Hating on Gold Diggers: A Double Standard?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 5:13 PM GMT
    The other day my buddy and I discussed gay men in May-December relationships. (For the sake of discussion, let's say a May-December relationship is one in which one partner is at least 11 years older than the other partner.) I expressed my uneasiness with the double standard applied to individuals in such relationships, particularly when the older guy is wealthy. The younger guy is often characterized as a money-hungry gold digger. But the older guy--even if the younger guy is gorgeous!-- is rarely characterized in such pejorative terms.

    Consider Chauncey and Jamal. Jamal's a 47 year-old dermatologist with a successful practice, a beautiful home, and two Shiba Inus. Chauncey's a 33 year-old personal trainer--he's gorgeous and usually passes for 20-something--with an old bicycle and two roommates. Let's say Jamal was drawn primarily to Chauncey's youthful beauty, and Chauncey to his bulging bank account. Jamal's friends know that Jamal prefers and deliberately seeks guys much younger. Still, they dislike Chauncey because, as they see it, he's simply a money-hungry gold digger.

    What's with the double standard? Is chasing after beauty more morally upstanding than chasing after money?

    Weigh in, gentlemen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 5:17 PM GMT
    BlkMuscleGent said Is chasing after beauty more morally upstanding than chasing after money?


    Yes, it is. "You are so beautiful" is a pretty much generally accepted compliment in any culture. "I"m so attracted to you, I mean you're so rich!" is not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 5:40 PM GMT
    please kill me if I ever go out with an old dude for his money
  • charlieviiper...

    Posts: 328

    Apr 16, 2011 6:53 PM GMT
    only if he can buy me the world icon_redface.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 7:17 PM GMT
    ok, you asked:

    money is a quantifiable resource. a fixed one that anyone in a free society should be able to attain enough of to support himself.

    beauty is in the eye of the beholder. completely subjective.


    so people might judge the party with less money by saying "why can't he make his own money if he likes it so much?" ...and beauty is not something you can generate yourself, especially when you want to appreciate it in someone else. however, you can acquire proximity via that sort of relationship.


    personally, i wouldn't worry about what people say. if you check out the "should my boyfriend pay half my rent?"

    relationships based on transactions tend to be shortlived anyway.

    i think sometimes those situations are more honest tho
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 7:25 PM GMT
    Beauty for the most part, is a permanent thing that cannot change (however, with all the different cosmetics and surgeries... lol)... for example: If I like a certain color of eyes, I will look for a mate with those eyes and I will know that through old age, he will still not lose his eye color and therefore, his beauty will still be there and cause me to be attracted to his body.
    However, if I like someone just for their money, what happens then when they have no money? Will I not like them anymore?
    the difference is that:

    People who say: I like rich men... NO you don't... you like MONEY not rich men...You are not attracted to a man because he is rich, you are attracted to the MONEY he has with him. If I told you that there is a chest filled with over 5 million dollars and a man with 1 million dollars... you would probably go for the chest and date the chest if you call yourself a "gold-digger"... my point is that it very misleading when someone says I am attracted to rich men.

    Whereas, in beauty, you are attracted DIRECTLY to the man.


    That's the difference.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 7:34 PM GMT
    _Mohammed_ saidBeauty for the most part, is a permanent thing that cannot change (however, with all the different cosmetics and surgeries... lol)... for example: If I like a certain color of eyes, I will look for a mate with those eyes and I will know that through old age, he will still not lose his eye color and therefore, his beauty will still be there and cause me to be attracted to his body.
    However, if I like someone just for their money, what happens then when they have no money? Will I not like them anymore?
    the difference is that:

    People who say: I like rich men... NO you don't... you like MONEY not rich men...You are not attracted to a man because he is rich, you are attracted to the MONEY he has with him. If I told you that there is a chest filled with over 5 million dollars and a man with 1 million dollars... you would probably go for the chest and date the chest if you call yourself a "gold-digger"... my point is that it very misleading when someone says I am attracted to rich men.

    Whereas, in beauty, you are attracted DIRECTLY to the man.


