GOLD DIGGERS: Hate or Congratulate?

You see an obvious gold digger with a rich older guy ur response is:

  • Hate it. It's downright REPULSIVE!

    Votes: 55 15.7%
  • Congratulate. Get it Girl!

    Votes: 123 35.1%
  • Envy. Dang, I wanna be in her shoes!

    Votes: 36 10.3%
  • Don't care.

    Votes: 136 38.9%

  • Total voters
    350
A few things: being a golddigger doesn't mean you're necessarily dependent on someone else. I've got a friend who dates nothing but men with money - buying her Gucci watches and shoes, taking her out for dates where afterwards they go stay in the Le Meridien and Beverly Hills Hilton hotel (even though they both live in LA). AND she works - full time, good job, her own place, her own money.

And men CLAIM they don't like golddiggers - cuz they can't be upfront and say they're essentially paying for someone's company. But think about it - if men hated golddiggers so much, then how does Superhead manage to still date men in the industry?? They know what she's about, hell - we ALL do. Men like good company (good could mean good looking, good conversation, smart, educated, or good sex). Women like feel secure (financially, emotionally, spiritually). If both folks go into the situation HONESTLY, I've got no problems with it.

I look at golddiggers like this - if you're up front about what you want and he's upfront about what he wants then what's the problem???

The only thing I don't like about SOME golddiggers is when they corrupt men, so that the next woman they meet they've got all KINDS of baggage.
 
I dont quite know about that, none of those are stipulations where I come from. In Islam its supposed to go to the woman. If the family follows correctly they will not take her dowry. It also makes no stipulation on the woman's sexual status...convert women here who often come with kids and are not virgins still have their dowry requests met. If a man chooses to marry a woman who is not a virgin he still has to give her the dowry that she requested(it should be within his means, so if your man works at Piggly Wiggly requesting a 1.5 million house is not a reasonable:lachen:). The dowry will be written in to the Nikkah(marriage contract). Muzzies I know get married and divorced like its going out of style. In some sects like the Shias they have temporary marriages...need I say more. I think people would be surprised at the rate of divorce. It is very easy to get divorced, simple as the man saying I divorce you three times. In lots of cases women will request something religious, but a sum of money, a house, or a car is not unheard of especially in the west and other places where people are able to afford it. In poorer places livestock, grains, and the sort are not unheard of. Yes, some people will add all their cultural stipulations to the "law", but there are plenty that will try to be as pure about it as possible. Not sure what other religions/cultures who the dowry practice expect though.

The dowry practice can does exist here in the United States.

Not sure how that negates anything I said :lol: I definitely agree that what you described applies in some cases.
On average, I think it can be accurately said that within cultures that still use dowries that virginity or sexual reserve in some degree tends to be an expectation of women in general. It's not a written rule, but the dowry isn't the only tradition they hold on to. This doesn't apply to every culture, but a significant amount. My initial point being that the dowry tends to come along with certain other cultural practices that many Western women IMO would not be able to meet so it's ironic when we reference it in connection with gold digging. Also, I believe that many people misunderstand the dowry. It is not necessarily a bunch of cash just handed over to the bride. Hence, I believe the term is sometimes misused.

I have many African and Indian friends/relatives, so that's my perspective. In India they are having a lot of problems with men accepting the dowry from multiple families and never marrying the bride. These families are then left no money to buy their daughter into a respectable family and are also shamed. It's a heart heartbreakingly growing practice in the Indian Canadian community as well as in India. Amongst my African friends there's a lot of debate about dowrys, some feel it forces women into submission because human nature lends itself to feelings of ownership over anything they've purchased, others feel it's a wonderful tradition that has been corrupted (bride prices are going up in many areas), some feel that it's no different than expensive wedding rings and should remain a common practice, others are postponing marriage and marrying women outside of the culture because they don't want or can't afford a huge dowry.
 
Ah...many men trade in their spouses for "younger models" regardless. And many have the gall to trade in wives who put them through grad school and helped them build businesses so, I'm not sure one is better off than the other.

These women have an agenda that is appropriate for THEM personally. The concept of "selling oneself" is such a fragile argument because it's so subjective to an individual's perspective...my old boss got engaged...and her ring was GAWGEOUS!...everyone was fawning over it in the office and someone said..."he must REALLY love you because that is SOME ring!"...to which my boss shot back, without missing a beat, "...Nah, it's because I SWALLOWED!" Of course it was very tongue-in-cheek and we all laughed but...unless each woman is saving herself completely until the wedding night, then the whole selling yourself argument is too fragile to make the case.

