Hey Savagirl,
I'm curious you responded to everyones question EXCEPT ONE that would have betrayed your true intentions...it was the question 'what happened if he lost everything...would you stick by him?' you never answered that it seems a little fishy to me....

on the flip side of things, i'm in the navy i travel a lot and i've had the oppurtunity to experience different cultures you may just be wording it wrong. You make it sound like the only thing you care about is how much the guy makes. And that you want him to be able to 'take care' of you. But after reading all your replys i'm going to make an assumption here.....You want a family and a home...but not to struggle. You keep saying family is important to you. my guess? you had rich boyfriend in the past who cheated on you...broke your heart and shattered all your dreams. Now you want those dreams so bad that you'd be willing to 'allow' him to cheat on you. It seems to me that you don't care what YOU do in any of it. YOU JUST WANT YOUR DREAMS REALIZED....you know that you are being selfish but you think by 'granting' him these liberities it equals itself out....Not the way it works in this country....India is a good place to start looking though. Either way good luck

Sorry, but I must say...
Having grown up with some financial distress in my family, I am almost insulted by your view of "basic luxuries." As geektothetenth pointed out, that's an oxymoron.

Having lived in California for some years, I am also somewhat environmentally aware. Therefore, I personally think that it is disgusting that you hint at believing that having your own car is birth-given right. If you really value family, why would you want to restrict your children's maturity by spoiling them with riches? Why would you set the example to them that all women have to do in society is marry rich? You should be teaching your children the value of working HARD and working SMART for what you want in life. You may think that marrying rich is the same as working smart, but it's really not. Someone mentioned in this thread that you might as well be playing the lottery. Is gambling smart? Psh I dare you to say yes.

How the hell can you even put the words "basic" and "luxuries" together like that? Look at third-world countries where people are getting by on one meal a day. Look at the happy and enlightened monks who choose to live in piety with no worldly posessions besides the simple robes they wear and the bowl and chopsticks they carry. Look at the conditions in Africa today. The conditions are sh!t there, especially in Sudan. Trust me, as a human rights activist and co-founder of an Amnesty International chapter in my old high school, I would know. I myself am proud to be an American, but please do not shift my patriotic attitude in the opposite direction by embodying all that is corrupt within our infrastructure by making yourself ignorant.

"Basic" consists of the MINIMAL; what one may refer to as "alternatives." The truth is, you don't even need your own car. You can walk, bike, or take public transportation to get to where you want to go. You don't even need sinks in the bathroom. You can walk to the kitchen to wash your hands. Damn... have you ever gone a week or two without visiting the mall during your teenage years? Get your head out of the goddamn bubble.

I think it's sad that most who posted here think it's a bad idea to want to marry a man that is committed to family and home and to be a good PROVIDER. That is what men should do for their families. I also have a hard time believing that the women here aren't just bitter they haven't found this for themselves, the ones who desire children and family. It is completely unnatural and a dysfunctional way of thinking to want anything else.

A smart successful man, as anyone, can come across hard times, but a smart, successful man will also create and find solutions.

And as far as being traded in at for 40 for a younger model from the girl bragging she's smart enough to sign a pre-nup..

I'm talking about commitment here. A man who is committed to his family wants to take care of them. I believe a woman should take good care of herself to look good at all ages.

Providing for the needs of family is the responsibility of BOTH parties. Needs include fiscal responsibility but it includes far more, emotional needs, teaching values, taking care of a home etc. There are lots of families out there that aren't clearing 6 figures yet still lead a happy existence.

Whatever your preferences are, that's entirely your business and you're welcome to have them. I think the contentious part of your post is more that you'd be willing to share the man as long as he provides fiscal security for you.

In your OP you only mention affluent professional or succesful businessman as the traits you're looking for. That automatically, whether intended or not, shows people that that is all you care about. You also mention grooming and dressing these are all external traits not internal ones.

Men who are affluent and succesful who have some modicum of decent looks, and a decent personality probably have a fair number of choices among women, they'd probably pick someone who actual posts a picture. Hell, I'm poor, ugly, and have a horrible personality and I tend to not like to chat with a blue square.

but it's such a pretty blue square

Ok, so what im taking out of this is. Because i dont make enough money to buy a huge house, buy 2 cars and be able to charter a yatch or jet...i shouldnt have a family? Thats pretty much what i took out of that statement.

And you STILL havent answered the question. WHAT if he loses all his money. C'mon, lets play the game, hypothetical question. HE loses his money, and you....what? What do you do. Do you stay with him...or ditch his ass, inquiring minds want to know oh teacher of life.

I think by not answering the question she just answered you.

What bothers me in this situation is that you have no problem with him cheating on you. Do you call this a healthy way of thinking????

What we do strive for is someone who can take care of us and a family,mentally, physically and financially of course, but do you think we should just look the other way when cheating???

Yes it would be nice if the one we fall in love with has all those things but to sell yourself short on love because you think its ok for men to have extra marital affairs is ridiculous and shows me that you havent really lived yet.

Don't forget that a great number of the "financially" acceptable people out there have the sense to understand what a waste some of these excesses are and actually use their brains.

lol most of the rich guys I know are the cheapest with their money!!!!

Thats how they get and stay rich...they are not fools

My older sister married a rich guy.....he is so cheap he makes her buy their kid second hand clothes....

There are many reasons not to buy new clothes for kids. It could be to teach them to not look down on people that have less.

Just a thought.

In my original post, I stated certain attributes I'd require to consider marrying and having a family with a man. This has nothing to do with whether I have my own career and money. If I plan to have children, I plan to spend time with them caring for them, not my clients or at work.

I have not addressed values I plan to teach in our home. That is a separate subject.

Sounds like the kind of men here are the ones that resent the idea of providing for a family.

I addressed the issue of my husband hitting a period of financial difficulty by stating that a SMART, SUCCESSFUL MAN finds solutions and won't remain in a hole forever. I am able to work and am a money earner myself, though I do not see that being my main focus when I have three or so little ones to look after.

I also stated that an excessive lifestyle is NOT necessary. I refer to basics, and again, for the reading and definition impaired, LUXURY IS THE ABSENCE OF POVERTY.

here's a definition of luxury from princton

the quality possessed by something that is excessively expensive

Further, I find it interesting that more girls do not want a man that can offer these physical requirements and that there aren't more men PROUD enough to stand up and say that is what they'd LIKE TO DO FOR THEIR FAMILY.

That definition states NOTHING. Excessive is a relative term. Expensive is a relative term. We know the meaning of poverty.


My definition is better than princeton's. I'm sticking with it.

Luxury is the absence of poverty.

If you don't mind..what is the source of your definition? I think this request is fair since you so casually disregarded mine that even included the source.

The source is irrelevant. Do you believe everything you read and everything everyone tells you. THINK for yourself.

So what you are saying is that everyone can make up their own definitions???????

I thought you were semi-educated, my bad.

Language works only because we have collective agreed upon definitions for words, we collect them in dictionaries, otherwise everyone would make up words and nobody would understand anyone.

Luxury is not abscence of poverty, by it's very definition it denotes excess wealth.