to not be like this if that's what you so choose? Yes, by denying your human instincts.

I'm not going to speak to the moral implications, because morals are wholly subjective. Whereas you might MORALLY see it wrong to base choosing a partner based on looks, I personally couldn't be with someone that I'm not physically attracted to. Physical attraction also varies from person to person. There are some men who are very attracted to larger women, and that's awesome for them and their bbws. Then there are men who like a good body, but unique or different facial characteristics such as myself. There are all types in this world, and trying to force everyone into the model of what you think is right would make this a very boring place.

Face it. There will never be a time on this planet, for as long as it goes on before the inevitable nuclear winter, that everyone will judge everyone SOLELY on personality. If anything, we are getting further from that with outage culture.

devilish-cutie · Answer

People are hypocrites. Its all about demand and supply.
Lets not forget that just for the past like 100 years women can actually work and earn their money without being treated like property and their worth determined by their looks. Its all the ruins of mens world. Getting a ritch husband trought history was a achivement and men wanted a pretty wife. Things are different now, women can work, but things dont change over night. Women are still underestimated and not as respected at work as men and in a lot of cases underpaied or discriminated to the fact that they will have to be away cause they might have a baby.

ManOnFire · Answer

Wait a minute, wait a minute. It's actually the other way around. People will defend and support a woman being with a man for "financial stability" - and you'll even have those ridiculous evolutionists and science nuts explaining it as "biology" - while we label men as being "shallow" for being with a woman for her looks.

I don't think this question is correct.

Skelmir_Nathair · Answer

Because society is absolute hypocrisy. People dont really take the time to think. They just react as programmed, by society.
There is no need to think more, so long as what you do is acceptable to others, right?

Lol
Still, if you take the time to really dig and think about it. You start to realize just how prolific hypocrisy is in our society. How there is no reason behind most of our social behaviors, its just how we've been programmed.

No there really is no difference.. If anything, women marrying for money is a far more sensible thing to do than for a man to marry for looks.
Reason being, looks are guranteed to fade. Money can to, but its not a guarantee.

So here's another one along the same lines...
Do you feel its wrong for a man to marry for money?

Syrian_survivor · Answer

It's fine for men to marry only for looks? Who said it was fine? I never heard of that "issue" before tbh, men are more and more avoiding marriage and wouldn't get themselves so deep in that shit if they aren't sure about what they're doing.

Either way it would lead to an unhappy marriage, following hormones and doing something as big as marriage because of them is like the worst thing somebody can do to themselves and their partner, so they'd have to deal with the consequences and Karma will do its work.

But how would the girl not see through it? It would be pretty damn obvious if the guy wanted to MARRY her just for her looks, their shallow approach and standards should be pretty clear to see.

BoobMan · Answer

Yeah--what she's doing there is taking the half of the opinions of two separate groups of people, putting them together and pretending that that's what "everyone" thinks. I'd suggest to you that the vast, VAST majority of people who find it unacceptable for a woman to marry for money or a visa ALSO find it unacceptable for a man to marry solely for looks. I'd also suggest that the vast majority of people who find it okay for a man to marry for looks would have no problem with a girl marrying for money or a visa. She's concocting a bullshit strawman argument and pretending that "society" thinks that way.

MackToday · Answer

God what an idiotic false equivalency. Is this woman in an asylum? Is she retarded? Why in the hell are there people so damned dumb around that someone has to explain something like this? Maybe human kind doesn't have any predators to clean it's gene pool is the problem. In the wild members of a heard this damned dumb would have been picked off by lions or something. Fuck me some times it feels hard to breathe the frustration of the shear dead weight of stupid pressing down on me. Holy shit. This ass hole is actually comparing marrying someone for physical attraction vs something that isn't even sexual at all. A gross basic street whore that isn't even in to a man in the most shallow sense, somehow compares to a shallow guy who's hung up on a woman for her looks. And she can't fucking make the distinction! Look at her god damned post! She's actually that shit for brains stupid.

demonics · Answer

I see nothing wrong with either, its literally how our society works. Mia is just bitter that men have held her to a standard.

Men exchange resources for access to the vajj *read reproduction. Mens desire for the vajj is based on fertility indicators *read being pretty and in shape. Women are genetically programmed to seek out men who exhibit resource gathering potential and who seemingly have the ability to protect them. Think men in uniform cliche. Muscles, abs, tall, big house, nice car, well dressed etc.

