I’m PRO to Marrying for Money
The concept of marrying for money, since its birth, has been outrageously criticized by those who oppose on it. However, as time goes on and as the simple world transforms into a complex place to live, marrying for money slowly turns into a common and acceptable option in any society. Numerous people, man or woman already embraced, are embracing and will be embracing this pattern thus tending them to forego the said pattern’s counterpart which is, marrying for love.
Which is better? Marrying for money or marrying for love? Which is more beneficial? And which is more practical?
I myself, firmly and strongly believe that marrying for money and marriage built in money are better than marrying for love, as well as marriage built in love.
To further defend my stance, I present these three arguments. First, marrying for money is more beneficial than marrying for love; Second, marrying for money is practical than marrying for love: And third, marrying for money does not only solve financial difficulties but also brings forth love in the relationship.
First point, marrying for money is more beneficial than marrying for love.
If you marry for money for sure you’ll have a guaranteed luxurious and convenient life free from the troubles brought about by poverty. On the other hand, if you JUST marry for love, you’ll end up loving that person and raising your children in the brink of financial suffering. Marriage focusing on love indeed uplifts the social and financial status of a person. According to a survey conducted by the Social Weather Station (SWS) in 2006, majority of the Filipinos, either male or female, who have married rich individuals such as moneyed foreigners, said that their lifestyle dramatically changed for the better, that are now able to eat three or more meals a day and that they can appreciate the beauty of life.
The benefits of marrying for money is not only cast to the person who married a wealthy man or woman but also to his/her relatives, friends and other close entities. Again, it has also been proven here in the Philippines and in the other countries as well such as India and Romania. Persons who marry money were able to enhance the standard of living of those who are close to him or her. They were able to put up either a small or big business for their relatives, a chance to see the positive side of the world, an opportunity to supply their wants and needs, and an assurance that they will not be discriminated by the judgmental… These benefits only prove that marrying for love is not selfish, it is selfless…benefits that cannot be achieved by just marrying for love.
Second point, marrying for money is practical than marrying for love.
Nowadays, we are experiencing a myriad of problems and most of these are concerned about money. Such problems that arise are inflation, unemployment and unstable economic growth. Because of these occurrences, we can say that it’s not the time to engage most on that hypothalamic sensation—what I mean by that is love. In this tough moment, it’s necessary to concentrate on how to survive in this world. To attain survival is to provide ourselves with the basic needs for subsistence. And what are the basic needs for subsistence? According to Abraham Maslow, on his hierarchy of needs, the basic needs are FOOD, CLOTHING and SHELTER. And not love. Love is just a tertiary need that should be fulfilled the moment you accomplished satisfying your basic needs.
In this context and in terms of marriage, we can fulfill our basic needs through marrying not for love, but for money. Money is a medium of exchange in this world. Hence, it can be used as an exchange for those that we need for subsistence. And what is love? Is that a medium of exchange? Well, it is in other aspects. But it cannot be used as an exchange for food, neither for clothing nor for shelter. Thus, it’s not practical to marry for love.
Third point, marrying for money does not only solve financial difficulties but also brings forth love in the relationship.
Yes, according to www.californiapsychics.com, which is a reliable website for social issues, a relationship that is bounded mainly by money eventually turns into a relationship bounded with love. In this sense, we can say that money conquers love, and if money conquers love, it means that money is more powerful than love. Thus, it is more important to marry for money and not for love for the reason that love can bloom from money. Love can bloom from money in such a way that a couple who is wealthy enough already fulfilled the need to survive. Thus, they are now ready to go ahead towards fulfilling their safety and security needs and then, love and belonging needs. This pattern is based on the widely accepted hierarchy of needs by Abraham Maslow.
If you could just imagine…it is better to be rich first before being love. Why? Because with this, we can assure ourselves that our sons and daughters will be in good hands, free from any financial cruelty of this financially cruel world. If we focus on love first and think about the money later, absolutely, the future of our children would be uncertain.
With all these points, I firmly stand.
Comments? Leave your intelligent feedback down below or consider following CollegeTimes on Facebook or Twitter to stay updated or to get in touch!
Share This Story:
Please scroll down to leave a comment.
Some of you guys are so closed-minded. I’ve known a couple of people who marry for practical reasons and the couples are HAPPY. Of course there will be couples who don’t end up being happy even with money-as there are couples who marry for love and then fall out of love and divorce. If you guys look up top reasons for a divorce, you’ll ALWAYS see financial instability as one of the top reasons.
