GOLD DIGGERS: Hate or Congratulate?

[Princess4real]

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.

I don't think there's nothing else to say after this.I don't know bout y'all, but I'm worth it!!!

 

[Syrah]

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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

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

Those men that claim they have an easier time climbing the corporate ladder with a non-black wife/SO convinced themselves of this fact BEFORE they started climbing. And these same individuals (male and female) are convinced that their being BLACK is the only problem with their climb up the corporate ladder - so they think that by switching or reducing that as much as possible, they're ok.

What do I think the real problem is???

Honesty. No one is comfortable being honest because society has said that so many things are "not ok" even though in this "free country" we've convinced ourselves of otherwise.

- A man isn't comfortable being honest about wanting a pre-nup because he KNOWS a female will be offended. "What?? He thinks I want him for his money??".
- A woman isn't comfortable with asking for sex early on in the relationship cuz society has taught us that it's "unladylike".

Society has told us that its ok for women to be "taken care of", but not for men. Look at Nick Lachey. Folks were dogging out his manhood the minute he decided to go after some of Jess' money. Do we get upset when Ivanka did the same to Donald??

In the US, "home of the free", we've got so many unspoken rules. Why are interracial relationships more prevalent in western europe?? Because society (IN URBAN AREAS) is more accepting of these relationships. In the US, we're still not ready for it - it's ok in LA, NY, Chicago and SF - but waltz down the street in Savannah GA with a white man, and tell me you don't feel at least ONE pair of eyes.

And feminism. Feminism effed up women...especially black women. Because we went from one side of the spectrum to the other - we rejected everything that was FEMININE about us and did everything we could to emulate. We're so stuck on this "independent" women stuff that we've forgotten what makes a sustainable relationship - hence why there are so many "successful, beautiful, educated, independent" women out there who can't find a man.

:::Man did I get all off topic:::

 

[Syrah]

I don't think there's nothing else to say after this.I don't know bout y'all, but I'm worth it!!!

I'm serious. That's my new thing.

In my last, 6 year relationship, I played "supportive chick" to the tee. Finally got fed up cuz I wasn't getting what I wanted and said "*** this, I'm out" (not in those words of course).

Looking back, I kept wondering "why am I not getting what I want??". Because I didn't ask. Cuz I was so afraid of seeming like our relationship was financial. Cuz I was afraid he'd turn around and be like "oh, so thats what this about?". Relationships are 4 sided - emotional, spiritual, financial and sexual. If one side is missing, the square ain't right. Well, we had a damn TRIANGLE. Ain't no finances, no where!

Forget that. From now I'm asking. You can always tell me no. But I'm not going to get ANYWHERE keeping my mouth shut.

...cuz like you said, we're worth it!

 

[MJ]

And feminism. Feminism effed up women...especially black women. Because we went from one side of the spectrum to the other - we rejected everything that was FEMININE about us and did everything we could to emulate. We're so stuck on this "independent" women stuff that we've forgotten what makes a sustainable relationship - hence why there are so many "successful, beautiful, educated, independent" women out there who can't find a man.

I have to agree with this comment. I was all up in feminist theories when I was in college. I had a staunch feminist professor mentor and everything. Feminist theories, the Second Wave in particular, teach women to focus on their masculine energies in order to emulate and prove to men that we are equal to them, while focusing on all that is wrong with men and their treatment of women throughout the ages. Talk about creating confusion and chaos within women. And as a result, the Superwoman complex -- a schizophrenic personality within women -- began to emerge as we try to do all and be all.

It wasn't until my last year of college when I started having male friends that I came to realize the grave mistakes of the Second wave of the feminist movement, which I'd completely supported up until that point. The shocking truth that I've learnt is that men have feelings. Even now I marvel at this. Because in all my years of research and writing papers, not once did I really realized that men are like us in many ways regarding the emotional sides of their lives. Yeah, they don't open up in the ways we have been taught, but once you get to know them and hear them talk...

I'm looking forward to the Third Feminist wave because it will be a more balance way of approaching life. I think the best of both sexes will be addressed during that wave.

 

[Princess4real]

I'm serious. That's my new thing.