HumansExist · Answer

Excellent question... but uh, generally speaking, there's the association that females enter a relationship due to the partners resources and that males will enter a relationship due to the females looks... it comes under the "human reproductive behaviour" theory in psychology -it's pretty old but yeah... it comes under a more evolutionary perspective than the other theories about relationships.
So while it's not viewed very highly socially (back in Victorian times it was acceptable) it's likely due to the fact that in modern day society women have the ability to get a job and make their own money therefore they shouldn't require a partner to have money.
Choosing a partner based on money would go under the attraction to status.
While choosing a partner for looks would go under the attraction to health.
As it would go, a healthy person would be more likely to be fertile the same can't really be said for someone who is rich.
So there's that too.

Nice_Guy_Last · Answer

Not necessarily a justification, but money is not a part of a person. It is something you can take away, and something you can have without said person. You can’t have someone’s looks. You can maul them and ruin their looks, but it’s not something you can steal for yourself.

That said, both are shallow reasons for dating. We define a person by their conscious. If love is the goal of dating, and most would say it is, you won’t find it in their body or their money.

That being said, if you are just going out for fun, you don’t really need a reason so long as you have fun and nobody gets hurt.

Lelee · Answer

I never thought it was okay for a woman to marry for money. I DID think it was okay for me to require a certain level of independance and self sufficiency in my partner so we can build on what we both contribute. I always planned on working though. If my partner preferred that I didn't, work then it would be a standard that my husband make enough to support the both of us so that I have no problems managing the household and raising the children comfortably (although I still would always prefer to be working rather than being a stay at home mom). But I never directly assumed that ut was okay to marry a guy for his money. And the reason its not really acceptable for a man to marry for looks is because looks fade. While requiring financial security can be a good foundation for a marriage, looks are NOT a good foundation. Looks will gradually degenerate in both partners and the marriage will become invalid the moment the man is no longer attracted to the woman. Thats why

Juxtapose · Answer

Because being liked for your looks is still flattering, it's still being liked for a part of you that is very important for relationships. Would a woman date someone who looked awful either? Don't pretend it's just guys!

Meanwhile, liking someone's wealth has nothing to do with them, it's even more shallow than looks. A lot of women wait for their rich partnerto *DIE* (or plot a divorce in advance) so they can steal his resources. That isn't anything about the man, not even his physical being. It's just GREED!

The physical aspect is very important for relationships. A man won't care about how much you make as long as he doesn't have to financially support you. Horny guys who only want to fuck are way less shallow than gold diggers.

CottenBrick · Answer

In general, our society has created a situation where guys feel the need to go searching for love/sex whilst the girls get to choose.

This is common amongst many animals as Well that's why male birds are the ones with bright colours whilst the females are often brown/dull.

So when a guy sleeps with physically attractive girls it's considered an achievement that not many guys are able to do.

Many girls always have the option to sleep with someone for their money and it's considered an easy/lazy/shallow option.

Swiftkill79 · Answer

A woman's body is something she is born with , it's a natural gift that only lucky people get. It's apart of her natural self

Whereas money is something that is earned through hardwork and dedication to a career.

Besides in this modern society women are capable of getting job and earning money and yet they still take the lazy route and marry a rich guy

You have to admit that some things that women do are worse than what men do such as cheating , body shaming , and having materialistic attraction ( that is money )

JJ-afamilycompany · Answer

1. First off, with all due respect, who determined it was wrong?

Here is a graph of my thoughts on this.

Good looking women -------> Higher percentage finding wealthy man
(Handsome or not)

Average looking woman ----> Lower percentage finding wealthy man
(Most likely average looking or less)
*A wealthy man can live being wealthy and having a average wife but no wife is better than being rich with an ugly bitch

Wealthy handsome man------> Most likely to date good looking
woman
*Good looking woman higher chance of finding wealthy man

Wealthy average looking man ----> Most likely to date average
looking or good looking woman

Ps if you're offended you're prolly an ugly bitch

hellionthesagereborn · Answer

Wow women are bat shit crazy. It is wrong, we here it all the time, he is a player a fuckboy he is shallow etc. etc. etc. We here nothing but how any man who doesn't want her for her "mind" is a piece of shit. What kind of make believe fantasy world are you living in? Maybe stop playing victim and look around a little because you are completely out of touch with reality.

menina · Answer

Because many people believe that it's right to judge a woman, but it's wrong to judge a man.
Men are free to do anything they want, while women can't do the same things that men do without being judged.
Also, there are men who date/marry women because of their money. But of course, only women are interested in money, right?

Kat-__o · Answer

It isn't socially acceptable for a woman to be with a man for money. With that said, I'm a traditionalist. I believe men should be the bread winners and are the head of the home. Neither situations you described should be acceptable. A woman shouldn't leech off a man and a man should use a woman as a trophy. Partnerships should support each other and better one another.

