How important is a man's job when it comes to dating?

Individual anecdotes - well they prove everything! 😊

Yeah there are all those toxic songs by women emphasising the importance of men having money but there are also extremely sexist hip hop tracks, which don't prove all men are chauvinistic pigs.

Back in the day, society was less complex and women raised the children and maintained the home, men provided for this. So yeah it was important to women back then - it had to be (and still today if she wants to be a full-time mother, but most don't seem to be). However, now that women go to college and work - some holding high-flying careers, and now that not all want to have children, well they can provide for themselves. In those cases, the man's income is not important. Unless she's really greedy - yes I know they exist, and that brings me to the other claim (only held by extremists or those on a wind-up, in fairness): that women are only interested in rich men. Most men are not rich - most on middling incomes have partners or wives. And those women who have no interest in designer this or that, or expensive jewellery - we exist. To think we're all really materialistic and shallow - that just means watching too much TV. People have varying interests.

Then there are the rest of the factors: like the other qualities - personality, physical attraction, character, chemistry. And how people meet - it isn't all going out on a date (could be at work, through friends, on a night out, on holiday). And what social circles they move in. And if you like someone, you like someone.

And nobody, male or female, only the most eejity (or victims of domestic abuse) would put up with someone full-time freeloading off them. Obviously if your partner needs financial help through no fault of their own or because they've gone back to college, that's a different situation.

Examples like those extremely rich old dudes with much younger, very beautiful women - proves that there are gold diggers and men who would do anything for a pretty face/great body, but they're extreme situations, not the norm. There are also old rich men who won't tolerate freeloaders, and most women can't have sex with someone they're not attracted to.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118193535#Comment_118193535

Yeah I don't get that. I totally get dolled up to look attractive to men. I do it to make myself feel good for sure, but part of that is men thinking I look good. If I'm calling over to a female friend or gay male friend, I certainly don't get dolled up. And obviously I don't when I'm just at home.

Anyone who wants to know if the credentials desired by, eg, this female considered “attractive”:

• To be male
• To be fairly but not overly interested in own appearance
• To shower/bathe regularly, and always before oral sex.
• To be sober most of time, excepting shared evenings out and to most of time be heeding enough to take general care.
• To not carry over expectations or beliefs that a past mate will be similar to a new one for good or for bad.
• To think ahead as to where this could go, and to remove oneself before things could go beyond politeness.,

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118198937#Comment_118198937

as a group. on average.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199028#Comment_118199028

Not sure why you are trying to make it so complicated. People use plenty of things as preliminary filters. It just so happens that a man's job tends to be a common filter. You can say what you like about it not making much difference compared to etc etc etc. but that is because you applied that filter so early on that you forgot about it. The low earner has already been filtered out of the population you are considering

A fella could come on and say that a women's looks aren't really that important and I take X/Y/Z into account as well. But being honest, when he talks about that, he's not thinking of the 20-stone lady. He just doesn't consider her to begin with. He's only considering between the ones who he gets on well with and are middling attractive and the ones that are a bit more objectively attractive but who he might not get on with as much.

Well of course it's unlikely that he'll go for the 20 stone woman. But most men don't end up with absolute stunners. What I say still stands, a man's income isn't important to all women. If it was important to all women, I'd have no problem admitting it. I have no time for dishonesty, whether it suits my views or not. But you like who you like.

I'm not making it complicated - it can be complicated. Others are making it too simplistic.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199152#Comment_118199152

I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a good friend of mine years ago. She was adamant that girls don't really care about physical or material things. Job isn't that important. Looks aren't that important. Height isn't that important etc. She was fairly prolific on dating apps and websites at the time and I asked her whether she had any filters set for any of those things when searching for matches. She went quiet and admitted that she had her settings for fellas 6 foot and above only............... 😀

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199203#Comment_118199203

Yeah people who say there are absolutely zero criteria for them when on a dating app... can't be too self aware or are trying to kid themselves/others.

completedit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199203#Comment_118199203

The height pill never ceases to humble me. It is earth shattering in its visceral impact. There is no escape. Truly depressing. I notice it becomes more important as women get older too, looks don't matter as much but height and frame remain constant. Miserable being beneath 6 foot in this day and age.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199234#Comment_118199234

It just means certain pathways might not be fruitful for you if ya don't make that filter. It doesn't mean there is no chance in general. Just means there is no point spending too much effort on those media.