In my last, 6 year relationship, I played "supportive chick" to the tee. Finally got fed up cuz I wasn't getting what I wanted and said "*** this, I'm out" (not in those words of course).

Looking back, I kept wondering "why am I not getting what I want??". Because I didn't ask. Cuz I was so afraid of seeming like our relationship was financial. Cuz I was afraid he'd turn around and be like "oh, so thats what this about?". Relationships are 4 sided - emotional, spiritual, financial and sexual. If one side is missing, the square ain't right. Well, we had a damn TRIANGLE. Ain't no finances, no where!

Forget that. From now I'm asking. You can always tell me no. But I'm not going to get ANYWHERE keeping my mouth shut.

...cuz like you said, we're worth it!

Let me know when you write your book. I would like to have at least 50 copies, to give out to friends and relatives.

 

[SleekandBouncy]

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 (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).
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!

Nothing wrong with that, those aren't qualities of a gold digger, IMO. I had the same expectations for an SO and I got him.
Financial computability is an important aspect of a successful relationship.

Perhaps gold digger is changing in definition. If gold digger meant what it seems many of the women in this thread are defending I don't think there would be much issue. A GD IMO, is a woman that seeks to use a man for his money, will change from a no to a yes if she finds out you own a Benz, will drop the panties for material goods, uses manipulation and deception to gain access and mooch his money. She seeks men based solely on their wealth and seeks, as possible. When the money dries up, so does she. If you don't meet those qualities I don't consider you a gold digger.

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 listed those as hypothetical examples. Any man that actually practices it should be hit by his black momma regardless to how practical and financially sound he may consider it.

 

[SleekandBouncy]

Those men that claim they have an easier time climbing the corporate ladder with a non-black wife/SO convinced themselves of this fact BEFORE they started climbing. And these same individuals (male and female) are convinced that their being BLACK is the only problem with their climb up the corporate ladder - so they think that by switching or reducing that as much as possible, they're ok.

What do I think the real problem is???

Honesty. No one is comfortable being honest because society has said that so many things are "not ok" even though in this "free country" we've convinced ourselves of otherwise.

- A man isn't comfortable being honest about wanting a pre-nup because he KNOWS a female will be offended. "What?? He thinks I want him for his money??".
- A woman isn't comfortable with asking for sex early on in the relationship cuz society has taught us that it's "unladylike".

Society has told us that its ok for women to be "taken care of", but not for men. Look at Nick Lachey. Folks were dogging out his manhood the minute he decided to go after some of Jess' money. Do we get upset when Ivanka did the same to Donald??

In the US, "home of the free", we've got so many unspoken rules. Why are interracial relationships more prevalent in western europe?? Because society (IN URBAN AREAS) is more accepting of these relationships. In the US, we're still not ready for it - it's ok in LA, NY, Chicago and SF - but waltz down the street in Savannah GA with a white man, and tell me you don't feel at least ONE pair of eyes.

And feminism. Feminism effed up women...especially black women. Because we went from one side of the spectrum to the other - we rejected everything that was FEMININE about us and did everything we could to emulate. We're so stuck on this "independent" women stuff that we've forgotten what makes a sustainable relationship - hence why there are so many "successful, beautiful, educated, independent" women out there who can't find a man.

:::Man did I get all off topic:::

I'm feeling your entire post, especially the bolded. Call a spade a spade, but don't tell me it's something other than what it is.
As for the last paragraph Balance is the key. Anyone that denies that the feminist movement didn't start out of necesity needs a history lesson, however it soon morphed into a catalyst for other agendas.
What women should want is choice, whether that's Susie Homemaker or Oprah the mogul. We deserve the right to have your opinions heard, make the same amount of money/get the same promotion opportunities as a man *if* we choose to do the same work.

There's a great deal of value in women past the role of supportive, domestic, but there's still value in the traditional "female" roles.
I will encourage my future-daughter to nurture the traditional "female" qualities and appreciate a man that can provide for their family, but I will also encourage her to be assertive, intelligent, self reliant, free thinking, and authoritative when necessary. Whether she chooses to be an engineer or a stay at home mom is up to her, I'm just happy she'll have a choice.
The male-female energy is very different and we need as a society to accept and value those differences, but adhere to them so strictly that we go back to the time when women couldn't chart their own path in the world.