    That's the difference.


    that's very well written.

    another angle could be if someone is attracted to someone for security. say if you realize you are perceived to be hot (which is transient), someone with the intelligence and skills to provide security for you as a couple might be attractive. so if he had money, and there was a crash, he's the type who could rebuild himself and you're attracted to him, and the security he brings (in other words, you wouldn't want to take his money and run...it's gravy). just like someone may be attracted to a muscular guy, knowing he will age, but that's ok, the frame is what are you attracted to. that type of attraction is durable. you see this ALL THE TIME in the straight world.

    a different combination you see that is not durable is men who basically trade money for a new youthful partner every few years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 8:12 PM GMT
    I stopped caring about other people's business. To me, each person involved has a motive for wanting one another. So think of it as a relationship of convenience. They both know what they're getting into.

    And of course, there are the exceptions where they are really in love, and neither of them care about money/status/beauty/age.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 8:18 PM GMT
    Some years back in was in DC at a private pool party and a few of the guys there were Poz.
    One older wealthy gentleman said "It's sad that these young guys won't give you a glance if you are over 30, even sadder if they find you are Poz. Silly boys. I have huge home here in DC paid for, a nice Mercedes, a large bank account....and no heirs. So, the government and my charity are getting it all."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 8:51 PM GMT
    I don't really like either side of these relationships, because I thought relationships should be build on love, not on what each partner provides for the other. I know, I'm a hopeless romantic.

    If Chauncey and Jamal are really in love with each other, then I'm very happy for them. If not, why are they wasting each others time?
    Edited after I read meninlove's comment below: If both are happy, then I'm very happy for them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 9:36 PM GMT
    I totally know where you're coming from, BlkMuscleGent. I'm kinda sickened when a younger man/woman is vilified for being a gold digger and yet nothing is said about the older partner. The way I see it, the older partner is also guilty of taking advantage of the younger guy's vulnerable financial status; and he (or she) usually exploits this vulnerability with the hope of a sex. The gold-digger difinitely get's the worse deal: they get money and share a bed with someone they're not attracted to. The rich person gets to have sex with a younger hot guy, gets to relive his glory days, and has someone who will help spoon-feed him his caviar when his feeble hand can longer - they don't scarifice nearly as much as the golddigger icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 9:42 PM GMT
    Are the two people in that kind of relationship happy? If so, then good for them. Their relationship is theirs, and it's very hard (if not impossible) knowing what's going on inside it from just outside observation.

    -Doug
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 9:42 PM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle said Look at how royalty was required to marry someone they never met before in order to perpetuate their lineage. People were married off to one another without even knowing them.



    The concept of "marriage for love" is kind of a quirky contemporary luxury. Marriage was pretty much founded as business contract, a means for families to further improve their situations.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 9:52 PM GMT
    I see it as a double standard as well. It isn't always a fact that the younger guy is getting handouts from the older wealthier guy. He may be just attracted to older successful guys. But most older gay guys tend to pray on younger vulnerable guys and lead them on with what they can buy them and when the younger guy ends the relationship the older guy thinks that the younger guy owes him something.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 10:13 PM GMT
    Music Time icon_eek.gif ??Here's a soong icon_biggrin.gif!

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 11:38 PM GMT
    I have pals that are both types of guys. Frankly, both are contemptable. As a young hottie to go after someone solely for his money, well Prostitution=sex for money. I know, I know a bit too clinical. The older guy is just as bad, seeing the younger one as nothing more than a triumph, a "look at me. See what I can still pull" trophy. And probably knows that he can keep him as long as the money is there. How refreshing it would be for both of them to get pass the surface stuff (looks and money) and see each other for who they really are and want to stay for a long time.

    I will concur that there are still today and even in our community relationships of convenience which really are nothing more than business arrangements.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 11:53 PM GMT
    BambinoRex saidok, you asked:

    money is a quantifiable resource. a fixed one that anyone in a free society should be able to attain enough of to support himself.

    beauty is in the eye of the beholder. completely subjective.


    so people might judge the party with less money by saying "why can't he make his own money if he likes it so much?" ...and beauty is not something you can generate yourself, especially when you want to appreciate it in someone else. however, you can acquire proximity via that sort of relationship.


    personally, i wouldn't worry about what people say. if you check out the "should my boyfriend pay half my rent?"

    relationships based on transactions tend to be shortlived anyway.