If you are 5'4 you probably aren't going to get any matches on tinder or the like. You just have to get over it .......presumably with the help of a little ladder 😋

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199028#Comment_118199028

The point of the tracks is that you'd be hard pressed to find a male singer at any point singing a song about 'no romance without finance' 'i dont want no female scrub'.

What you will find are lots of songs by males about how they get money. Not so many by women singing about how they get money.

(1 or 2 exceptions I can think of, but overall the trend is 'I dont accept poor men' from female artists and 'Hey I just so happen to have lots of money' by male artists)

This a window into the minds of not just the artists, but the population itself. As often these tracks have done well in the charts.

A quick look at Mills and Boon titles will confirm womens fantasy ideals, the billionaire (as with 50 shades), the neurosurgeon, the CEO. Not a single amazon driver or tesco team supervisor in there.

Consistent with what the scientists say, consistent with what the popular music says, consistent with what the cliche says, consistent with the mythbusters episode. A mans attractiveness to women is increased by wealth and job title.

This is hardwired into the general female population. Like playboy girls for men. Its just nature.

"Miserable being beneath 6 foot in this day and age" - you're truly deluding yourself Completedit by telling yourself that men just under 6ft have trouble getting women.

Under 5ft 7" maybe - although that's still taller than many women (albeit without heels).

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199262#Comment_118199262

Well that's a different thing to only *looking* for men who are wealthy.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199295#Comment_118199295

I didn't think he was saying that. I thought he was meaning it in the context of those dating apps and sites. In which case I'd agree with him that his odds would be low. Maybe not for 5'11" but if you are going 5'9" or under then pickings would be low on them. So you'd need to explore other avenues. I suppose it then depends on what his peer group are using.

Burt Renaults

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199337#Comment_118199337

I'm under 5ft 9 (and always include that fact somewhere on my profile, for the purpose of weeding out anyone who does care about something so trivial) and it's never stopped me from getting plenty of matches. I learned a long time ago (shortly after I realised that I wasn't going to get any taller) that it's not worth getting hung up over something that you can't fix. If a short-arse isn't having any luck at all on Tinder or Bumble, I'd say their diminutive stature is the least of their worries. You have to have (and attempt to show) a half-decent personality too.

completedit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199725#Comment_118199725

Yeah it's really someone's personality that is excluding them on apps where appearance is front and centre and personality amounts to some generic about me section that nobody reads anyway.

Women, especially in Ireland are odd, they have an aversion to heart on their sleeve type guys, you have to just be an irreverent sarcastic bore to get girls. Our society heralds this type of shite. Earnestness is frowned upon.

Burt Renaults

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199727#Comment_118199727

I have never swiped right on anyone without reading their "About me" section first, and finding something that makes me want to speak to them. And people do read it. Pretty much every first message I ever received was in relation to something I said on my profile.

So this is the latest "all women are money grubbing whores who only date tall men" thread? Cool, it's been a while since we had one of those. There can never be too many threads of this type. Keep posting, y'all.

BurgerFace

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058218491/how-important-is-a-mans-job-when-it-comes-to-dating

Is that a week or a year?

No girl wants to marry a Crystal Palace defender....a Liverpool midfielder though...then you're in with a shout.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199783#Comment_118199783

Except that nobody said either of those things. The thread was asking how important the mans job is. The later point the fella made about height was in relation to cheap dating apps (cheap in the sense that it is cheap to swipe through to the next person).

For the first, consider Mary telling Patricia: "Hey Patricia, will you cancel your plans for Saturday because I want to introduce you to newly single John. He is 40 and is a nice fella. Only last week he got promoted to a two-star server down in McDonalds"

Or if Mary tells Patricia: "Hey Patricia, will you cancel your plans for Saturday because I want to introduce you to newly single John. He is 40 and is a nice fella. Only last week he got promoted to Consultant in the Hospital"

Don't tell me that one is not more likely to have Patricia agree to change her plans than the other.