 

[Reslnt1]

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.

I'm a little confused about the examples that you used???

Sorry but Alexs is not the girl that was with him when "through the wire" came out, he was with another chic then he got with the chic from MTV and then Alexis......I'm gonna see if i can pull her name up..

Kelis....maybe not well known to those that only listen to the radio, but she is very well known internationally and practically her entire 1st album was produced by the Neptunes.

Sam Jackson's wife was with him when he started and is not as well known as he is but thats b/c she is more of a sitcome actress than a box office one...but she got her own...
Jada same thing execept for the few movies she's done

 

[PretteePlease]

i'm sick of dating brokies but i cant say i would date someone solely on wanting them to give me something cause i'm no fool you got to use what you got to get what you dont got and i'm not trying to give it LOL

now setting a standard and saying i wont stand for anything less is something else i think i need to set up some new standards i like him
is no longer working for me

i think that it is totally possible to be independent and taken care of at the same time Spoil me dang it Spoil me


......i ain't saying shes a gold digger but she aint messin w/ no broke.....

(this dont apply to me yet cause i just happen to run into pseudobrokies good job but financial idiots)

 

[SleekandBouncy]

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.
We have to be careful to disassociate what we would like to be true, with what actually is true. The above is an overgeneralization to make acceptable an otherwise unpalatable behavior. It's true in part, but wealthy men are like regular men in that some don't want to be sought solely for money. If a man is looking for a relationship he may not want to feel like his money is calculated or is more desired than he is. Gold diggers aren't necessarily just seeking to be "company" nor are they always straight forward about what they seek.

I'm curious, where y'all are meeting these forthright gold diggers. I can't be the only one that has seen the dark side of it? Nothing is ever simple when it comes to money. Chicks faking everything from interest to pregnancy, manipulating their way on to back accounts, playing all kinds of games to pull out money, etc. If we're talking about another kind that's straight up about her intentions then by all means let her and her man do their thang!

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.

This is definitely true in some cases, but again it's not just less rich men who are mad. Many men worry that such women may up and leave when they least expect it or may have feelings that aren't genuine. When it comes to money, people will lie to their own momma much less a man.

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?


I can't view Kelis or Jada or Denzel's wives as gold diggers. Where are y'all coming up with these definitions?
A gold digger specifically seeks out wealthy men. She's first and foremost about the $$ and will generally use manipulation, deception, and/or sexual enticement to get what she views as hers. However, just because you marry a dude with more money or look for a man who is in part successful doesn't make you a gold digger. Who knows the intent of Denzel's wife or Kelis. Kelis and Nas seem pretty freaky in love to me. Some of y'all are just widening the definition of gold digger to include everything.
This is what I'm working with: Gold digger link

Perhaps the discussion of gold diggers in this thread seems to be predicated on stars or hood rich individuals. There are more regular rich guys who seek the same qualities as any other man especially from women of similar backgrounds. IMO,the discussion of gold digging takes on a different dynamic if we're discussing celebs, ballers, rappers, or athletes. However those types don't make up the bulk of wealthy men especially amongst other races where wealth is more likely to be generational and diversified in great numbers in professional fields.
In my experience, it's fairly obvious to those that have moved around men (and women) with money that male and female gold diggers aren't as welcomed as some in this thread make it appear. Gold diggers aren't limited to either sex and there are a lot of users hiding in the shadows of money lined rooms and it's practiced by people from various classes/races.

 

[cocoberry10]

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.

To your bolded: I agree with some, but not all of your examples. Kanye did screw his girl when he first made it, but now it looks like things are better...we'll see! Nas and Kelis are equal in my mind. Kelis has been around, singing hooks and producing, she wasn't as "famous," but she was doing things in the industry, making $$$. Jada was an actress, and both benefitted from that marriage (maybe she more than he). I'll give you Samuel and Denzel's wives, since neither are actresses!

To your post: I agree with most of what you said!