Also, women who put their resources and talents into snagging a rich man are not necessarily undereducated and unmotivated. We keep equating gold diggers with groupies and trust me....they are NOT one and the same! In fact, gold diggers are waaaay too calculating to be sitting around waiting on a man as their sole source of a mealticket.


You took the words out of my mouth. :yep:
 
:yep:
If your man wants to take care of certain things than why not? I don't consider that gold digging. IMO, some people confuse wanting a man on your level or higher or the reality that finances can play a role in mating with being a gold digger. Gold digging, is using money as the main determiner of a man's worth and then deception and manipulation to get his money. Many such women eventually get traded for the younger model or they gold dig while young then settle when they run out of options. Such practices are similar to renting your body (one must sample out the goods at some point) or women who have babies by several different men to insure greater child support.

My SO provides anything I want, which I didn't accept initially. He said people bring different things to the table, if your man loves you and wants to bling you out then enjoy, just provide support in other areas. If tomorrow his finances changed I'm still his ride or die chick.

I see women all stressed because they're almost 26 and haven't snagged a rich man. I had a chick ask if there's any way to access a man's bank account and another bragged that she only makes 20k at her job, but 50k in child support from her ex husband :perplexed Truth be told, if a man is gonna' give up cash, at least have something to offer. Some people expect to trade day old, used goodies. I'm amused by anyone, but especially 5.5 and 2.5s investing more time in finding a rich guy than their education and people with nothing, who feel entitled to those with something. Competition is tough, these women need to ponder if they really have something guys can't get for free elsewhere.
It's ironic, the black community is bling obsessed, but we are relatively cash poor. Half the men and women my age expect to become athletes, rappers or get a baller who will spoil them. They want easy money to live like Kimora.

So, how do we feel about male gold diggers?





True, but dowries are often given to the bride's family, it does not necessarily go to her. In India they are actually provided BY the bride's family TO the bridegroom. Practiced here it would actually lessen the purpose of gold digging :lol:
Within culture that use dowries, it's intertwined with other cultural expectations, divorce is uncommon, the wife is dutiful, marriage is at a young age and the women tend to be virgins. I'm not sure how many here would meet those requirements :look: By 19 a lot of Western women have had enough sexual partners to negate any significant dowry in many cultures.

While I agree with some of what you said, these types of guys don't want the easy and free women.:nono:
 
Ah...many men trade in their spouses for "younger models" regardless. And many have the gall to trade in wives who put them through grad school and helped them build businesses so, I'm not sure one is better off than the other.

These women have an agenda that is appropriate for THEM personally. The concept of "selling oneself" is such a fragile argument because it's so subjective to an individual's perspective...my old boss got engaged...and her ring was GAWGEOUS!...everyone was fawning over it in the office and someone said..."he must REALLY love you because that is SOME ring!"...to which my boss shot back, without missing a beat, "...Nah, it's because I SWALLOWED!" Of course it was very tongue-in-cheek and we all laughed but...unless each woman is saving herself completely until the wedding night, then the whole selling yourself argument is too fragile to make the case.

Also, women who put their resources and talents into snagging a rich man are not necessarily undereducated and unmotivated. We keep equating gold diggers with groupies and trust me....they are NOT one and the same! In fact, gold diggers are waaaay too calculating to be sitting around waiting on a man as their sole source of a mealticket.

It seems my post is being reworded or maybe I'm not being specific enough. The intent of my overall sentiment may be lost when viewed in paragraphs.

What you said about men trading for the younger model is definitely true. From my observation I do think the chances of that happening are greater when marry primarily for finances. Those men usually want the latest model of whatever they have. It still happens regardless, but certain types of qualities are more likely to draw certain types of people (in this case men).

As for selling oneself, it has it's practical applications as well so I agree with your statement. I'm just stating from a non emotional perspective that gold digging taken to the extreme is not much different from the same mentality that a woman who deliberately gets pregnant by multiple men to ensure that she gets a good child support check or a woman that sells her presence/body as a companion. Logically speaking I don't think they are that different, but I'm just calling it what it CAN be, I'm not saying either is "good" or "bad". Those women are essentially making a decision to live well by tapping into the income of another invidual, regardless of the decision the motivating element is the same. I only hope people are upfront in their dealings, it's sad if one party believes they've married for love or one party marries with the intent to leave after the marriage and take xx%. My main issue, as I stated in that same post is when deception and manipulation are used but otherwise if everyone is on the same page then by all means find that baller.

