Würdet ihr einen Mann heiraten, der wenig Geld hat?

So wenig Geld, dass er nicht für euch und/oder eure Kinder versorgen kann (und ihr deswegen gezwungener Weise auch arbeiten müsst).

Die Frage richtet sich natürlich an die Frauen.

LG sari😇🩷

(1 votes)
Loading...

Similar Posts

Subscribe
Notify of
52 Answers
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
palusa
1 year ago

For the first time I have absolutely no desire to be financially dependent on someone else.

And then there are no more too many people whose income is enough to pass through a family alone and at a pleasant level. If you insist, it becomes complicated with the partner search 😁 once upper 20% or so.

Gott1234222
6 months ago
Reply to  palusa

Based woman. It’s rare.

palusa
6 months ago
Reply to  Gott1234222

Not really. In my generation, there are no pure housewives anymore. As I said, the salaries aren’t enough, that’s not in it anymore.

Martismartis
1 year ago

Is a good question whether a woman wants me like that if I only have a good 1000 euros a month and I am already in the pension for health at the age of 25 and I am 47 almost at the end of June

Elli113
1 year ago

Yes; I can provide myself with my income well and it would also be enough for young people, only with restrictions.

And, of course, he would have to do his part – if he anyway deserves badly, it would be useful if he took over the majority of the housework and the child education and worked at most part-time so that I can work full-time.

Gott1234222
6 months ago
Reply to  Elli113

What also means, if he falls in love with someone or simply falls in love, he is the main person of the children and they stayed with him, right?!

Elli113
6 months ago
Reply to  Gott1234222

Why not? If that’s true that the father is the main reference, that would be logical.

Personally, I would prefer the change model if possible.

Oponn
1 year ago

At least as a man, I wouldn’t marry a woman who wants to be supplied by me.

Gott1234222
6 months ago
Reply to  sari4

Because divorces aren’t underestimated and there’s no question of guilt anymore. Too much risk for the man.

Oponn
1 year ago
Reply to  sari4

Because the woman should be alone.

Oponn
6 months ago

What kind of risk?

dancefloor55
1 year ago

in principle yes – if he goes to work normally 40h and unfortunately has a badly paid job.

No if he just sits around or makes occasional jobs and therefore earns too little

But I’d go to work like this because I don’t want to be financially dependent on a man. I also need to think about my future. What if he leaves me after 20 years? Then I didn’t work for 20 years – in my originally learned job, I’m hardly gonna hire a company anymore. So I only have badly paid helpers jobs left. I won’t get a pension because I worked for a few years.

So could be that I’m trembling into poverty just because I wanted my husband to be financial for me.

BrainFog128
1 year ago
Reply to  dancefloor55

Nice answer.

janawieniq
1 year ago

I don’t care to be financially dependent on a man. If we had common children, we should be able to provide them together.

anonym0507
1 year ago

He doesn’t have to be able to supply me – I can do that well alone. As long as he has enough money that he can take care of himself and you have enough money together to provide children then, that is enough. I always want to work myself and never depend on the partner in the relationship.

Mortonius69K
1 year ago

I always thought women wanted to work like that. Then the man could take care of the children, I would at least have no problem with it

Mortonius69K
1 year ago
Reply to  sari4

Work? Then you are now a few

xsxjx
1 year ago
Reply to  Mortonius69K

That would be something for me too.

Mortonius69K
1 year ago

Look at what you’re saying, you’re being held up for such statements. But don’t have a problem with it and I’m not very distorted too

dancefloor55
1 year ago

because I have enough to do with the household and the children.

yes then you have to make your husband household and take care of the children when you go to work. you don’t have to do it alone

Oponn
1 year ago

And you can’t share that exactly?

Mortonius69K
1 year ago

Okay.

Mortonius69K
1 year ago

In my answer, the man then took care of the children

Oponn
1 year ago

that is not my task

Why?

Mekpomm
1 year ago

I wouldn’t depend on a man, neither emotional, nor financial.

LeckermaulVK
1 year ago

We both worked and earned money. He as an electrician and I as an official.

SirFragesteller
1 year ago

I answer once as a man because I don’t understand why only women are addressed.

I have been living with my friend for years and of his money alone, we cannot live, which is why I also go to work part-time. I’d still marry him and start a family with him. Money is not so important.

Gott1234222
6 months ago

Establishing a family? How?

SirFragesteller
6 months ago
Reply to  Gott1234222

Would be a way, right?

brennspiritus
1 year ago

Because I have a decent salary myself and don’t want to stop someone

Allyluna
1 year ago

The question is of course addressed to women.

Why of course? You know men are allowed to marry, right?

And to the question: Yes, of course. I can actually provide financially for myself – and even for my children!

diderot2019
1 year ago
Reply to  Allyluna

However, it is useful to ask this question separately to the sexes. Men are obviously much more willing to marry a woman who cannot care for herself.

Allyluna
1 year ago
Reply to  diderot2019

Sensual for those who are still mentally anchored in the last millennium. Otherwise, no. You can also see the answers here.

diderot2019
1 year ago

In any case, I have seen great differences in the career choice talks with girls and boys for years. As far as I have read from studies what the plans of young women and young men are, this confirms my assertion. In my environment, too, I observe that. And a study currently discussed in Switzerland with female students also shows this: https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/die-meisten-studentinnen-lieber-einen-erfolgvolle-mann-als-selber-karriere-making-165723834136

It may be that there is still a lot to relativize. But after decades across all media the opposite has been asserted, it would be appropriate to breathe through and consider whether the well-known feminist ideology should not be revised.

Allyluna
1 year ago

It’s here – and it looks the same on both sexes. Which is why explicit segregation is insane.

If you don’t know, you can’t help with one side like this. Look at you.

diderot2019
1 year ago

Serious to those who want to know what it looks like today. Not in the minds of some ideologists, but in reality.

studiogirl
1 year ago

Love usually has little to do with money.

And today, many women have to work to keep the way they live.

brennspiritus
1 year ago
Reply to  studiogirl

Depending on the salary, I can easily provide myself and that is also good

Shany
1 year ago

BEIDE should go to work

xsxjx
1 year ago

My opinion😅

Kugelflitz
1 year ago

Sure. Who doesn’t work as a woman is stupid.

Kugelflitz
1 year ago
Reply to  sari4

What dancefloor writes. Plus missing pension points, dependency and and and.

dancefloor55
1 year ago
Reply to  sari4

Topic Age poverty (no minimum pension) or after a long work break in case of separation, the woman gets only badly paid jobs

Rheinflip
1 year ago

Today both have to work to have a good standard of living