 

[cocoberry10]

:thatsall: You pretty much just shut this thread DOWN!

Those men that claim they have an easier time climbing the corporate ladder with a non-black wife/SO convinced themselves of this fact BEFORE they started climbing. And these same individuals (male and female) are convinced that their being BLACK is the only problem with their climb up the corporate ladder - so they think that by switching or reducing that as much as possible, they're ok.

What do I think the real problem is???

Honesty. No one is comfortable being honest because society has said that so many things are "not ok" even though in this "free country" we've convinced ourselves of otherwise.

- A man isn't comfortable being honest about wanting a pre-nup because he KNOWS a female will be offended. "What?? He thinks I want him for his money??".
- A woman isn't comfortable with asking for sex early on in the relationship cuz society has taught us that it's "unladylike".

Society has told us that its ok for women to be "taken care of", but not for men. Look at Nick Lachey. Folks were dogging out his manhood the minute he decided to go after some of Jess' money. Do we get upset when Ivanka did the same to Donald??

In the US, "home of the free", we've got so many unspoken rules. Why are interracial relationships more prevalent in western europe?? Because society (IN URBAN AREAS) is more accepting of these relationships. In the US, we're still not ready for it - it's ok in LA, NY, Chicago and SF - but waltz down the street in Savannah GA with a white man, and tell me you don't feel at least ONE pair of eyes.

And feminism. Feminism effed up women...especially black women. Because we went from one side of the spectrum to the other - we rejected everything that was FEMININE about us and did everything we could to emulate. We're so stuck on this "independent" women stuff that we've forgotten what makes a sustainable relationship - hence why there are so many "successful, beautiful, educated, independent" women out there who can't find a man.

:::Man did I get all off topic:::

 

[cocoberry10]

Nothing wrong with that, those aren't qualities of a gold digger, IMO. I had the same expectations for an SO and I got him.
Financial computability is an important aspect of a successful relationship.

Perhaps gold digger is changing in definition. If gold digger meant what it seems many of the women in this thread are defending I don't think there would be much issue. A GD IMO, is a woman that seeks to use a man for his money, will change from a no to a yes if she finds out you own a Benz, will drop the panties for material goods, uses manipulation and deception to gain access and mooch his money. She seeks men based solely on their wealth and seeks, as possible. When the money dries up, so does she. If you don't meet those qualities I don't consider you a gold digger.

I understand this and I agree. However, we say this is a bad thing (and I think that it is a bad thing). But is it really as bad as we say (I'm just posing the question)? Once upon a time, women's primary reason for marrying a man was for what that man could provide. The modern gold-digger has some (maybe not all, but some) of those qualities. Marrying for love has only happened over the last 40-50 years max. I wonder if the way gold diggers act is actually not as bad as we make it out to be. I know in the past, I thought badly of gold-diggers, but now, I can at least appreciate the logic (doesn't mean I'll be one, I just see things differently now)!

 

[cocoberry10]

I agree, especially the bolded!

I'm feeling your entire post, especially the bolded. Call a spade a spade, but don't tell me it's something other than what it is.
As for the last paragraph Balance is the key. Anyone that denies that the feminist movement didn't start out of necesity needs a history lesson, however it soon morphed into a catalyst for other agendas.
What women should want is choice, whether that's Susie Homemaker or Oprah the mogul. We deserve the right to have your opinions heard, make the same amount of money/get the same promotion opportunities as a man *if* we choose to do the same work.

There's a great deal of value in women past the role of supportive, domestic, but there's still value in the traditional "female" roles.
I will encourage my future-daughter to nurture the traditional "female" qualities and appreciate a man that can provide for their family, but I will also encourage her to be assertive, intelligent, self reliant, free thinking, and authoritative when necessary. Whether she chooses to be an engineer or a stay at home mom is up to her, I'm just happy she'll have a choice.
The male-female energy is very different and we need as a society to accept and value those differences, but adhere to them so strictly that we go back to the time when women couldn't chart their own path in the world.

 

[Syrah]

I'm a little confused about the examples that you used???

