3 ms·
I think you are misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not insinuating that women are generally gold-diggers. I'm saying that ultimately status and income are co
by colmvp 14y ago
I think you are misinterpreting what I'm saying.
I'm not insinuating that women are generally gold-diggers. I'm saying that ultimately status and income are considerations that come into play when it comes to the mating game. Physical attractiveness aside, a male doctor or male CEO is going to attract more interest than a male barista by virtue of his occupation and income. Income and wealth for men is a sometimes a consideration not different from height.
Let's put it another way: A minority male in the U.S. like an Asian male who earns a certain amount above the average is going to have significantly a lot more choices in interracial pairings than if he were at a low paying job. Statistics show that Caucasians females rarely marry Asians in the United States, but when they do, that pairing has the highest median income level compared to every other pairing in the U.S., including Caucasian/Caucasian and Asian/Asian. Anecdotally, all the Asian men I know who married Caucasian female are well-paid relative to the average Asian American male.
- cwb71 14y ago> Physical attractiveness aside, a male doctor or male CEO is going to attract more interest than a male barista by virtue of his occupation and income. You clearly do not live in San Francisco.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- roguecoder 14y agoMy argument is this: so what? You say these things like marriage, and in your case interracial marriage, is the be-all and end-all of happiness. I argue that it isn't, and all research directly correlating income and happiness finds that it tops out around $67k. If you sacrifice happiness for marriage, and get a crappier marriage than you would otherwise have in the bargin, what is the point?
- akldfgj 14y ago> $67k. Not in Silicon Valley. In Ohio, maybe.