On the other point, other poster mentioned height. I told the story of my friend who sets her filter on dating apps at 6'. Now she says she sets it so high as "guys lie" anyway. She is about 5'7" or 5'8" and she has dated fellas shorter than her. She just didn't meet them through apps. The point was that the app might not be as productive a medium for the short person as would be making an effort in real life.

seenitall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118198803#Comment_118198803

You’re not a woman, so you don’t know what you’re talking about. When it comes to “dating”, Irish men are just as materialistic as Irish women are, you can take it from me as a non-Irish woman. I’ve been in this country for 20 years, and have no career, merely a free-lancing profession, with a general insecurity of income that gigging brings. Sex is something else. Anyone can have sex with a tasty thing of their choosing, but people here seem to be looking for security of income in a potential partner for a long term relationship, man or woman. That has been my experience and observation with Irish men. Which makes sense in a nation where the most prized lifestyle has long been having a mortgage on a suburban house, car(s), the expense of kids, all their paraphernalia, nice stuff for the house, nice clothes, restaurants, travel. It’s all expensive stuff, getting more expensive by the year, and people need a second income to be comfortable. So again, from my experience, this hyperMcDonaldsgammy red-pilled stuff has an application to both sexes in this country. I’m not complaining either. I’m just tired of forever reading and reareading this myth that being materialistic is something inherent in woman’s nature, and the poor over-worked men are merely downtrodden innocent lovestruck not-in-the-least-bit-materialistic beasts of burden for the gold-digging minxes they marry. What I’ve seen and experienced is that the more a woman can earn, the more she is valued as a potential partner by Irish men. And vice versa. Being pragmatic, materialistic, mercenary, is something that no sex has a monopoly on, it’s merely the fact that historically women have by far and wide been the more disposessed (of property, jobs, votes…) sex and have therefore had to make their living by marrying or coupling up in much greater numbers than men have ever had to. So, out of disregard for historical circumstance, and women’s generally lowly position in societies gone by across all different areas and eras, this stupid misogynist myth arises, of course. In a truly equal society, (which seems to be a pipedream at the moment, as the whole paradigm of business processes and how we /don’t/ reward or individually remunerate the most basic but most important work such as caregiving, instead docking value points off the more caregiving sex for doing a child related run from the office, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon) you would see the propensity for, ahem, pragmatic relationship choices equally distributed among men and women alike. Which is already happening in Ireland, so - go Ireland in equality stakes!

vriesmays

Beta males who're members of a secret society and an accounting body are top pick for most Irish women.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118200917#Comment_118200917

They probably are once the woman goes over the hill and turns 35 alright 😋

Ya gotta cut your cloth to suit your measure

seenitall

That reminds me, I know a successful accountant who couldn’t get a date if his life depended on it, let alone a relationship. Not for the lack of trying, either. On paper he is supremely “eligible”, in person he has a bit of an underwhelming personality, so not his fault, he’s an ok fella. But it seems all these materialistic Irish women are getting kinda fussy these days! :D

The whole thing about meeting people online is that you have to make selections based on specifications. Meeting someone “organically” in real life, eg at work where you get to know them at but and find you have a spark, the person you find yourself with would seldom fit the criteria you would specify as your ideals. I know people who have matched very successfully online, really one way or the other it’s a toss of the dice.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118199725#Comment_118199725

Height is definitely not a criteria anyone really cares about. It’s really all about personality at the end of the day. Whilst one can’t change overall personality, there are aspects of it which can definitely be worked on. I have seen innately very shy people develop general confidence over the years; not talking about fake confidence and bluster but when people do a lot of work there can be huge improvements in how they relate. This type of confidence can come across appropriately on the “about me” section. Fakeness stands out like a sore thumb.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118200163#Comment_118200163

I’d be asking about John working in McDonalds:

Is he working temporarily there to keep a roof over his head whilst he is studying or planning his next career move etc? If that were the case I’d be admiring him for making every effort to keep providing for himself.

