House of Eratosthenes

Here we go again with this myth…which must look quite reasonable on the female side of the gender line, I understand. But a myth it is. We gentlemen are supposed to be callously rejecting the ladies who make more cheddar than we do.

The majority of my most successful, good-looking, educated, talented girlfriends are still single.

If they had Y chromosomes, they would have been married a decade ago. Instead, like successful single women all over the country, they trek into their mid- to late 30s on their own — experiencing fabulous professional success, buying real estate and making savvy investments for the future, without much going on in the relationship department.
:
But there’s another factor at work for women at the top of their game: They’re intimidating to men. No matter how enlightened most men claim they are, few are ready to pair up with a woman who is more successful, better paid and better educated — not to mention better traveled, more connected and more socially savvy than they are.

By now, I’ve been out of the dating scene for quite awhile. But I can tell you this is hogwash. It’s a case of women laying out the rejection so naturally, and so easily, that they don’t even realize they’re doing it — chalking it up to the other party as a form of psychological projection.

Men objecting to their wives & girlfriends making more money, is Thing I Doubt Number One, and it is that for a reason. Nobody on the male side has stepped forward to confirm for me this is so, or even to suggest that it is so. I’ve talked to other men about this. So far everyone’s response is the same as mine: I’m virginal to the situation of a woman monogamously involved with me earning more money, and it sounds like a kick-ass change of pace.

No, I was for a brief time a suitor to a lady who was a doctor, making about $30k more than me. That one really didn’t go anywhere. I didn’t even make the first-cut, because I didn’t have anything to offer. That’s not to suggest all the high-earning gals are demanding an opportunity to marry-up — although that certainly is the case with most of them, I think I can suggest…since Dr. Carolyn Kaufman, the expert quoted in the story linked above, comes out and says as much:

She is a perfect example of a woman who has everything except a date. “I have this crazy belief that I have the right to expect my potential partner to be at least as successful as I am, and to have as many things to offer as I do,” she says.

Eminently reasonable. But it substantiates my point. Women are supplying the rejection here, and then rationalizing to themselves that it must be coming from us dudes.

That this is not a universality, might be of some benefit to some charismatic under-achievers hoping to snag a sugar-momma. Fortunately, that’s not me. The high-earning woman who might be willing to consider taking on a beau who earns far less — a very rare breed, that, let’s get that one thing straight — has a short list of adequate substitutes in mind for his compensating attributes. First and foremost, he should be able to change her mood for the better, significantly, and consistently. Be a gift-of-gabber. Be a laughy-talky-jokey guy. A Guy-Smiley. I suppose the relationship could be purely sexual, and on the other hand, I suppose it could be purely compatriotic. He and me against the world, so to speak. That could work; but I fail to see how.

I dunno. Maybe if I was magically transformed into a high earning, single lady for twelve months, my perspective could be changed. I’m convinced that in that situation, it might seem that “men are intimidated by a strong woman”; given the number of such gals who say such a thing, I’m sure that must be the case. But appearances aren’t always reality. Perhaps such women are far less accepting of compromise than their “softer” sisters…and if that’s the case, wouldn’t it be reasonable for the bachelor to favor the more financially humble bride, who would better promise him a future with some domestic tranquility?

Because I can confirm, in a heartbeat, that over on our side of the fence the domestic tranquility has become an ingredient in high demand and short supply. We’ve learned the hard way that our entire personal lives will rise and fall based on this one characteristic derived from our mates. When you’re a guy, and you’re united with a gal who doesn’t appreciate or value your opinion on anything…it’s a walking death. The sun is harsh and not soothing, the food doesn’t taste good, the air is poison in your lungs, and sleep is the only solace around the clock. It’s a miserable existence you wouldn’t wish on your worst freakin’ enemy. Smart guys will avoid the situation like the Black Plague. And it’s late, so we’re pretty-much all smart. We’re not going to stay stupid for too long.

So maybe the gals who earn a lot of money, need to take a few steps backward and ask themselves — seriously, now — how do they treat the fellas who make less, assuming they’re open to dating them at all? And be honest.

The landscape is littered with articles like this one, asserting that men are “intimidated” by high-earning women. Out of all those articles, I’ve not yet seen a single one articulating the challenge written in the paragraph above.

Not one.

Include me out. My salary, when I have it, is higher than my gal’s…and whether that’s what makes us happy together, or not, is a question I’ll leave to the philosophers. I couldn’t care less.

Share This Article With Others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

Sphere: Related Content

Interesting topic, this. I have a lil bit of experience in this space, having dated and/or lived with a few women who exceeded me in both education and salary. I’ll say this for the high-salaried ones: ANY person, of either gender, pays a price in terms of commitment (read that as: time on the job) for that salary. And most men, given our fragile egos, have issues with that… read as “Your job is more important than ME.” So… like all things, there’s an oh-so-small grain of truth in these women’s complaints. That said, I still agree with you… most of the bitching is rationalization.

It ain’t the money or position, per se, it’s how much she can give in other ways, most often in time and energy. And, to put the shoe on the other foot, I heard that very same complaint (”Your job…me”) from (the post-graduate-degreed and most professional) The Second Mrs. Pennington in the end-game of our marriage. Which is sorta ironic, innit?
- Buck | May 10, 2008 @ 2:48 pm
Yeah, that’s an interesting overlapping subtopic worthy of discussion: The notion that when there’s friction because she spends too much time at work, you aren’t being supportive, but if it’s because YOU spend too much time at work, you’re neglecting your family.

Yesterday I happened to catch Dr. Laura’s radio program when a husband called in for advice on how to make his marriage work after he’d been cuckolded. Somehow, everyone involved — the betrayed caller, the wife, Dr. Laura herself of all people! — came to a hasty agreement that the infidelity was his fault for being too invested in his job. It wasn’t even up for debate or question.

Eh…I’m sorry, that’s going a bit far for me.

There seems to be a well-coordinated subversive effort in place to dissuade women and children from respecting the time and effort the family patriarch spends at his job. In the last fifteen years, it’s gone from being a saturated and pungent message, to a nauseating, overpowering one. There apparently is a stiff financial penalty in store for the producer of any “kid” movie that doesn’t include this theme in some way. That, or a high-voltage jolt delivered through a copper butt-plug they wear all the time. Seriously, it’s almost a Pavlovian response they show: We’re making a kid’s movie, okay get a dad, have him spend “too much time” at work, show the scene where the kid is disappointed dad didn’t show up for his soccer match, give dad the epiphany that he’s a screw-up as a dad and needs to quit his job…roll credits…go back, Jack, and do it again.

You can’t help but wonder how many of these kid-movie producers are dads. And how much time they spend at work!
- mkfreeberg | May 10, 2008 @ 3:07 pm
Somehow, everyone involved — the betrayed caller, the wife, Dr. Laura herself of all people! — came to a hasty agreement that the infidelity was his fault for being too invested in his job. It wasn’t even up for debate or question.

That’s frickin’ amazing, especially on the part of The Betrayed. What’s-her-name tried that very same approach/rationale with me. I didn’t buy it then, I refuse to buy it now. I’m just a troglodyte, I guess.
- Buck | May 11, 2008 @ 2:49 pm

You must be logged in to post a comment.

House of Eratosthenes

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Community Members

Site Admin

Too Successful For a Mate?Saturday, May 10th, 2008

Leave a Reply

Too Successful For a Mate?
Saturday, May 10th, 2008