Sorry but Alexs is not the girl that was with him when "through the wire" came out, he was with another chic then he got with the chic from MTV and then Alexis......I'm gonna see if i can pull her name up..

Kelis....maybe not well known to those that only listen to the radio, but she is very well known internationally and practically her entire 1st album was produced by the Neptunes.

Sam Jackson's wife was with him when he started and is not as well known as he is but thats b/c she is more of a sitcome actress than a box office one...but she got her own...
Jada same thing execept for the few movies she's done

I'm not saying they didn't have their own thing going on - but there was an inequality that existed when they met and STILL exists. Kelis has always had a larger following overseas than here in the US (until recently) - her first 2 albums were virtually UNHEARD of in the US. But Nas was more well known, no?

...and I don't know about Kanye - you might very well be right. I thought she (Alexis) was the "Through the Wire" chick.

 

[cocoberry10]

I don't know any forthright golddiggers either. And I agree with you. Most of the wealthy men I know are just as human as the next guy and want a real relationship with a real woman. I find that those with self-esteem issues, that maybe couldn't get a certain quality mate before becoming wealthy (i.e. many rappers and entertainers) are the ones caught up with the "golddiggers." Most wealthy businessmen I know are married to equally attractive, put together women. For example, many call Tracy Edmonds a "golddigger," however, this woman had a degree from Stanford and had her own things going on before marrying Babyface. And we can see that she still holds her own although they are now divorced. Does she want a man that can take care of her? Of course, and she has every right to. She's beautiful, intelligent, and got her stuff together!

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.
We have to be careful to disassociate what we would like to be true, with what actually is true. The above is an overgeneralization to make acceptable an otherwise unpalatable behavior. It's true in part, but wealthy men are like regular men in that some don't want to be sought solely for money. If a man is looking for a relationship he may not want to feel like his money is calculated or is more desired than he is. Gold diggers aren't necessarily just seeking to be "company" nor are they always straight forward about what they seek.

I'm curious, where y'all are meeting these forthright gold diggers. I can't be the only one that has seen the dark side of it? Nothing is ever simple when it comes to money. Chicks faking everything from interest to pregnancy, manipulating their way on to back accounts, playing all kinds of games to pull out money, etc. If we're talking about another kind that's straight up about her intentions then by all means let her and her man do their thang!

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.

This is definitely true in some cases, but again it's not just less rich men who are mad. Many men worry that such women may up and leave when they least expect it or may have feelings that aren't genuine. When it comes to money, people will lie to their own momma much less a man.

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?


I can't view Kelis or Jada or Denzel's wives as gold diggers. Where are y'all coming up with these definitions?
A gold digger specifically seeks out wealthy men. She's first and foremost about the $$ and will generally use manipulation, deception, and/or sexual enticement to get what she views as hers. However, just because you marry a dude with more money or look for a man who is in part successful doesn't make you a gold digger. Who knows the intent of Denzel's wife or Kelis. Kelis and Nas seem pretty freaky in love to me. Some of y'all are just widening the definition of gold digger to include everything.
This is what I'm working with: Gold digger link

Perhaps the discussion of gold diggers in this thread seems to be predicated on stars or hood rich individuals. There are more regular rich guys who seek the same qualities as any other man especially from women of similar backgrounds. IMO,the discussion of gold digging takes on a different dynamic if we're discussing celebs, ballers, rappers, or athletes. However those types don't make up the bulk of wealthy men especially amongst other races where wealth is more likely to be generational and diversified in great numbers in professional fields.
In my experience, it's fairly obvious to those that have moved around men (and women) with money that male and female gold diggers aren't as welcomed as some in this thread make it appear. Gold diggers aren't limited to either sex and there are a lot of users hiding in the shadows of money lined rooms and it's practiced by people from various classes/races.

 

[SleekandBouncy]

I understand this and I agree. However, we say this is a bad thing (and I think that it is a bad thing). But is it really as bad as we say (I'm just posing the question)? Once upon a time, women's primary reason for marrying a man was for what that man could provide. The modern gold-digger has some (maybe not all, but some) of those qualities. Marrying for love has only happened over the last 40-50 years max. I wonder if the way gold diggers act is actually not as bad as we make it out to be. I know in the past, I thought badly of gold-diggers, but now, I can at least appreciate the logic (doesn't mean I'll be one, I just see things differently now)!