When women marry for practical reasons, they aren’t necessarily being selfish. When women chooses a man that is financially stable, they see that the man can take care of the family, can bring home enough to eat, to put their children in good schools, and can raise a family in a safe environment.
I grew up in a family that married for love, but the man was uneducated and didn’t make very much money. As a kid, I grew up in dangerous neighborhoods because my parents couldn’t afford better housing. Sometimes we would eat ramen noodles a couple of times a week-this is not enough nutrition for growing children!
If I were to marry a man, I would want there to be love and financial stability. If I had to choose one, I’m not sure what I would choose at the moment. It might depend on whether or not I can make a decent living on my own. If I can make a decent living on my own, I might not mind as much if the man does not make much-as long as they try and still work hard or use their time doing something important. If I am not as successful-as in, I don’t think I have the ability to make a good enough living to take care of my family, I would definitely marry for practical reasons.
However, I would not marry someone I am sure I can never fall in love with-I’d rather just stay single and enjoy the freedom of being single.
Dear Author,
you said that the need for love is not on Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs. Sorry to tell you that your are incorrect. On the social stage one requires a need for love, affection, and acceptance. Get your facts correct before you write an article.
this article is BULLSHIT. women like you make me laugh. love is the single greatest thing in this world and your willing to throw it all away to marry some d*******g with a huge bank account. sooooooo sad
Yes, I do know what opinion means, and yes I can criticize it, you clearly expected criticizm as you have indicated yourself “To further defend my stance, I present these three arguments.” The whole point of the reply function on this site is for people to respond to your statements, ideologies, accusations and “opinions”. If you don’t want people to respond adversly to your opinion then you should keep it out of the public spotlight, or only share it on sites where people are of the same ideology. I understand fully that what you have written is what you say you believe, therefore being your opinion, now you know what my opinion and response is to it.
Old saying, “If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen”
@mesmer Do you know the definition of the word “opinion”?
Man, this is just my opinion and there’s no way you can criticize it ’cause it is what it is.
I respect yours OK so respect mine.
Let’s be happy!
Peace up! :D
Why not just marry a bank, that way you don’t destroy someone elses life.
If you truely stand by your opinion of cash, first, last and always then I pity any children of yours as you clearly don’t care about their emotional wellbeing. As to being in good hands, do you actually think that being rich makes someone nice or kind, you clearly have very little idea of what you are on about. A case of it’s better to be rich and miserable than poor and happy, I suppose one “good” thing will come out of your plan, you will make a lot of therapists very happy, and rich.
VJ Czar = shallow hal, before the hypnosis. ;)
Marrying for money is essentially prostition with a certificate, whether it’s the male or the female doing it doesn’t make a difference.
Marrying for lust is equaly pathetic albeit in a different way, I married my wife because we truely love and care for each other, not for a bank account or to f**k like rabbits on viagra. So far we have been married for 14+ years and see many more ahead of us.
To all of those who marry for cash, what difference honestly can you see between you and a common street walker (besides the certificate and false vows) ?
P.S. The PRO in the heading of this article should stand for PROstitute.
I’m not sure about where Karamel318’s from, but in the US, at least in Texas (where I’ve lived all my life), marrying for money is scorned by the public as a degrading practice that destroys the sanctity of marriage… Well, they said that about gay marriage as well and I can think of some pretty happy gay people who got married. Back to the topic, though: here, marrying for money is scorned by the public, but encouraged in private. Mothers always tell their little girls to “bag ’em a rich one.” Personally, I’m against marriage as a whole because I believe that it destroys a relationship (given that most marriages end in divorce, most in the first 2 years), but since marrying for money is essentially the opposite (because the only relationship they’re usually in is probably sexual, if that), it’s really not as bad as people believe. My only real problem with it is that most rich people are high maintenance, find everything beneath them, and can’t get their hands dirty, whereas I went dumpster diving the other day to try and find a 10$ ring I lost.
Yes…it may not be condemned there in your country.. But here in the Philippines, marrying for money’s got a bad impression among Filipinos. However, for practical reasons, it’s been encouraged…yet indirectly.
But marrying for money hasn’t been condemened since the beginning of the institution.Quite the opposite, in that it has been encouraged