    i think sometimes those situations are more honest tho


    Agree...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2011 11:57 PM GMT
    _Mohammed_ saidBeauty for the most part, is a permanent thing that cannot change (however, with all the different cosmetics and surgeries... lol)... for example: If I like a certain color of eyes, I will look for a mate with those eyes and I will know that through old age, he will still not lose his eye color and therefore, his beauty will still be there and cause me to be attracted to his body.
    However, if I like someone just for their money, what happens then when they have no money? Will I not like them anymore?
    the difference is that:

    People who say: I like rich men... NO you don't... you like MONEY not rich men...You are not attracted to a man because he is rich, you are attracted to the MONEY he has with him. If I told you that there is a chest filled with over 5 million dollars and a man with 1 million dollars... you would probably go for the chest and date the chest if you call yourself a "gold-digger"... my point is that it very misleading when someone says I am attracted to rich men.

    Whereas, in beauty, you are attracted DIRECTLY to the man.


    That's the difference.


    beauty totally changes. When he gets old and wrinkly and looks like the snuggles dog
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2011 12:16 AM GMT
    So, if you're both rich and good looking, sky's the limit then, eh? Or perhaps that creates even more of a dilemma: is he into me because of my money or my beauty? Perhaps it's less problematic to be just plain ugly and rich or dirt poor and beautiful.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2011 12:25 AM GMT
    They both have their flaws and, ironically enough, both have a habit of running out depending on who you are or who you are with.

    An elder person who only seeks the company of younger men is generally known as a Cradle Robber. They usually only enjoy the company of someone much younger for the fact they are trying to hold on to their own attractiveness and don't generally find people of their age to be appealing. It's a sort a of an ego thing I guess. Like wise those who specially only go for those waaaaaaay older than them are known as Grave Robbers and generally have some kind of Daddy complex. I could be wrong though and maybe some people don't put attractiveness with age. This is all just an opinion.

    A person who is after money in general, regardless of age, is known as a Gold Digger hence they are willing to tolerate certain things about a person in order to get that money. They prefer to have the full package deal like an elderly person who is actually attractive. That's a bonus but the main objective is they are looking for someone who will take care of them and has money to boot. Gold Diggers have the habit of leading people on and do play hard to get. Basically it boils down to how much are you are willing to spend just have that attractive person in your life?

    Often times Gold Diggers and Grave Robbers are one and the same and have an attraction to money.

    The real kicker is when someone knows they are dating a Gold Digger and they still continue to date them after the fact. It's really a shame when you can't find someone who would like you for you and so you end up paying for a mate who could drop you at any moment if a bigger wallet comes along.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2011 12:29 AM GMT
    BlkMuscleGent saidWhat's with the double standard? Is chasing after beauty more morally upstanding than chasing after money?
    Who really gives a fuck? Let Chauncey and Jamal make their own choices.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2011 12:39 AM GMT
    What two consenting adults do is no one's business but their own. Any judgment is exactly that a subjective judgment. Would you saying anything about a wealthy 33 year old man coupling with an extremely goregous 51 year old who recently modeled in DNA? It is true and they are quiet prominent figures in the gay community and very happy together.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Apr 17, 2011 3:22 AM GMT
    I can't understand how a much younger guy can pretend to be in love with a much older guy just so the younger guy can live in luxury. The act would wear thin (for both of them), after awhile.

    But, then, "There's no fool like an old fool," my father used to say.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2011 4:28 AM GMT
    ErikTaurean saidI have pals that are both types of guys. Frankly, both are contemptable. As a young hottie to go after someone solely for his money, well Prostitution=sex for money. I know, I know a bit too clinical. The older guy is just as bad, seeing the younger one as nothing more than a triumph, a "look at me. See what I can still pull" trophy. And probably knows that he can keep him as long as the money is there. How refreshing it would be for both of them to get pass the surface stuff (looks and money) and see each other for who they really are and want to stay for a long time.

    I will concur that there are still today and even in our community relationships of convenience which really are nothing more than business arrangements.


    lol, at the same time, if they're busy with each other it makes it a little easier for other kinds of guys to wade through them in the dating game, so to speak. icon_wink.gif.


    PS in the straight world this is a trophy wife and a whole demographic is into it.

    icon_eek.gif
  • needleninja

    Posts: 713

    Apr 17, 2011 4:42 AM GMT
    ive had older guys date me, and my guess would be because of my looks and personality, but i wasnt wanting to be a gold digger or anything, its just that i didnt really have money of my own coming in.