article: Recession: When the money goes, so does the toxic wife

[MatureDJ]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...en-the-money-goes-so-does-the-toxic-wife.html

'You loser!" screamed Katie, aiming a vase at her husband. "You've destroyed my life,'' she continued, hurling it. "Just look at my hair, look at my nails! You loser, you jerk, you nobody."

Katie's husband, Jack, whose property portfolio disintegrated in the financial crash, had just told his wife that she would have to cut back on her thrice-weekly visits to Nicky Clarke, the nail salon in Harvey Nichols, and the oxygen facials, chemical peels and seaweed wraps at Space NK.

YOU LOSER! LOL!

"As soon as the financial wobbles started, she must have joined some upmarket dating agency because somehow she's found another very rich man pretty damn fast.''

Another case is Sasha who, for the past few months, had been gloating about the £3.4 million chalet in Verbier her husband was about to exchange on, how she'd managed to hire a high-society interior decorator to do it up for a song (''more an anthem, actually", she'd giggled) and how much she was looking forward to a white, snowy Christmas there.

At the last minute, Husband pulled out of the deal. Never mind that he had lost his lucrative job in the City, she felt he had deliberately traumatised her and is suing him for divorce on the grounds of mental cruelty. '

'She's got the personality of an overindulged infant,'' he sighed, ''a spoilt brat who starts screaming the moment a toy is taken away.''

LOL! Mental cruelty means telling a wife that she can't spend like she used to?

According to Susie Ambrose, a marital psychotherapist and CEO of Seventy-Thirty, an upmarket introduction company that takes its name from the work versus free time balance, there has been an unprecedented demand from married women recently.

''We are being targeted by women on the fence between leaving their husbands who are on the brink of losing their wealth, and wanting to meet someone extremely rich straight away,'' she says.

So, a woman whose husband is taking a financial hit is actually going on a dating website to trade up, while still being married? WTF?

How we laughed when Richard, with admiration in his voice, mentioned at a drinks party last year that he'd turned to his wife in the middle of the night and asked her if she'd still love him if he lost all his money.

''F--- no!'' had been her answer. Such a feisty, amusing (and obviously joky) response delighted him. But today he is scratching his head with abject dejection. She had meant it.

She left him the moment he lost his senior post at an investment bank and immediately hooked up with another rich man.

I'm speechless!

 

[Unbridled_Phoenix]

Men need to start beating these women up again.

 

[Aenigma]

The poor saps probably don't realize how much better off they are without them- well if not for the alimony and lawsuits anyway.

The really sad part here is that the men probably adored the wives and bought them these things out of love and affection; while the wives cared not one iota for the husbands and merely pretended to love them while acting out their "love" and "devotion".

Their love was unrequited and they didn't even realize it until their paychecks and cashflow dried up- and then their wives left them and sued/divorced them afterward; when their chips were down.

How sad and tragic.

 

[STR8UP]

I personally know of at least two women who are in the process of leaving their husbands, and in both cases the hubby has either lost his job or had his income cut substantially.

Ain't sayin' the loss of income is the sole CAUSE of the divorce, but I will guaranfreakintee you that it has something to do with the reason why it's happening now as opposed to two years ago.

The lesson here is that "love" is never unconditional. Your long term value as a man is inextricably tied to your ability to provide.

 

[ketostix]

The worst part is that there's so many wealthy guys willing to take up a divorced gold digger. These women are probably attractive but still..

 

[sodbuster]

On the bright side, his property settlement will be down, alimony will be gone as soon as she remarries, and he can rebuild his life without his ex in the financial picture.

 

[Luthor Rex]

The worst part is that there's so many wealthy guys willing to take up a divorced gold digger. These women are probably attractive but still..

This is something about rich guys I really don't understand. If I were rich I would be so paranoid about golddigger I doubt I would ever get married. Why do these rich men MARRY these women when they could just keep on FVCKING them!? Or fvcking several women at the same time.

Rich guys who get screwed like this make me think they aren't really alpha.

