Is a woman who marries for money the same as a ***** (Clinton, financial)

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

Many women marry only for money, so is this the same as being a full time hooker.

In my mind I would say yes, it is the same.

How about it

[lifeexplorer]

Absolutely. Why even ask?

[malamute]

There are differences. A woman who marries for money might sleep with only one man -- while a hooker wouldn't.

Since this is the politics forum what about a woman who marries and stays married only for the political connections and advantages it gives her? Whose marriage is based on political gain only? Who doesn't even expect fidelity because she's in it only for her own lust for power and money? Wouldn't she be no better than a hooker?

[Kenneth-Kaunda]

A good case for the abolition of marriage then.

But the funny thing is, is that society tolerates the gold digger, but not the pro.

That doesnt make sense.

[Cavaturaccioli]

Originally Posted by malamute

There are differences. A woman who marries for money might sleep with only one man -- while a hooker wouldn't.

Since this is the politics forum what about a woman who marries and stays marry only for the political connections it gives her? Whose marriage is based on political gain only? Who doesn't even expect fidelity because she's in it only for her own political gain? Wouldn't she be no better than a hooker?

This brings to mind an excellent joke of Dennis Miller's: Bill & Hillary's marriage couldn't be any more about convenience if they installed a Slushie machine and a Slim Jim rack at the foot of their bed.

[eRayP]

Originally Posted by malamute

There are differences. A woman who marries for money might sleep with only one man -- while a hooker wouldn't.

Since this is the politics forum what about a woman who marries and stays married only for the political connections and advantages it gives her? Whose marriage is based on political gain only? Who doesn't even expect fidelity because she's in it only for her own lust for power and money? Wouldn't she be no better than a hooker?

A woman who stays married only for the political connections and advantages it gives her? That sounds like Hillary Clinton

[lifeexplorer]

Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda

A good case for the abolition of marriage then.

But the funny thing is, is that society tolerates the gold digger, but not the pro.

That doesnt make sense.

Marriage has been dying even since they allowed divorce. It's just a matter of time now.

[EmeraldCityWanderer]

Generally it is considered not pleasant if either person in the relationship marries for something other than love.

Originally Posted by Kenneth-Kaunda

A good case for the abolition of marriage then.

But the funny thing is, is that society tolerates the gold digger, but not the pro.

That doesnt make sense.

How can you tell who is a gold digger or not without reading people's thoughts?

A pro you can prove they are taking money for sex by their actions.

We don't have thought police in the US.

[An Einnseanair]

A "hoe-er" is someone who has sex with multiple men and charges money for it.

If the woman stays faithful to the marriage (sexual relations only with her husband) then she does not meet the definition of a "hoe-er". What's the difference between a woman who marries for money, a woman who marries for pure physical attraction, and a woman who marries for love? All three are arguably marriages for security; financial, physical, and emotional security, respectively.

But if the woman continues to see other men after marrying a man for money, then yes, there is little difference between this person and a "hoe-er".

Incidentally, you started by talking about women, but this concept works both ways. I know men who married for money, or looks, and there is no difference.

Also incidentally, is why we've got to protect the "sanctity of marriage"? To keep gay people from having the right to marry for money the same as straight people?

[Just1Fan]

Absolutely not. Being a wife requires more than just keeping her legs open.