I also agree with you on your second paragraph, that is why I separated my statement into two categories. I said women who focus on snagging a rich man more so than their education. I don't think the two behaviors are mutually exclusive. If a woman is looking for a man that is paid and is also making sure she has the education to take care of herself and enrich her life, then more power to her. To further clarify my point, if a woman is solely focusing on snagging a rich man then she should be careful because time goes by quickly and if you don't get lucky you might need to fall back on other resources.
 
Last edited:
General disclaimer: As stated in my other posts, I see nothing wrong with a women being provided for by her man. It may not be my thing, but if two people mutually reach an agreement and know what to expect from each other, then I have NO problem. Deception, greed, manipulation and feeling entitled to someone else's loot not included.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This probably won't be a popular opinion, and I'm not saying this to knock either side, but as something that I pondered. Since we're looking at this topic from a practical perspective without the rose tinted glasses of sentimentality, I wonder if our objectivity bleeds over into all areas.

Following the established chain of reasoning, it's a well established fact that for various reasons worthy of another thread there are less black men of much "gold" than other groups in this country. A black man with money is sought after by many "personal investment specialists" and is likely to be picky. So, practically speaking of course, it would make sense if a personal investment specialist limited her dating to few if any black men. If you're hunting Lions, you might still hit up the San Diego Zoo, but you're likely to have greater success in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Accordingly, some black men claim they have an easier time climbing the corporate ladder with a white SO or wife, especially for the networking and dinner party nature of corporate America. Would that be understandable self interest? Since we're speaking of protecting our personal investments and things of a practical nature :look:

We should perhaps soften our view of men who do leave their wives for younger women. If gold digging can be likened to being a personal investment specialist then wouldn't it be equally pragmatic of the other to sell his stock when it drops in value? He invested in her looks, she invested in his money. Practically speaking of course :grin:

Do we view prenups with the same practicality, even if they properly provide for the wife in case of divorce? One could argue the man is simply protecting his personal investment as a gold digger is going after her own self interest. It's ironic that the discussion of prenups relied on sentiment ("he doesn't trust me!?"), but the discussion of gold digging is of logic and practicality. Some men say we can't decide what we want in life, I say we can, we're just unabashed hypocrites (as are many men):lachen: .

My point, is that the same math we're using to make sense of gold digging could be applied to other equations, but the results may not be as palatable and I'm just curious if we'd stretch our brains accordingly to make sense of it.
 
Last edited:
Gold diggers are repulsive to me. *shudder* I'm glad that my family raised me to be self-reliant. I can't stand people that feel entitled to someone else's ish.

Just this past weekend, I realized that I had to let one of my friends go because her gold digging ways were absolutely disgusting. She had the nerve to brag about how she was using a guy that she didn't like for his money. She asked the guy to shell out some dough, and he basically played her ass and cussed her out. When I asked her what she did to deserve the money she was like, "Hello, I am a QUEEN! If he can't take care of me, then he's not a real man." The rest of the weekend she talked about how she knows that god is gonna send her a rich man to take care of her and her daughter. :rolleyes:

Anyways, here's a man's perspective on gold diggers. It's from craigslist.




What am I doing wrong?
Okay, I'm tired of beating around the bush. I'm a beautiful
(spectacularly beautiful) 25 year old girl. I'm articulate and classy.
I'm not from New York. I'm looking to get married to a guy who makes at
least half a million a year. I know how that sounds, but keep in mind
that a million a year is middle class in New York City, so I don't think
I'm overreaching at all.
Are there any guys who make 500K or more on this board? Any wives? Could
you send me some tips? I dated a business man who makes average around
200 - 250. But that's where I seem to hit a roadblock. 250,000 won't get
me to central park west. I know a woman in my yoga class who was married
to an investment banker and lives in Tribeca, and she's not as pretty as
I am, nor is she a great genius. So what is she doing right? How do I
get to her level?
Here are my questions specifically:
- Where do you single rich men hang out? Give me specifics- bars,
restaurants, gyms
-What are you looking for in a mate? Be honest guys, you won't hurt my
feelings
-Is there an age range I should be targeting (I'm 25)?
- Why are some of the women living lavish lifestyles on the upper east
side so plain? I've seen really 'plain jane' boring types who have
nothing to offer married to incredibly wealthy guys. I've seen drop dead
gorgeous girls in singles bars in the east village. What's the story
there?
- Jobs I should look out for? Everyone knows - lawyer, investment
banker, doctor. How much do those guys really make? And where do they
hang out? Where do the hedge fund guys hang out?
- How you decide marriage vs. just a girlfriend? I am looking for
MARRIAGE ONLY
Please hold your insults - I'm putting myself out there in an honest
way. Most beautiful women are superficial; at least I'm being up front
about it. I wouldn't be searching for these kind of guys if I wasn't
able to match them - in looks, culture, sophistication, and keeping a
nice home and hearth.
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial
interests
PostingID: 432279810