 

[Unbridled_Phoenix]

Most of them aren't alpha, they are the revenge of the nerds. But I know a rich man who is anything but. The old school, self-made captain of industry kind of millionaire. The kind who came from nothing, saw what he wanted, and made things happen. He has a wife and a girlfriend, but I've never seen his wife. He takes his gf with him everywhere.

Now that I think about it, he's really the pinnacle of everything we aspire to.

But no, most rich guys aren't alphas. They are overeducated, overanalytical, out of touch geeks who fail to embrace their inner man. Subsequently they are blatantly used by women and tossed away like a banana peel, as though he was the one working at Hooters before they met...

I don't know what pisses me off more, rich AFCs or the women they marry!

 

[MrLuvr]

Is this any different than a man who dumps his wife when she gets fat? If a guy comes on here and says that my wife has become fat and I am not attracted to her anymore, what would most guys on this board reply? Dump her FAT azz! I know I probably would.

We KNOW that the way beauty is to men, money is to women. So, why be surprised when the woman leaves when the money is gone.. It works both ways.

Besides most of these guys are probably fat, unattractive AFCs anyway. The money was compensation for the woman to overlook his short comings. When the money is gone, his failings become even more glaring. Can`t really blame the women for leaving then.

 

[Hooligan Harry]

This would never have happened if these guys had game. Even if they ended up in the soup kitchens, she would have stuck by him if he had game.

Yes

Its all about "game"

yes

 

[ketostix]

Is this any different than a man who dumps his wife when she gets fat? If a guy comes on here and says that my wife has become fat and I am not attracted to her anymore, what would most guys on this board reply? Dump her FAT azz! I know I probably would.

I think there is a difference. A person has full personal control over their weight, but no one can have full control over their employment and the economy.

We KNOW that the way beauty is to men, money is to women. So, why be surprised when the woman leaves when the money is gone.. It works both ways.

Besides most of these guys are probably fat, unattractive AFCs anyway. The money was compensation for the woman to overlook his short comings. When the money is gone, his failings become even more glaring. Can`t really blame the women for leaving then.

I still totally blame these women. Nowadays a woman has just as much or more opportunity to earn income as a man does. And more importantly, it'd be different if the guys were unable or unwilling to provide even substinence, but what we are talking about here is women who expect to be provided a lavish lifestyle. We can't assume these guys are fat, unattractive AFCs. Per your own premise these women only care about wealth or at least care more about wealth than anything else, so these types of women would leave them no matter what their looks or game was like. Their problem is they didn't screen and test their women and only spoiled them.

 

[Drum&Bass]

Is this any different than a man who dumps his wife when she gets fat? If a guy comes on here and says that my wife has become fat and I am not attracted to her anymore, what would most guys on this board reply? Dump her FAT azz! I know I probably would.

We KNOW that the way beauty is to men, money is to women. So, why be surprised when the woman leaves when the money is gone.. It works both ways.

Besides most of these guys are probably fat, unattractive AFCs anyway. The money was compensation for the woman to overlook his short comings. When the money is gone, his failings become even more glaring. Can`t really blame the women for leaving then.

Very poor example...fat women are lazy women. what self respecting human being concerned about their health and the happiness of their partner becomes unhealthy ?? How many problems will arise when the man is not able to become physically aroused by his wife anymore ??

2 healthy people are able to live and love together on a humble budget. Wives can still love and respect their husbands even though they are not millionaire's.

Character, integrity and compatibility is the mortar that cements healthy relationships. If a person is no longer physically attracted to another person how can a healthy relationship be sustained ??? They are no longer compatible for each other as designed by nature.

Leaving someone because they NEGLECT their health is far different than leaving someone because they are NOT WEALTHY.

 

[jophil28]

The worst part is that there's so many wealthy guys willing to take up a divorced gold digger. These women are probably attractive but still..

THose guys are their own worst enemies. They flaunt their wealth in the hope of hooking a hot trophy, then wonder why she leaves when the money dries up.


