[DreamP346]

So something that was mentioned in another post got me thinking and thought it might be a good topic of debate. Marrying somebody for their money or looks. What are your thoughts. I will add mine.

The idea of marrying for love is more of a recent trend. In many societies, love is still not the primary reason for marriage. It may be power, financial stability, solidify family relationship, succession, etc. Marrying for love is often a luxury that is a western tradition. To me, there is nothing wrong with marrying for money or for a person's looks as long as there is no deceptions. Why do we value relations built on love over other factors. We know love doesn't mean a successful marriage. If anything, it probably has very little impact on a successful marriage. It may make things easier, but I don't think it leads to a successful marriage.

Also what is love? Just a bunch of chemicals firing away in your body, often leading you to make a fool out of yourself. Why are decision made based on chemical reactions we can't control so much more important than logical decisions about what one feels they need from a spouse?

[Something_Awesome]

SP, I was about to be all over the "marrying for love" bandwagon (which is influenced by attractiveness IMO), but then I read your second and third paragraphs . I guess you're right. I am sort of an idealist though and would be devastated if I found out someone married me for anything other than love. I would also be bummed even if there was no deception about it.

I would also like to say that there is the chance people can learn to love each other. I do not know if any of you guys have seen the move The Painted Veil, but it deals with that issue, at least the way I perceoved it. I was much younger mentally and much more immature when I watched it, but my take away is that people can be forced to like each other. Is that bad? If the love becomes genuine, does it matter how you go to that point whether it was forced or otherwise?

[jen1447]

I'm not a cynic but I agree with the skepticism about the concept of love. It's not that I don't believe in it, but in the end I think it really is essentially a chemical reaction in the brain that's designed to foster procreation, which is biologically our biggest responsibility in life. It's why being in love feels so good and heartbreak feels so bad - your body is like a crack dealer when it comes to rewarding good behavior, with 'good' being anything that increases your chances of reproducing. And much like a crack dealer, your body doesn't care about the consequences of failure either. Get dumped, the crack stops, you get the hardcore DTs and die. Natural selection.

[Stillness]

Good topic. I think that money, love, and looks are all bad reasons to marry by themselves. The rich, pretty person you love could be a horrible individual that would make your life miserable once you marry them.

Attraction is important, but spirituality, goals, expectations in marriage, and personality trump it. Full blown romantic/erotic love is not necessary (and maybe not even desirable) before marriage. I don't think you can really have that until you are already well into your marriage anyway. Views toward money...definitely. Money itself...no. If neither person has any, it may be a reason to not marry.

[Something_Awesome]

I dunno Jen... I am not sure I need to procreate. My GF really does. I think I'd rather not have kids only because I can be pretty protective and I know I can't protect them from everything, like bullies at school.

It's too bad you don't believe in real love (at least the way I took it)

[Baboy]

Methinks, sp346, that my comments about a woman who married a guy with a big wallet and a small penis might just be the underpinning for your query.

So I'll go first, unless someone manages to squeeze in while I am composing.

In matrimonial law circles, it is oft said that spouses marry in contemplation of each other's assets and prospects. There is no ill in that. What is wrong to me - and here I do not mean "wrong" in some moral sense, but in the sense of being unlikely to form a sound foundation for a marriage - is marrying solely in contemplation of a single asset, particularly one subject to change, beyond anyone's control. Looks can fade over time. Fortunes can be lost.

I have far greater financial resources than my wife. Not only did I have a significant asset base when we married, I had far greater earning capacity. I would expect her to take that into account in deciding to marry. She would have some assurance that I could provide for her and children in a way she could not on her own, and that many men could not do as well. For me, I got a beautiful young woman, who had demonstrated an array of domestic skills, showed herself to be patient and loving towards children, and with whom I had the best sex I had ever known (and I had had some pretty good sex). So right there, there was some quid pro quo.

You ask what is love. No doubt there are some here who will be able to give eloquent voice to that one. I have some views on the matter and could perhaps write a treatise on the topic, but time does not permit and I do not profess to have much insight into the topic than anyone else. Love has many faces and for me, it probably falls somewhat into the genre of "I can't tell you what one looks like, but I know one when I see one". I definitely found it.

Marrying for looks or money might suit some. In some of those cases, love might follow, with luck. I'm not sure I subscribe to the "love conquers all", or "all we need is love" viewpoint. If one eschews the notion that money is of any importance in a relationship, provided there is love, that noble sentiment might be sorely challenged when trying to raise a family in a state of grinding poverty. The love might falter when survival is at stake.

I would venture that the best marriages embody a host of factors, some tangible, others less so. My wife married, in part, for financial security; me in part for a vivacious partner I found irresistibly sexy and who has an abundance of talents that, although not money-makers, I am able to appreciate. She does things for me. I do things for her. We enjoy each other's company. We have fun. We have a wonderful child and enjoy co-parenting.

At the time I married, had I been less financially secure, I might well have looked for someone who could be a financial contributor to the marriage. Ours is a "traditional" marriage, with my wife a stay-at-home mother. She has worked outside the home from time to time, but more as just an occasional diversion, or to help someone out, rather than to make money. Her wages are generally modest. But, because I love her, I support her in that endeavor, even though the argument could be made that it is uneconomic for her to take employment. I want to do for her what makes her happy. If tomorrow she tells me that bringing home a boy toy for sex will make her happy and I'll get a bj in payment, I think it will be time to part company. If she tells me she loves my heavy wallet but despises my small penis, the denouement will be upon us.

It's 2 p.m. on a weekday here and I should get back to work. Interesting topic, sp346. Quickly scanning what I have written, I would not give it full marks for completeness, but it sets out a few of my thoughts. Perhaps more anon.

[Baboy]

So much for being first.

[jen1447]

I dunno Jen... I am not sure I need to procreate. My GF really does. I think I'd rather not have kids only because I can be pretty protective and I know I can't protect them from everything, like bullies at school.

Your conscious mind might not want kids, but your genes have other ideas.

[Something_Awesome]

Your conscious mind might not want kids, but your genes have other ideas.

What about your genes Jen? And you were never in love?

[CHANDLERS WISH]

Bone of contention, once, no more .

Still to today I shake my head. Wind back 6 years, separated, believe in marriage, love attempt to reconcile and pose the question. "What is it you love about me?" ... Answer " Your looks and business head"... Shakes head, does not reconcile, walks away.

Fast forward to now fiancé - 4.5 years together = love.

I was making a comment to D the other day. In my younger years I was 5 foot 11 with high heels, long blonde hair, size Aussie 10 a model. All the "rich" dudes of Adelaide, tried the handbag thing but I refused. Imagine, I could be a millionaire now, having put up with some jerk that had several women a small penis, loads of cash and a couple of spoilt kids, heck one could have turned out like Elliot Rogers I am sure I still would have been a work-a-holic.

Alas, I chose to make my own life by myself as I sit here smiling hard life but a good life, wonderful life, normal life, happy life.

I always suspect It commences from your up-bringing. The little princesses groomed by Mom to take the cake and eat it. Spoilt kids, perhaps Mom wasn't too bad but stuffed up and now wants daughter to be like her, perhaps she wants to be looked after by daughter... I don't get why girls do this? Money is still the root of all evil yes?

I don't know I believe in love, I have love in my life now but it's not just about chemistry and this could be down to age, wisdom, been there, done that but for me it's about laughter, someone caring, helping, making me laugh, showing me love. Wouldn't swap that for the World.