THE ANSWER
Dear Pers-431649184:
I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully
about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament.
Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your
bill; that is I make more than $500K per year. That said here's how I
see it.
Your offer, from the prospective of a guy like me, is plain and simple a
crappy business deal. Here's why. Cutting through all the B.S., what you
suggest is a simple trade: you bring your looks to the party and I bring
my money. Fine, simple. But here's the rub, your looks will fade and my
money will likely continue into perpetuity...in fact, it is very likely
that my income increases but it is an absolute certainty that you won't
be getting any more beautiful!
So, in economic terms you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning
asset. Not only are you a depreciating asset, your depreciation
accelerates! Let me explain, you're 25 now and will likely stay pretty
hot for the next 5 years, but less so each year. Then the fade begins in
earnest. By 35 stick a fork in you!
So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy
and hold...hence the rub...marriage. It doesn't make good business sense
to "buy you" (which is what you're asking) so I'd rather lease. In case
you think I'm being cruel, I would say the following. If my money were
to go away, so would you, so when your beauty fades I need an out. It's
as simple as that. So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage.
Separately, I was taught early in my career about efficient markets. So,
I wonder why a girl as "articulate, classy and spectacularly beautiful"
as you has been unable to find your sugar daddy. I find it hard to
believe that if you are as gorgeous as you say you are that the $500K
hasn't found you, if not only for a tryout.
By the way, you could always find a way to make your own money and then
we wouldn't need to have this difficult conversation.
With all that said, I must say you're going about it the right way.
Classic "pump and dump." I hope this is helpful, and if you want to
enter into some sort of lease, let me know.
 
It doesnt seem like everyone is working on the same definition of what a gold digger is. :spinning:


I assumed most people had the same common understanding of what a gold digger is, but it appears I'm wrong. There are enough songs about them. Basically: Will drop draws for money.
I don't consider a woman who is about getting her education, but also seeks a man on her socioeconomic level or higher, a gold digger.
I don't consider a woman who wants to be spoiled by her man or a woman who take into consideration (in part) a man's earning potential, a gold digger, necessarily.

The link below sums up what I would say most people consider gold diggers, hence I never knew many ppl considered it a positive thing.

LINK
 
Last edited:
I assumed most people had the same common understanding of what a gold digger is, but it appears I'm wrong. There are enough songs about them. Basically: Will drop draws for money.
I don't consider a woman who is about getting her education, but also seeks a man on her socioeconomic level or higher, a gold digger.
I don't consider a woman who wants to be spoiled by her man or a woman who take into consideration (in part) a man's earning potential, a gold digger, necessarily.

The link below sums up what I would say most people consider gold diggers, hence I never knew many ppl considered it a positive thing.

LINK

If money is your NUMERO UNO consideration, you're a golddigger. And there are MANY college educated, smart, independent golddiggers out there. It's not necessarily that they're not doing anything for themselves, it's that they don't want to be the only one contributing to their own pot. Because, again - I know quite a few independent golddiggers (have their own place, cars, educated, good jobs, travel with or without a man), but won't consider dating a man that's not got some $$$ and is willing to spend.

But I also think "golddigger" is a term inadequate men came up with because they realized that before they had money, they were getting no play (because they had nothing to offer). And once they got some money, they started getting play (because at least there was SOMETHING to offer).

Notice who's yelling about golddiggers. It's the ugly rappers (I'm just keepin it real). Ice-T. Too-Short. The Cash Money Clique. Game. Biggie (RIP). And it goes both ways - they complain about it, but they play right into it. Hello - Superhead?!?!?? She's released her second book, is working on a third and those dumb rappers are still sleeping with her behind - because they don't have a problem with it.

And like other posters have mentioned, Golddigger is also a western term, because we look at marriage as love and soul mates and whatnot. In many eastern countries where marriages are arranged, a man's finances ARE the reason why the union is arranged. And usually its not just his finances, but the finances of EVERYONE in his family. Dowries? Money in exchange for marriage. And in many of the world's wealthiest families, those with daughters are STILL trying to marry up.