Yes, it is a bad thing if you're deceiving or manipulating the person. Who wants to be married to some chick who's intensity of feeling you can't discern because money is her top priority, who may have a side piece because she's not all that into you or worse, births your children and leaves if/when you go through financial hard times. I've known more than one man who unknowingly married a gold digger only to have her divorce him shortly after (as she planned) and take almost everything.
It's the deception and the feeling of entitlement to someone else's money that makes GDing a bad thing. If two people have an agreement between them that's a different story.

This is why I posted the unpleasant hypotheticals. Using the same logic many are using in this thread we shouldn't have a problem with those scenarios, but we do. My point being the logic is inconsistent.
We seem to be able to use our pragmatic side when discussing THIS topic, but when the roles are reversed we're all sentimental and "what about trust", "what about feelings". The thread about prenups was all about sentimentality and reliance on blind trust, "but he should trust me", but this topic is dominated by "let's consider the other side" and references to history lessons, origin of words, etc.
Let's at least be consistent in our reasoning.

 

[cocoberry10]

I totally agree with you, I was just putting the question out there. And I also know a few really good, wealthy men who have been put through the ringer by a gold digger. I have a friend that almost lost his family business that's over 100 years old (a Black business). He's only 27, and almost lost his family business to a golddigger! So, yes, I know it can happen! Good, kind-hearted wealthy men have been murdered by golddigging women, so be not deceived! There are some trifling females out there!

Yes, it is a bad thing if you're deceiving or manipulating the person. Who wants to be married to some chick who's intensity of feeling you can't discern because money is her top priority, who may have a side piece because she's not all that into you or worse, births your children and leaves if/when you go through financial hard times. I've known more than one man who unknowingly married a gold digger only to have her divorce him shortly after (as she planned) and take almost everything.
It's the deception and the feeling of entitlement to someone else's money that makes GDing a bad thing. If two people have an agreement between them that's a different story.

This is why I posted the unpleasant hypotheticals. Using the same logic many are using in this thread we shouldn't have a problem with those scenarios, but we do. My point being the logic is inconsistent.
We seem to be able to use our pragmatic side when discussing THIS topic, but when the roles are reversed we're all sentimental and "what about trust", "what about feelings". The thread about prenups was all about sentimentality and reliance on blind trust, "but he should trust me", but this topic is dominated by "let's consider the other side" and references to history lessons, origin's of words, etc.
Let's at least be consistent in our reasoning.

 

[shynessqueen]

This is a very interesting thread.

 

[Syrah]

I don't know any forthright golddiggers either. And I agree with you. Most of the wealthy men I know are just as human as the next guy and want a real relationship with a real woman. I find that those with self-esteem issues, that maybe couldn't get a certain quality mate before becoming wealthy (i.e. many rappers and entertainers) are the ones caught up with the "golddiggers." Most wealthy businessmen I know are married to equally attractive, put together women. For example, many call Tracy Edmonds a "golddigger," however, this woman had a degree from Stanford and had her own things going on before marrying Babyface. And we can see that she still holds her own although they are now divorced. Does she want a man that can take care of her? Of course, and she has every right to. She's beautiful, intelligent, and got her stuff together!

I guess it's all in the interpretation - does marrying "up" make you a gold-digger or just a damn good catch (and lucky?)??

And is being a golddigger REALLY a bad thing?

 

[SleekandBouncy]

I totally agree with you, I was just putting the question out there. And I also know a few really good, wealthy men who have been put through the ringer by a gold digger.I have a friend that almost lost his family business that's over 100 years old (a Black business). He's only 27, and almost lost his family business to a golddigger! So, yes, I know it can happen! Good, kind-hearted wealthy men have been murdered by golddigging women, so be not deceived! There are some trifling females out there!

The underlined is disgusting. It's one thing to take into consideration a man's ability to provide financially or seek a man equal in status or even higher with the ability to spoil you, it's another thing to go on with that other kind of nonsense.
I can honestly say I don't know any well to do men or women that would want their child to marry a gold digger, it's just not something that people with real money are happy about.
I hope your friend's business turned out okay. A 100yr old black business is not an every day occurrence.