Another good reason to audition a woman thoroughly for quality and character before you sign up..

 

[jophil28]

Character, integrity and compatibility is the mortar that cements healthy relationships.

You are looking at a whipping here from the pragmatists and the "realists" by describing the characteristics of the 'mythical' quality woman like that.
:rockon:

 

[STR8UP]

I still totally blame these women. Nowadays a woman has just as much or more opportunity to earn income as a man does. And more importantly, it'd be different if the guys were unable or unwilling to provide even substinence, but what we are talking about here is women who expect to be provided a lavish lifestyle. We can't assume these guys are fat, unattractive AFCs. Per your own premise these women only care about wealth or at least care more about wealth than anything else, so these types of women would leave them no matter what their looks or game was like. Their problem is they didn't screen and test their women and only spoiled them.

Do you blame a rattlesnake for striking you when you step on it?

You can't blame women for this "poor" behavior because contrary to what most guys WANT to believe, it has nothing to do with her being of "poor character" to not stick by her man in tough times. Foofy "for richer or poorer" societal PC niceties SOUND pretty, but in the real world it doesn't work that way. It doesn't matter how much opportunity women have for making money- it's hardwired into brains to be attracted a man of means, just like it's hardwired in YOUR brain to be attracted to a 7/10 waist to hip ratio, perky t!tties, and a nice, pretty, feminine face.

It's like when a woman leaves a bar after a night of drinking. She could be carrying an AK47 and would STILL want a big, strong man to walk her back to her car late at night.

Very poor example...fat women are lazy women. what self respecting human being concerned about their health and the happiness of their partner becomes unhealthy ?? How many problems will arise when the man is not able to become physically aroused by his wife anymore ??

1) You are saying that one can be avoided, the other cannot, and that's not entirely true. The "better" man will have squirreled away resources for a rainy day. The "better" man would be prepared for the pitfalls of life, not living paycheck to paycheck.

2) To say that "It's wrong for a woman to leave a man over something he doesn't have control over" is idealistic wishful thinking. What if your wife developed a thyroid problem and turned into a blob of jello? Society might see you as a great guy for sticking by her side even though you are repulsed by her jiggly rolls, but sticking with her is the equivalent of committing genetic suicide. Her thyroid condition is MUCH less preventable than the loss of your job, I can assure you of that.

It's also a moot point because regardless of how much control the other party has, income makes up a good chunk of a man's value just the same as a petite figure makes up a good portion of a woman's value. Nature does not care about "fault".

2 healthy people are able to live and love together on a humble budget. Wives can still love and respect their husbands even though they are not millionaire's.

Just like 2 people can still live together if one gets fat. You should still love and respect your wife if she puts on a few, right?

Character, integrity and compatibility is the mortar that cements healthy relationships.

And the bricks are the alpha traits of the male. Lose your job and get depressed and the bricks start to crumble REAL quick. Every woman needs a stronger man.

If a person is no longer physically attracted to another person how can a healthy relationship be sustained ??? They are no longer compatible for each other as designed by nature.

Exactly. If a woman loses attraction for you for WHATEVER reason, how can a healthy relationship be sustained?

Your entire argument rests upon the flawed concept that for some reason it is ok to lose attraction for physical reasons, but not for "other" reasons, which is a crock. Attraction mechanisms in men and women differ, but neither one is right or wrong, they just are.

 

[Luthor Rex]

Wayne Brady is gonna have to choke a b!tch.

 

[Nutz]

I'm pretty sure this article is a repost from a few weeks/months back

 

[ketostix]

Do you blame a rattlesnake for striking you when you step on it?

You can't blame women for this "poor" behavior because contrary to what most guys WANT to believe, it has nothing to do with her being of "poor character" to not stick by her man in tough times. Foofy "for richer or poorer" societal PC niceties SOUND pretty, but in the real world it doesn't work that way.