Unit1 · Answer

I wouldn't know.
Women's Beauty is natural, so most women have that already and we are attracted to women as they are.
Our money however isn't. It's no part of our nature. It doesn't grow out of our wallets. But if money is what you (not you but the general you) are attracted to, go right for it. You'll deal with it's consequences.

Holistic · Answer

Both are wrong. Looks and money should be a minor factor in terms of dating because they aren't what make the person. I don't care if it's a man or a woman, but someone who dates only for a person's looks or financial status is just shallow.

rjroy3 · Answer

I mean, I personally been given s*** for being attracted to some girls, solely because other women viewed them as bimbos. And I've heard more than one group of girls talk s*** about a man marrying a woman solely for her looks and it's usually revolved around the women not being that pretty, or being pretty and dumb. So I guess you're going to have to define what you mean by socially acceptable here

ritxi · Answer

Do you really need to have an explanation? When a woman is with a man for his money, she will look for any chance that the laws give to them to leave him in a way where she can take advantage of it, but when a man is with a woman for her looks, he won't take any advantage after leaving the relationship.

In the other hand, the man who was unlucky to be with a woman for his money, have lost much more money than almost any other woman has lost for being with a man who is with her for her looks.

White-American89 · Answer

I guess because it's internalized mysoginy, whats wrong with a woman that she can't maker her own money unless you think owning a vagina is a physical mental disability.
Also men don't marry for looks, it takes more than looks.

Why is it socially unacceptable for a woman to be with a man for his money but not for a man to be with a woman for her looks/body?

Tardcarter · Answer

Natural selection?
If a woman wants to be with a guy because he's successful, that makes sense, as he would be a better provider for the family.
If she wants to be with him due to his money, in today's society, that hints at entrapment to gain it by marriage or child-support/alimony.
Men generally want a healthy-looking woman, so she could survive childbirth. A younger woman is desired for this same reason.

LegendarySir · Answer

Cry me a river... jesus christ. Do you know how much shit men get when they choose a woman just for her looks? Literally any time you date a girl that is pretty, people assume it's because of her looks that you're dating her.
Stop acting like y'all are the victim all the time when you don't even take time to talk to men about their experiences.

A-man-22 · Answer

Because your body is a part of you , it's unique. It's shows they love something specific about you.

Anyone can have money, you aren't loving them for who they are, just their worth.

Something everyone can have Vs something unique to each person.

Can you see why it's frowned upon now.

rkaye · Answer

Some men are attracted to looks but the matter of the fact is that everyone is attracted by looks so you can't judge them for that because both parties are bad.

But if you dating them for money quite simple your a gold digger lmao. You have no interest in the person just wealth instead of earning your own you feed off of others through seduction like Bonnie and Clyde.

Bonnie and Clyde was seduction Bonnie had no love Clyde just attention she wanted.

Xlink · Answer

Why would anyman be with a chick that just wants money lol I rather just pay for pussy. Haha.
Once that's. Thing the price goes down for the woman becuase if she won't another will for cheaper with equal looks as the first one.

You might get a old lonely guy who wants to talk but that's about it.

Adam_INTJ · Answer

I say both are socially unacceptable.

I say it's only acceptable to be with someone because you want to start a family.

It kindof works to be with someone because you like THEM (personality, shared experiences, really the essence of their soul) too, but not really.

Being with someone mostly for their looks or wealth makes you a bad person, regardless of the setup where male/female dynamic falls in that regard.

jermaine1 · Answer

It's not always about the money it's about the personality but if y'all wanna mess around until y'all get caught good luck ladies and gentlemen especially y'all teenage girls looking for a sugardaddy and teenage boys looking for a sugarmamma keep playing 🎮🤣✌

jessture · Answer

Men at least like an aspect about the woman herself. Women could care less about who the guy is, it's all about getting at his money which (gasp!) isn't a part of him.

There's a complete difference between being attracted to someone physically and gold digging.

LogicBomber · Answer

Where do you find it acceptable?
If a man says he is only interested in a female for her looks, he is called every name in the book.

But, If a female wants to be a glorified whore, she can be. So many females inherently go after men simply for their money.

GD360 · Answer

🙄 I highly doubt any real successful marriage is based souly on looks, and if it is, that's just another reason why we have many divorces. Marrying for money or only looks is stupid. Now on the other note nobody ever got with someone that they didn't feel attracted to. 1st attraction, then get to know. Let's be real you not dating someone you think is ugly to YOU.

zeineboyy · Answer

Because everyone knows that the girl doesn't love the man,

While the man actually likes the girl because if a guy is in a relationship with a girl he must like her personality too.