 

[Miss_Jetsetter]

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.

Seriously, all gold diggers should try to be corporate flight attendants. I have flown a few men mentioned in this thread on many occasions. Funny thing is, a girl who was in my training class just resigned because one of our (big time) owners proposed to her. Aint that 'bout a b****, lol!

 

[cocoberry10]

Bumping………… I ain’t sayin she’s a golddigger, but she ain’t messin with no broke n!$$as!

And for laughs,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU13MRtSD7E

 

[Kawaii1]

Why should I care about a gold digger? If a man is stupid enough to give up his money to a gold-digging chick (which he should be able to tell by all the things she wants) that's his problem. Feel bad for the young ones who get sucked in, that really scars men bad makes them scared and mad.

 

[tocktick]

I'm not sure that all men hate "gold-diggers". In fact, I think some actively seek out women to spoil in return for sex and/or companionship. sometimes these "relationships" are mutually beneficial. I recall Donald Trump saying he realised his wife wasn't with him purely for his charming personality and good looks nor was he with her for her highly intelligent mind . And Anna Nicole Smith's ex-billionaire husband could not have been that stupid as to think she didn't want him for anything else besides money, he was a tycoon after all...there must have been something up top and I'm sure he was wise to the game. Yet he still left her everything. Imo, that's because she provided for him whatever it was that he wanted from here and she got hers in return.

Whilst I do not "hate" gold-diggers because their life is really none of my concern, nor is mine theirs, I generally do not think that a woman should be relying solely on a man for money and to exploit him. However, like I say, some men do want to be exploited so...the lines are blurred. When should one care and when should one not care? If two adults go into the relationship without rose-tinted glasses, they do no care if others disapprove of how they conduct themselves. Maybe relationships have become increasingly over-romanticised nowadays because in previous decades financial security and wealth was picked above looks and love. I suppose the only thing that's potentially distasteful is a person being used by their so-called partner and they do not realise, even worse they may even be in love with that person. I suppose that's what's morally wrong.

 

[sonce]

Now, it's no secret men HATE gold diggers( prolly cuz of the shame of being used)

I beg to differ. Men who can't afford gold diggers hate gold diggers. Men who can afford them are thankful for them because how else would old, arrogant, ugly men with often stank, misogynist, and immoral attitudes get with gorgeous, desirable young women? I've been propositioned by many an older man seeking to make me his young plaything and they know full well that if I took them up on their offer, it would be for their money and their money only. All of them were ready and willing to be used for their money because they had plenty of it and I would be bringing something they didn't have: the prestige and social status associated with having a beautiful, young woman (an older man actually told me this when I was 20). Mind you I can't stand an ugly, stank man, so no amount of money will do.

 

[trini_rican]

You summed it up quite nicely. I believe that men secretly like gold diggers. Gold diggers appeal to the captain-saveahoe in men.

There is a thin line between gold diggin and "marrying well". I don't think there is anything wrong with either now. I wish that I was more open to it when I was younger. So many opportunities passed up because I considered myself too moral to just be with someone for money. Hmph let me meet somebody now that wants to take care of me. . .

ROTFLMAO

 

[trini_rican]

I gotta make my own money! I can't see having a lifestyle and staying with someone to maintain it. Or worse having to ask for money to shop or buy the shoes I'm in love with at Saks. If he drives a nice car - it's still HIS car. IMO it's not worth it. Now I do believe that once you're making yours you need a man that's making as much or more than you. If he wants to do things for you - that's different. But, to be totally dependent on someone else - I could try for a bit but I know it would never work.

 

[harrison]

There is a thin line between gold diggin and "marrying well". I don't think there is anything wrong with either now. I wish that I was more open to it when I was younger. So many opportunities passed up because I considered myself too moral to just be with someone for money. Hmph let me meet somebody now that wants to take care of me. . .

I know that is right.... hmm..

 

[InsertCleverNameHere]

I like spending other people's money better than I like spending my own