See Str8up you are insinuating that every woman has the same nature. If this were true then we wouldn't find some percentage of attractive women that marry a guy who isn't rich and stay with him through hard times. There is a percentage of women like this whether it's 40% or 20% or whatever.This article wasn't about these women not sticking with their man through hard times. They were out the door the minute the wealth was reduced.

It doesn't matter how much opportunity women have for making money- it's hardwired into brains to be attracted a man of means, just like it's hardwired in YOUR brain to be attracted to a 7/10 waist to hip ratio, perky t!tties, and a nice, pretty, feminine face.

But in this case these women weren't really attracted to the man who had the ability of means. They were solely interested in the means. Wealth is just one criterion for female attraction albeit a large one. What I'm saying is these women were evidently there only for that criterion. We can find plenty of women who choose a guy who isn't near as wealthy as other options she has. Not all women put means above everything else. I don't think it's completely analagous between how a man is attracted to a woman's overall physicality and how a woman is attracted to wealth. If anything women are hardwired to respond to several criteria, the guy's overall persona and his appearance, along with his economic stature.

It's like when a woman leaves a bar after a night of drinking. She could be carrying an AK47 and would STILL want a big, strong man to walk her back to her car late at night.

Well maybe so but when women feel safe they are less inclined to go looking for male protection. Same thing when they have financial security whether that's through their own ability to earn or find another rich sucker. They're less inclined to be agreeable or loyal. Humans have a knack for adjusting to their enviroment more so than animals do with their instincts.

My point is for better or worse not every woman marries solely for money which these women did. So I think it's eroneous to say "all women are hard wired like these ones".

I do agree with your point that women are with a guy for some type of gain more than they are there for the man himself and when she perceives the gain is no longer there she's leaving. The thing is women do vary in loyality.

Exactly. If a woman loses attraction for you for WHATEVER reason, how can a healthy relationship be sustained?

Your entire argument rests upon the flawed concept that for some reason it is ok to lose attraction for physical reasons, but not for "other" reasons, which is a crock. Attraction mechanisms in men and women differ, but neither one is right or wrong, they just are.

Again the problem is these women weren't attracted to any quality of the man, just his wealth. You are making the insinuation that we know what women are attracted to and it's wealth. I believe that women are fundamentally attracted to a man's mental makeup and his appearance stemming from that, his mood, expressions etc.

 

[SXS]

I don't think it's completely analagous between how a man is attracted to a woman's overall physicality and how a woman is attracted to wealth.

another question, if a man is atracted to "a woman's overall physicality", how come there are so many gay atracted to other men ?

My point is for better or worse not every woman marries solely for money which these women did. So I think it's eroneous to say "all women are hard wired like these ones".

But still, how large is his wallet is more important than the size of the rest...

Quick joke:

What a woman said when she saw Obama on the street ?

"Is that a stimulus package in your pants or are you just happy to tax me ?"

 

[ketostix]

another question, if a man is atracted to "a woman's overall physicality", how come there are so many gay atracted to other men ?

I was referring to heterosexuals and what primarily attracts them to the opposite sex. But you are reinforcing my point that people vary and aren't just acting solely on programmed instincts from nature.

If woman were all carbon copies controlled by nature's programming, then the common held belief that women from 3rd world countries are different from US women wouldn't be true.

Women aren't really attracted to money itself per se. They want money of course, but what they are attracted to is a man's ability to succeed and his power and influence over others. Some women will get with a man only for money and not actually be attracted to his qualities as a person. The instance the money's gone, the women are gone. That's the point I was making.

You could give any guy who has no women a lot of money and suddenly some (but not necessarily many) women would be "interested" or "attracted" in him. That is as long as he has money and is spending it on her. You can find another guy who has little money but just as many or more women interested and attracted to him. Which is easier to lose, money or intrinisic personal traits? Which is easier to replace? Any otherguy could have more money but it's not so easy to replace personality traits.

I'm just not a believer in moral relativism, evolutionary psychology, or that human behavior is as predictable as low order animals based in instinct. I think enviromental conditions and nurture are big factors, at least the equal of "evolution" or so-called hard wiring.