Is this the sole limit of his long term ambition? If so, I’d be asking why. He might not be very engaging to a person who enjoys a reasonably good level of conversation.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201103#Comment_118201103

That wasn't the question though. The questoin was under which scenario would the lady be more likely to change her previous plans to go on the blind date.

You can't say that job doesn't come into it and then virtue signal (if you'll pardon the phrase) that you'd actually choose, or be more interested in, the McDonalds case over the other one. Either the job makes no difference or it does

rolling boh

I think in general most women will be put off if a guy has no ambition and is staying in a low enough paid job any career minded woman will not be interested as in fairness you have to have a bit of money to do what would be considered normal things like nights out a holiday or at least not having to save up money for weeks to do something .Lack of ambition is a huge factor in general lots of things spring from that .

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201152#Comment_118201152

Well yes, I was trying to say I’d be asking questions about the McDonald’s job, I wouldn’t about the consultant.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201181#Comment_118201181

Ok. I misinterpreted your response to thinking you were saying you'd be more interested in McDonalds one!!

nozzferrahhtoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118196450#Comment_118196450

So that would be a "no" to my question then :p

I think it was said well earlier in the thread. That it appears someones "job" is only one of many variables. And context is everything. Two people can have the same job but be in it for very different reasons and be in a very different place in their life while doing it. I would expect that what someones job is tends to come into WHY they happen to be in that job.

But it seems regardless of job that people seem to end up in relationships anyway. There are doctors in relationships and not. There are McDonalds people in relationships and not. And everything in between. So it does appear that job really comes into it. People end up in relationships regardless of what jobs they are in.

Mister Vain

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201319#Comment_118201319

Yeah most people pair off regardless. Plus not everyone in low paying jobs is lacking ambition. Maybe they don't want the added stress of a higher paying job or even the brains for that matter. If everyone was smart enough to be in higher paid jobs there would be nobody to do the unskilled work.

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201319#Comment_118201319

You clearly didn't check. 🙄

Yeah, job is a variable, thats been established. Thats what OP is asking, check the title of the thread.

Women find a mans job/finances to be important. Men may too but to a far lower extent. A woman's job title doesn't come up in playboy. There is no male mills and boon with a fancy title female character. On average we don't care. We dont experience pregnancy so we don't have to rely on a partner for 9 months. Part of anthropology, women have historically needed a resource rich man if they're to procreate safely and successfully.

Somebody earlier said that Merkle is chancellor but still a lardass, and that being chancellor doesn't mean men will be more attracted to her. And they were right, it wont make her more attractive to men....but what they didn't say was that a far lesser title wont make her less attractive to men, on the visceral level. Merkle as an Ikea worker and Merkle as chancellor are effectively equally attractive, some small variation. The weather girl will have far more men chasing her.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201550#Comment_118201550

I think the quote about Merkel was attributed to Berlusconi. That would be the same fat old billionaire Berlusconi that was having bunga bunga parties riding young girls and aspiring models etc.

I didn't hear of any claims or rumours that Merkel was having her own bunga bunga parties with late teenage and early 20-something young fellas.......or maybe she was and was just better at hiding it.

nozzferrahhtoo

I can not check what is not there. The liar accusation simply did not happen. Quote it if it did.

I think everyone has already agreed that its a variable sure. But it doesnt seem to be as large a variable as many people want to make out. It's just one of many. Even within a single job for example.... two people as I said could have the exact same job but the context of that can differ widely between the two. A person can be working in McDonalds and be totally with it and have their life together. The next guy in McDonalds might all over the place and not have it together at all. So if a person dating is being asked what their job is.... there is likely a lot more going on there than just trying to find out their earning potentials. What a person's career is can often but not always be a window into what makes them who they are. It's not their job thats important therefore... but what their job says about them too.

The article you linked to of course says a lot of that too. Gender role expectations seem to play a bigger role than anything else in what the study was saying. It seemingly was not saying that the earnings or different jobs were a predictor of divorce rather than the effect of feeling like gender roles are being affected. If men are unhappy because they feel like they are not being "real men" (whatever that means) then an unhappy marriage will certainly be a potential result then.