Again, I don't have a problem with it as long as you're upfront about it. It's like a man who says "i'm looking for quick sex". I respect that because he's told me he wants, I can consider his proposal, say no, respectfully, and he and I can both move on.
 
I feel like men already know when a chick is a gold digger, yet choose to still deal with them for their own personal reasons.Men are gold diggers too...but they're digging for a different kind of gold, usually. The trophy of a younger woman, a pretty woman, a really smart/degree holding woman, a shut up and sit down woman, a sex freak open minded, etc.

And you can be a gold digger without being dependent. You can have your own career, money, education, etc... and still have the 'benefit' of being a gold digger.
IE... you can make 6 figures from your job on your own...and make another 6 figures from gold digging.

Thank you for saying the bolded:clap:. ITA. A lot of men that call women “golddiggers” seem to go out of their way looking for them. I can honestly say that I’m not a gold-digger, but I am often treated like one by men (let me explain). See, men like to be able to provide for women. I am now in a position to provide for myself, but when I was in school, I was fortunate enough to have parents that could afford to provide for me (mom and dad), so I didn’t ever have to go on a date with a guy I couldn’t stand to get a meal (some of my friends had to do this). However, most of the guys I have dated hate the idea of allowing me to pay for things, and want to pay for things. So, if I let them, am I a gold-digger? Some might say yes, I say no! And truthfully, if men were a little more honest, many like “gold-diggers” because they can get away with more. If I don’t depend on your money, then you become “accountable” to me (i.e. sleeping around and disrespectful behavior becomes intolerable). With a gold-digger, if he’s footing the bill (rent, bills, dinners, gifts, etc.) it’s a little harder to complain. And I think many men would prefer things this way (the latter)!
 
I feel like men already know when a chick is a gold digger, yet choose to still deal with them for their own personal reasons.

Gold digging females are USUALLY digging for money. Sometimes status but usually money.

Men are gold diggers too...but they're digging for a different kind of gold, usually. The trophy of a younger woman, a pretty woman, a really smart/degree holding woman, a shut up and sit down woman, a sex freak open minded, etc.

It's a give and take relationship... so if people wanna enter into that, more power to them!

And you can be a gold digger without being dependent. You can have your own career, money, education, etc... and still have the 'benefit' of being a gold digger.

IE... you can make 6 figures from your job on your own...and make another 6 figures from gold digging.


Well now...Suerte ....:grin:

love your take on this subject.... :yep:

I respect the honesty of a woman owning up to her intentions, not cloaking them in political correctness..

who the flip cares anyhow, what goes on between consenting adults...

I dont hate or congraulate...but it seems obvious to me how folks seem to need/searching for a flimsy cloak of respectabilty to perch themselves from.....( generally speaking, peeps....not addressing anyone here):spinning:
 
Quite honestly I think the only reason sisters have an issue with "gold digging" is because BROTHERS have cried foul. Lazy, underachieving, broke, or players who don't wanna do the right thing...their protests have led to us going all "na-ah, that's not me!"....but let there not be one black man worried about gd'ers and all being FINANCIALLY generous and supportive to the women they date....you wouldn't hear one PEEP out of the....erm...."independent women". We are "INDEPENDENT" by necessity...not by design.

Ooooooh, you know you spoke the truth right there!
 
hahaha my dowry is collecting interest:drunk:

But all jokes aside I am grateful for the sense of worth my father instilled in me at an early age. All the craziness going on with women believing they have to settle and "work with" somebody to prove this fake sense of "strength" is one American value I am glad to have skipped. Gold digging is a patriarchal term coined by men who couldnt do any better now we have women lobbying it at other women, and black women do this a whole lot. Since we are quoting songs "On that independent ishhhhhh give it all up for a husband and some kids" -Kanye.

:yep::yep::yep:
 
I think you just won your case!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A few things: being a golddigger doesn't mean you're necessarily dependent on someone else. I've got a friend who dates nothing but men with money - buying her Gucci watches and shoes, taking her out for dates where afterwards they go stay in the Le Meridien and Beverly Hills Hilton hotel (even though they both live in LA). AND she works - full time, good job, her own place, her own money.

