Man Argues That Being Attracted To Someone For Money Is 'Less Superficial' Than Dating Someone For Looks
LightField Studios | Shutterstock What's worse: Dating someone for their money or dating someone for their looks? According to one man on Reddit, being attracted to someone for their money is somehow "less superficial" than dating someone for their looks.
Needless to say, not everyone agreed. The thing is, in a world where dating apps are how many people meet, superficiality is the name of the game. Let's just say you aren't swiping because someone makes you laugh or you like their personality. The real question becomes whether the superficiality of physical attraction or money is worse. In theory, they both seem equally bad, but from a psychological perspective, this guy might actually have a point.
A man said that it is 'less superficial' to be attracted to someone because of money.
In his post, the man asserted, “Being attracted to someone for their money is less superficial than being attracted to someone for their looks.” He explained, “Being attracted to someone because they have money is seen as superficial or low, but most relationships start with something more superficial … physical attraction.”
“At least with money, you know your life will be comfortable and [there] is a chance that [they] earned that money from being hard-working or intelligent,” he explained.
Alina Bitta | Shutterstock
Commenters on Reddit were split in their reaction to the man’s opinion. Some felt like he had a good point.“This is the first ever post that’s changed my opinion in the history of the Internet,” one person said. “They’re both a type of superficiality, but you’re right that going for looks alone is definitely more superficial,” another person said.
Others weren’t so quick to agree with the man. For example, one user said, “I’m not sure how people can equate being physically attracted to a person, vs. being attracted to something in someone’s possession.”
Then again, some had a more nuanced opinion. One poster said, “If you’re attracted to someone only because of their looks or only because of their wealth then it’s superficial … However, both of those criteria can be important when it comes to choosing a life partner.”
Money can’t necessarily be used as an indicator of intelligence or work ethic.
Part of the man’s argument was that “[there] is a chance that [they] earned that money from being hard working or intelligent.” However, this is not always the case.
According to Investopedia, “Intelligence appears to have no direct correlation with wealth.” To illustrate this point, they compared “famed NBA player Earvin “Magic” Johnson Jr. (who is wealthy) and Christopher Michael Langan, an American with a very high IQ (who is much less wealthy).”
Furthermore, money does not necessarily denote hard work. Someone can work very hard at a blue-collar job and earn less than someone in the corporate world. Or someone can take a minimum-wage job because it is the only option available to them and work incredibly hard.
Presuming that money is an automatic marker of intelligence or level of hard work might be the most superficial thing about the man’s entire post.
Dating for money might be a gender issue, thanks to evolution.
dekazigzag | Shutterstock
Money is very important, but it all depends on your perspective. PNC Bank noted, “A good match for you might clear those initial relationship hurdles, but you could eventually hit a snag if your money personalities turn out to be anything but a perfect match.”
Therefore, if one person in a relationship considers money to be more important than the other, it could lead to conflict. If one person is making all of the money while the other is coveting it, that’s also a sign that things might not work out well.
Interestingly enough, this might be a matter of gender more than anything, and that's where the psychological angle comes in. Psychology professor David Ludden, Ph.D., explained that it's long been questioned why men seem to favor looks in a partner, whereas women seek out money. Turns out it's based on evolution. There's a scientific term for it: evolved preferences theory. He explained, "Men are looking for healthy, fertile women who will bear high-quality offspring for them." He went on to say, "In contrast, according to the theory, women are at a natural disadvantage when it comes to acquiring resources. They’re physically weaker than men, and their mobility is hampered by pregnancy and child-rearing. So women are dependent on men to provide for them and their children, and that’s why they value resources over looks in a potential mate."
What makes the theory so interesting, as it pertains to the man on Reddit's assertion about money being the less superficial of the two qualities, is that in the modern world, women are still at a resource disadvantage, and that does slightly give the edge to money attraction being less superficial but only if it's a woman seeking out a financially stable partner.
Ultimately, what’s important in a relationship is unique to each person. Some people may indeed feel that money is a contributing factor, or even a deciding factor, in their romantic happiness. Others may rely more on physical attraction. Some may even eschew both.
Regardless, the more important issue is whether you're happy and in a healthy relationship. How you got there doesn't matter as long as you're both on the same page.
Mary-Faith Martinez is a writer with a bachelor’s degree in English and Journalism who covers news, psychology, lifestyle, and human interest topics.
