Prominent Republican: Women Need To Be Paid Less So They Can Find Husbands

[InTheLight]

"The survey polled 1,134 people nationwide with incomes ranging between $30,000 to $60,000 (squarely in the median range for nationwide incomes). The survey asked: "How willing are you to marry an average-looking person that you liked, if they had money?"

See, I don't see this question as being "would you marry for money?" I would answer the opposite question the same: How willing are you to marry an average-looking person that you liked, if they had no money?"

While I agree with your post Ann, the real question in the OP is, "if the pay gap did not exist, do you believe that half of all women would not get married?" That is the hypothetical situation that Mrs. Schlafly presented in the article. IMO, it is patently false. That's what I'm objecting to along with the idea that women are primarily looking for a mate that makes more money. All this other defense of her is a misdirection away from her stupid statement.

 

[InTheLight]

Women in their 30s were the most likely to say they would marry for money (74%) while men in their 20s were the least likely (41%).


Not so old, doddering and out of touch as some of you who didn't bother to research the subject thought, huh?

That's called moving the goal posts. Schlafly contends that half of all women would not get married if their potential spouse made the same (or presumably less) money than them.

It's not the same question as "would you marry an average looking man if he had money."

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

That's called moving the goal posts. Schlafly contends that half of all women would not get married if their potential spouse made the same (or presumably less) money than them.

You really need to wake up and smell the coffee. As IJ and I said, she isn't writing prescriptively. She's writing descriptively. She isn't drawing conclusions. She is playing out the string, so to speak, if the trend continues.

It's not the same question as "would you marry an average looking man if he had money."

If you want to think that, fine. No skin off my nose. But your "conclusion" comes from your bias against her, so I put no stock in it. God bless.

 

[annsni]

While I agree with your post Ann, the real question in the OP is, "if the pay gap did not exist, do you believe that half of all women would not get married?" That is the hypothetical situation that Mrs. Schlafly presented in the article. IMO, it is patently false. That's what I'm objecting to along with the idea that women are primarily looking for a mate that makes more money. All this other defense of her is a misdirection away from her stupid statement.

I agree. If the pay gap didn't exist, maybe then people would marry for something that actually matters? Like I said, I didn't marry my husband because he made a lot of money and while he did end up making good money at one time in our lives, if money were my focus, I'd leave him now that he's a pastor. We now make about half of what we made before he became a pastor. But that's not why I married him. I'd sell the house, get a full time job myself, go to become a one car family - all so that we could afford to live. But I would not give up my husband.

 

[Scarlett O.]

TND,

I thought the research you linked contained too many variables to categorically state that women are looking for money in a husband or they won't marry him.

It asked, "If you found a man to be average looking and you liked him, would you marry him if he had money." That's too many variables to claim that the women saying that they would marry this man are only after his money.

I think if someone is wanting to prove Phyllis' assertion that women won't find a mate unless it is someone who makes more money than her then another type of study should be done.

• Poll about 100,000 unmarried women from ages 20 to 50.
• Give them 10 characteristics of a potential husband such as money, integrity, religious beliefs, having the same life goals, sense of humor, looks, well-respected/leader in community, ...... and more.
• Have them rank these not from most important to least important, but have these women rank these from #1 being a non-negotiable factor and #10 being something that she could waver on and be flexible.

Then, I think we could dogmatically state whether or not women are looking for money in a husband and whether nor not women with high-paying jobs are still able to find husbands.

 

[InTheLight]

TND,

I thought the research you linked contained too many variables to categorically state that women are looking for money in a husband or they won't marry him.

It asked, "If you found a man to be average looking and you liked him, would you marry him if he had money." That's too many variables to claim that the women saying that they would marry this man are only after his money.

I think if someone is wanting to prove Phyllis' assertion that women won't find a mate unless it is someone who makes more money than her then another type of study should be done.

• Poll about 100,000 unmarried women from ages 20 to 50.
• Give them 10 characteristics of a potential husband such as money, integrity, religious beliefs, having the same life goals, sense of humor, looks, well-respected/leader in community, ...... and more.
• Have them rank these not from most important to least important, but have these women rank these from #1 being a non-negotiable factor and #10 being something that she could waver on and be flexible.

Then, I think we could dogmatically state whether or not women are looking for money in a husband and whether nor not women with high-paying jobs are still able to find husbands.

Good points. I'm sure if someone had access to the Census Bureau data they could definitively make a judgment call.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

You people don't like the evidence, tough. I've posted no less than three articles showing the trend, and you want to argue with the statistical methodology. I don't know why you have such a difficult time understanding that young, unbelieving men and women would do something as stupid and shameful as marrying for money, but facts are facts. You don't want to deal with 'em, who cares? I'll leave you with this.

Daily Mail: What women REALLY want: To marry a rich man and stay at home with the childrenhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ant-To-marry-rich-man-stay-home-children.htmlhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ant-To-marry-rich-man-stay-home-children.html

Most women still prefer to marry a man who earns more money than they do and would stay at home with their children if they could afford it, according to a survey published yesterday.

Despite years of equality campaigning and advances for women in the workplace, 64 per cent said they aspire to find a husband who brings home a larger pay packet than they do. None wanted to marry a man who earned less.

This would be a nice sentiment if it wasn't rooted in selfishness, but instead rooted in biblical living. The sad thing is, this is becoming the norm, like it or not.

Thought Catalog: I Don’t Love My Fiancé Anymore, But I Need His Money, So I’m Going To Marry Him Anyway http://thoughtcatalog.com/anonymous...ed-his-money-so-im-going-to-marry-him-anyway/http://thoughtcatalog.com/anonymous...ed-his-money-so-im-going-to-marry-him-anyway/

I think about what my mother would say if she knew, and I cringe. She is a strong feminist — raised in the second wave, where things were loud and new and revolutionary — and she taught me to be the same. I love and embrace my womanhood, and I would embrace my independence along with it, if that were an option. But as of now, it is not, and I could never tell her. I couldn’t watch the way her face fell as she realized that her daughter has fallen into exactly the traps and the lifestyle that she worked so tirelessly to eradicate. She fought to live her own life on her own terms, and I am choosing the comfort and security of living someone else’s.

My fiancé is a good man, much better than I deserve. He is smart, and kind, and extremely generous — with his money, yes, but also with his time and his emotions. He is the friend who would pick you up from the middle of nowhere at three in the morning if your car ran out of gas. He would lend you whatever you needed without asking uncomfortable questions. He believes in the good in people, and life has always rewarded him for it. Until, I guess, life matched him up with me.

When we first met, I was head over heels. I was younger, just out of college, and saw the couple-years-older professional man as this port in a storm of my own recklessness. He provided a sense of warmth and familiarity that I had never known, and I was intoxicated with the feeling of playing house with someone who could actually afford to buy one. While he showed me his version of life — restaurants, shopping trips, vacations — I showed him that there was no need to be as serious and reasonable as he always insisted on being. He became just as obsessed with my frivolity as I was with his reserve.

This is the way the world is going. Deal with it.

 

[church mouse guy]

What no Democrat ever says is that the high federal taxes favored by big business and big government have forced women to work no matter what.

Secondly, no Republican wants to marry a Democrat.