And men CLAIM they don't like golddiggers - cuz they can't be upfront and say they're essentially paying for someone's company. But think about it - if men hated golddiggers so much, then how does Superhead manage to still date men in the industry?? They know what she's about, hell - we ALL do. Men like good company (good could mean good looking, good conversation, smart, educated, or good sex). Women like feel secure (financially, emotionally, spiritually). If both folks go into the situation HONESTLY, I've got no problems with it.

I look at golddiggers like this - if you're up front about what you want and he's upfront about what he wants then what's the problem???

The only thing I don't like about SOME golddiggers is when they corrupt men, so that the next woman they meet they've got all KINDS of baggage.
 
This probably won't be a popular opinion, and I'm not saying this to knock either side, but as something that I pondered. Since we're looking at this . If you're hunting Lions, you might still hit up the San Diego Zoo, but you're likely to have greater success in Sub-Saharan Africa. I agree with this:yep:

Accordingly, some black men claim they have an easier time climbing the corporate ladder with a white SO or wife, especially for the networking and dinner party nature of corporate America. Would that be understandable self interest? Since we're speaking of protecting our personal investments and things of a practical nature :look:

I disagree with the pink bolded (not you, just this line of thinking), and theBlacks I know at the top of corporate America (and they are the ones at the tipity-top) all have Black wives. I find that younger Black men in corporate America have this mentality, but they are in for a rude awakening, as Black men are being replaced in many industries with Indian and Latino men, who can both fulfill the “brown” color, with the added benefits of bilingual capabilities! Just an observation I’ve personally made.
 
I assumed most people had the same common understanding of what a gold digger is, but it appears I'm wrong. There are enough songs about them. Basically: Will drop draws for money.

Okay ladies, let’s bring some history in here. This whole golddigger thing came about after the feminist movement. Cause if we were being honest, most women from the “olden” days:lol: (i.e. our grandmothers and before) married men they believed could provide for and take care of them. This was the system, and it was what they believed. A woman’s role was to take care of the family, cook, clean, accommdate her husband provide for his sexual needs. In exchange, the man went out and worked, brought home the bread and kept a roof over the family’s head. Today, it seems that women that want a man to take care of them are called golddiggers. Now, I don’t consider myself a golddigger, and I am a highly educated, successful, young and highly attractive woman (and the hair is fly, courtesy of LHCF:lol:).

I could easily be a golddigger, b/c I am a Black woman that attracts a lot of White, Middle Eastern, South American, Indian, and African/Caribbean men (not just Black American men). And they always want to pay/take care of me. I look at it like this. Once upon a time, gender roles were clear. Yes, there were issues of sexism and woman having to take care of their families (a phenomenon in the Black community—Black women have always worked as a whole). However, a man’s job was to provide financially, a woman’s job was to provide emotionally and be the homemaker. Now that things have gotten “out of whack,” I think that confusion has set in. These are just my thoughts, and you don’t have to agree!

Some of the qualities of a “golddigger” today were simply what women were taught to look for in a man. IMO, a man should want to provide for his woman, take care of her and his family. No, he doesn’t have to be a rich man, but the desire should be there to provide. I feel that a man that’s comfortable allowing you to pay for everything and that doesn’t want to be better has some growing up to do—sorry, that’s just my opinion. And I know I’m not a materialistic woman, but I could be. I did grow up with a father who was a great provider. And he showers us with lavish gifts, but I don’t expect these things from a man. But I’ve never dated a guy who didn’t desire to do and be better—and this is the quality I believe women should look for. I’m not ashamed of this. My stuff is tight. So I will not apologize for wanting a man that’s tight too. And if he’s working on getting it together, that’s cool. I just need to see that he has the ambition!
 
If money is your NUMERO UNO consideration, you're a golddigger. And there are MANY college educated, smart, independent golddiggers out there. It's not necessarily that they're not doing anything for themselves, it's that they don't want to be the only one contributing to their own pot. Because, again - I know quite a few independent golddiggers (have their own place, cars, educated, good jobs, travel with or without a man), but won't consider dating a man that's not got some $$$ and is willing to spend.

But I also think "golddigger" is a term inadequate men came up with because they realized that before they had money, they were getting no play (because they had nothing to offer).