No evidence for this of course but I have always had the FEELING that gender roles as a concept is dying off. I would not see that as a bad thing at all. The expectations that being a man means something silly like having to be the main earner.... is just toxic. And if it is making men suffer needlessly or harming marriages.... we should undermine the narratives that got them there.

seenitall

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201591#Comment_118201591

That’s because testosterone is the principal driver of sexual need. The same testosterone that men produce in abundance, women not so much (although they do produce some). Someone like Merkel probably spends some of her discretionary income on nice food or, dunno, science literature (natural sciences being her first love). (The rest of it, being German, she squirrels away in savings and investments.)

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201550#Comment_118201550

Somebody earlier said that Merkle is chancellor but still a lardass, and that being chancellor doesn't mean men will be more attracted to her. And they were right, it wont make her more attractive to men....but what they didn't say was that a far lesser title wont make her less attractive to men, on the visceral level.

That was me, I was responding to a guy who had already made your point, effectively rounding it out. He quoted this piece of wisdom, in slightly edited form:

Halle Berry's p***y is the same as the b***h that works at McDonald's p***y.” - Patrice O'Neal 

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201886#Comment_118201886

That may be so. But I'd probably choose Halle Berry's over Angela Merkel's.

Well at least 9 times out of 10.............. A change is as good as a holiday or so they say

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118202038#Comment_118202038

I think the point of the quote is if the 'McDonalds b***h' is young and hot she's just as as good as Halle Berry on a visceral level...

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118202065#Comment_118202065

Plus she might give you a few free burgers.

Ther Germans are sticklers for rules. I couldn't imagine Angela slipping you a few free burgers on the sly

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201591#Comment_118201591

I didn't hear of any claims or rumours that Merkel was having her own bunga bunga parties with late teenage and early 20-something young fellas.......or maybe she was and was just better at hiding it.

Not any time recently, although rumour has it she was a bit of a goer in her younger day, when she was between marriages. Doubt she'd find too many male takers even if she did want to revisit that lifestyle in her retirement...

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118202199#Comment_118202199

Berlusconi did at least have a few lookers in his government.

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201624#Comment_118201624

There could be something implied in post 85. Why are you laboring this irrelevance. Focus on the topic instead of weirdly obsessing over pedantic nonsense.

Hypergamy is a visceral thing. Its instinctual. Part of nature. Other male species develop elaborate plumage, un-necessarily large tusks and various other displays of resourcefulness. And the female looks for these signs. We do this with various status symbols like cars and titles. And human female nature is to look for these things. Women normally mate up and across. Visceral desires are for reliable resourceful dependable men to be there to provide during pregnancy and to bring home the bread for the children.

Plenty of other things will factor in, but OP's question is 'how important' and the answer is that it is certainly an important factor. Hypergamy, or this reliance by women for a dependable, resource rich man has made its way through thousands of years of evolution, so life itself is telling us that yeah its definitely important.

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201886#Comment_118201886

(patrice voice) Thank you sir.

Brings this gem to mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE6t3cG69a0

Mad_maxx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118201066#Comment_118201066

I'm very tall and it was never the slightest advantage in terms of success with women

Ekerot

I can't believe I spent my weekend reading over 200 replies to this

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118202487#Comment_118202487

Well there's different kinds of tall. I don't think gawky/geeky tall of the Peter Crouch/Steve Merchant variety would generally be perceived as a great look...

nozzferrahhtoo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118202240#Comment_118202240

"implied" is it now hehehe. So it never happened as I said. You were just being asked to cite your source. Which is a perfectly normal thing to do. It was suggested that earning differences increases the chances of divorce. But that is not fully what the study said. The study was saying that gender norms were the issue. And that makes a lot of sense really. It is not clear what the other study says because it was not cited.

It really does not seem THAT important at all really though given that people of all social and working classes end up in relationships. It is just one of a number of variables which while it might influence some decisions it seemingly does not control them. Preferences are just that.... preferences. And quite subjective and diverse.

85603

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118202625#Comment_118202625

what never happened? what are you even talking about? do you even know any more?

All I ever asked was why do women who earn more divorce at a higher than average rate. Which they do.

Women's propensity to date up has made it through centuries of human evolution, so yeah its important. Anything on the instinctual level is.