A guy who only goes for a girls looks is a bafboy you know the same ones you complain about but end up fucking

VanillaIcecream · Answer

Both are wrong in my opinion. Dating someone only for their money is wrong not to mention pretty stupid.

TonyMetal_86 · Answer

Who said it's fine? Maybe a feminist hypocrite 😏
Marriage is sacred only if it's done in a chruch or another place where the couple gets the blessing of god to become one and turn into a family...

I'll never marry a girl for her looks, i'll marry her because she loves me and willing to do anything for me...

A woman shouldn't marry a man for his money because marriage came from love and not from money!

Dchrls78104 · Answer

Because a lot of hypocrisy exists in society today, but here's the truth: A woman who is with a man for his money is a bitch and a thot. A man who is with a woman for her body is a cad and a louse. Individuals who act this way are reprehensible in every way and guilty of fraud and one of the most dishonourable forms of objectification.

MightyMikeMason · Answer

It's acceptable both way just frown upon. If you want to pimp out 1000 women more power to yah. If you want to gold dig and bankrupt 1000 more power to yah. In both situations, no one is truly a victim. People know who they're usually dealing with. And decided not to take action. In situations like those two no one is a victim and no one is an idiot

Kiran_Yagami · Answer

What on Earth are you blabbing about? Women bitch about men judging them only on their looks at least as much as men bitch about women judging them only on their success or material wealth. To pretend one is more "acceptable" than the other is to be vain, petty, selfish, and daft. You act like "socially accepted" is some designed machine with pre-programmed algorithms, when in reality it is just the similar opinions of individuals who neither attempt to nor care to conspire with one another.

bamesjond0069 · Answer

It's not. Its just that women go about it all wrong. If you simply had a standard ie. Only date successful men. Ok thats one thing. And in my opinion as a successful man thats a good standard. I dont want a girl who likes bums. Eww no thanks. But men who want pretty girls keep it as a standard. Ie i will not date fat girls period. What y'all do is date bums and then latch on to a rich guy. Thats disgusting and literally just trashy behavior.

Edanurus · Answer

You could argue that how someone looks is part of them i guess.

I dont think it is socially acceptable though we're not in the days of 'trophy wives' unless we are talking about the top earners. Then you have people marrying for looks to people marrying for money and... well they deserve each other.

the_mad_tinkerer · Answer

It was socially acceptable to marry men for their money up until the sexual (gender) revolution of the sixties. My grandparent and my parents married because "he had a good job".

pineappleshortcare · Answer

Cuz people who marry for money usually want the body of someone that isn’t their spouse, which leads to big issues.

MarkSeville · Answer

Money is not something you are born with. Since money is something anyone can get to marry for money can make the woman seem shallow. Men can be called shallow for falling for looks. One isn't more right or wrong than the other. But that's what I think.

GuidoThePizzaMaker · Answer

What are you talking about? Most women do marry men because the man has a good career! And Most men marry a woman because they like her looks, thats the natural order

Aquariusmystery · Answer

Because we live in a world where men can do no wrong and everything women do is critiqued. The man going for looks and the woman going for money are essentially the same thing as they are both shallow, but people only bat an eyelid at the woman.

Trings · Answer

It is? Not in the U. S. it isnt!😆😆Have you seen all these apps? Tinder, OKC, POF, etc...4 out of 5 female profiles state "cash app only," or "No broke nigggas allowed," or something like that. Seems pretty socially acceptable here to me.😏

Kinogo · Answer

if there's no feelings behind and it's only for teh money or looks then it's not really ok. But some men love the woman's looks as apart of her as a whole as @ChurchOfIron. too add on, money is important to some extent.

JayParris · Answer

Who said it's wrong? The rich man and his gorgeous wife? Or the broke guys and ugly women? So what does that boil the issue down to? Morality and ethics, or envy?

CubsterShura · Answer

I never came across anything like that. I've rather seen the opposite, women getting judged for wanting men for their money but people being ok with men wanting women for their looks only.

blondfrog · Answer

It would be equally as bad if a man is with a woman for her money. That's like comparing oranges to bananas. They might be fruit but not have the same type of vitamins. Your comparing materialistic double standards to vein physical standards.

Vesta · Answer

have you ever noticed that smaller chested women, (models, typically), tend to be with rich men (actors/other models etc..) you never see bigger breasted women, with rich men

Why is it socially unacceptable for a woman to be with a man for his money but not for a man to be with a woman for her looks/body?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Why is it socially unacceptable for a woman to be with a man for his money but not for a man to be with a woman for her looks/body?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.