I agree with your bolded, but does this really make you a golddigger? (To want a man who can provide for you, even though you can provide for yourself?). I’m just asking the question. As much as we go back and forth with this, men were designed to provide and protect; women were designed to nurture. No matter what you religious or personal beliefs, the older I get the more I realize this is just the truth. However, b/c of how things are in our society, we (esp. Black women) are being raised to provide and protect our men, while our men are making a lot of emotional decisions, and this is ass-backwards, IMO (:yep: yep I said it). I personally believe that we need to raise our daughters to have a sense of value, one that is seriously lacking, like water in the Sahara! There’s nothing wrong with getting an education and making that money for yourself. I’ve done this. However, we as women should be okay with depending on a man—not necessarily to the point of complete absurdity where we know absolutely nothing about the finances. However, look at our women! We stereotypically get screwed. Kim Porter. The ATL woman with Diddy’s baby. Scary Spice. The list could go on and on. We are always trying to do for ourselves, and I’m all for independence. But please hold a man accountable for being ambitious. He doesn’t have to be Donald Trump or Bill Gates. But he should value you enough to want better for both of you!
 
Okay ladies, let’s bring some history in here. This whole golddigger thing came about after the feminist movement. Cause if we were being honest, most women from the “olden” days:lol: (i.e. our grandmothers and before) married men they believed could provide for and take care of them. This was the system, and it was what they believed. A woman’s role was to take care of the family, cook, clean, accommdate her husband provide for his sexual needs. In exchange, the man went out and worked, brought home the bread and kept a roof over the family’s head. Today, it seems that women that want a man to take care of them are called golddiggers. Now, I don’t consider myself a golddigger, and I am a highly educated, successful, young and highly attractive woman (and the hair is fly, courtesy of LHCF:lol:).

I could easily be a golddigger, b/c I am a Black woman that attracts a lot of White, Middle Eastern, South American, Indian, and African/Caribbean men (not just Black American men). And they always want to pay/take care of me. I look at it like this. Once upon a time, gender roles were clear. Yes, there were issues of sexism and woman having to take care of their families (a phenomenon in the Black community—Black women have always worked as a whole). However, a man’s job was to provide financially, a woman’s job was to provide emotionally and be the homemaker. Now that things have gotten “out of whack,” I think that confusion has set in. These are just my thoughts, and you don’t have to agree!

Some of the qualities of a “golddigger” today were simply what women were taught to look for in a man. IMO, a man should want to provide for his woman, take care of her and his family. No, he doesn’t have to be a rich man, but the desire should be there to provide. I feel that a man that’s comfortable allowing you to pay for everything and that doesn’t want to be better has some growing up to do—sorry, that’s just my opinion. And I know I’m not a materialistic woman, but I could be. I did grow up with a father who was a great provider. And he showers us with lavish gifts, but I don’t expect these things from a man. But I’ve never dated a guy who didn’t desire to do and be better—and this is the quality I believe women should look for. I’m not ashamed of this. My stuff is tight. So I will not apologize for wanting a man that’s tight too. And if he’s working on getting it together, that’s cool. I just need to see that he has the ambition!

I agree with your post. I really don't see anything wrong with wanting a man that is willing and able to take care of me. Of course I can take care of myself and I have worked hard to get an education and maintain my financial independence. If I did marry a man that was taking care of me, I would still pursue my goals and maintain my career. I don't think that constitutes being a golddigger....
 
I agree with your bolded, but does this really make you a golddigger? (To want a man who can provide for you, even though you can provide for yourself?). I’m just asking the question. As much as we go back and forth with this, men were designed to provide and protect; women were designed to nurture. No matter what you religious or personal beliefs, the older I get the more I realize this is just the truth. However, b/c of how things are in our society, we (esp. Black women) are being raised to provide and protect our men, while our men are making a lot of emotional decisions, and this is ass-backwards, IMO (:yep: yep I said it). I personally believe that we need to raise our daughters to have a sense of value, one that is seriously lacking, like water in the Sahara! There’s nothing wrong with getting an education and making that money for yourself. I’ve done this. However, we as women should be okay with depending on a man—not necessarily to the point of complete absurdity where we know absolutely nothing about the finances. However, look at our women! We stereotypically get screwed. Kim Porter. The ATL woman with Diddy’s baby. Scary Spice. The list could go on and on. We are always trying to do for ourselves, and I’m all for independence. But please hold a man accountable for being ambitious. He doesn’t have to be Donald Trump or Bill Gates. But he should value you enough to want better for both of you!

Thank you!!!!! I have seen to many smart, educated, successful black women get the short end of the stick and when you want better you get called a goldigger :nono:
 
I agree with your bolded, but does this really make you a golddigger? (To want a man who can provide for you, even though you can provide for yourself?). I’m just asking the question. As much as we go back and forth with this, men were designed to provide and protect; women were designed to nurture. No matter what you religious or personal beliefs, the older I get the more I realize this is just the truth. However, b/c of how things are in our society, we (esp. Black women) are being raised to provide and protect our men, while our men are making a lot of emotional decisions, and this is ass-backwards, IMO (:yep: yep I said it). I personally believe that we need to raise our daughters to have a sense of value, one that is seriously lacking, like water in the Sahara! There’s nothing wrong with getting an education and making that money for yourself. I’ve done this. However, we as women should be okay with depending on a man—not necessarily to the point of complete absurdity where we know absolutely nothing about the finances. However, look at our women! We stereotypically get screwed. Kim Porter. The ATL woman with Diddy’s baby. Scary Spice. The list could go on and on. We are always trying to do for ourselves, and I’m all for independence. But please hold a man accountable for being ambitious. He doesn’t have to be Donald Trump or Bill Gates. But he should value you enough to want better for both of you!

:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy
 
I like these golddigging threads, because in a weird way they are empowering.

I've never had a problem with golddiggers or golddigging because I admire single-mindedness. People will poo poo the effort it takes to be a real golddigger, but honestly, how many of you stubble across eligible millionaires and billionnaires on a regular basis. It takes a calculated and determined woman to orchestrate those encounters and it takes a charming and inventive woman to maximize them. I don't think all of those traits occur naturally in any one person, so I think there is commitment and dedication involved in deciding that what you want is a rich man and then going for it. (Of course rich is relative, and if 100K and a house in the burbs is rich enough for you, your job is going to be easier than if your goal is to rule a principality alongside your sugar daddy)

At the same time, golddiggers always make me think of the phrase "be careful what you wish for" because if they are doing their job right and really earning their keep, then they are sacrificing a lot for that money. It's probably worth it in most cases, but sometimes I wonder.

In any case, I say congratulate. I'm always happy to see another woman move up in the world.
 
I agree with your bolded, but does this really make you a golddigger? (To want a man who can provide for you, even though you can provide for yourself?). I’m just asking the question. As much as we go back and forth with this, men were designed to provide and protect; women were designed to nurture. No matter what you religious or personal beliefs, the older I get the more I realize this is just the truth. However, b/c of how things are in our society, we (esp. Black women) are being raised to provide and protect our men, while our men are making a lot of emotional decisions, and this is ass-backwards, IMO (:yep: yep I said it). I personally believe that we need to raise our daughters to have a sense of value, one that is seriously lacking, like water in the Sahara! There’s nothing wrong with getting an education and making that money for yourself. I’ve done this. However, we as women should be okay with depending on a man—not necessarily to the point of complete absurdity where we know absolutely nothing about the finances. However, look at our women! We stereotypically get screwed. Kim Porter. The ATL woman with Diddy’s baby. Scary Spice. The list could go on and on. We are always trying to do for ourselves, and I’m all for independence. But please hold a man accountable for being ambitious. He doesn’t have to be Donald Trump or Bill Gates. But he should value you enough to want better for both of you!

We're going in circles. Who came up with the term "golddigger"?? It wasn't women. And I'm willing to be it wasn't even WEALTHY men - because wealthy men have no problem paying for attractive company.

Its the men who don't have much (on the grand scale) and are mad because they're realizing that their ugly friends who have money are getting more action from beautiful women. Truly wealthy men don't complain about paying for the company of an attractive woman because they understand that it's an unsigned contract. And women don't mind being "kept" because again, it's an unsigned contract. You've got two willing individuals who are CLEAR about what they bring to the table and are ok with what the other person has to offer.

When golddigging goes wrong is when the agreement isn't explicit.
- Either dude is paying up and isn't getting what he wants.
- Dude is getting what he wants but the female isn't getting the cash (or gifts) that she had hoped for.

What's the difference between a golddigger and a girl with a sugar daddy?? The ONLY difference is that the sugar daddy is OK with being exactly that - a means to an end.

And no, we don't stereotypically get screwed. You pulled the few none cases and tried to make them the norm. What about Kanye's girl, Alexis?? She was with him when he had nothing - and promised her the world then. He's got the world now, and he's holding true to his promise. What about Nas and Kelis (no, Kelis was not balling out of control when they met - half the world hadn't heard of her)? What about Will and Jada (same thing)? Or Samuel and his wife? Denzel and his wife?

The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Put what you want out there and then LET HIM determine whether or not you're worth it.
 
Back
Top