chas:

quote:

Originally posted by piqué:

But I strongly disagree that she's become someone hard to pair. A woman with a strong sense of self, a woman who is powerful and independent is extremely attractive to plenty of men. I know, 'cause I attracted 'em.

All that's true about her attractiveness on the "character market".

It's the great imbalance of wealth that makes her hard to pair.

Money matters - especially when there's so very much of it.

Mr.Beelady and I split at 28 years..our youngest was 18.

I have so much I understand....good and bad.

All I can say is "You go girl!" to Melinda.

An aside, I was in the PC software biz in the early days when there were only few companies, including MS. The computer shows were all the same people who just changed booths now and then, chasing their dreams...

There was lots of talk about Bill..on the spectrum (not that term then), had assistants to remind him to bathe, had dirty glasses all the time (that I did witness)...no social skills...His team backed him up. Mr. Beelady attended a MS party at B's very large house..the bartender was his Mom.

He married Melinda and all that changed...He was polished, social...His hair was combed.

I can imagine she must be pretty tired by now.

Just sayin'. I so get it.

I once went to the office when we were long distance dating...an engineer said to me.."I knew you were in town...Mr. Beelady's shirts aren't wrinkled."

Ive been married 30 years, so I think I align with Pique. After a while . . . . Well, why bother? Who needs the stress?

Now, it is possible that one of them met someone else. And I have a few friends who split because one person came out or transitioned.

Anyway, I think Mr. Sphinx and I are just going to ride this out. Bottom line: I would be happier with him than without.

And whoever outlasts the other gets all the toys. Might as well hang around to watch the credits roll. . .

quote:

Originally posted by Cindysphinx:
Ive been married 30 years, so I think I align with Pique. After a while . . . . Well, why bother? Who needs the stress?

Now, it is possible that one of them met someone else. And I have a few friends who split because one person came out or transitioned.

Anyway, I think Mr. Sphinx and I are just going to ride this out. Bottom line: I would be happier with him than without.

And whoever outlasts the other gets all the toys. Might as well hang around to watch the credits roll. . .

No argument, but when you’re splitting up $129 Billion the toys don’t matter much.

It is not about the toys..it is about what you contributed to the marriage, that may or may not include future earnings.

Besos' wife did it well..she is giving it all away.

I suspect Melinda will do the same.

In the end..can you live with the person looking across from you at the breakfast table...Do they support you? Do you believe in them? Can you trust them?

The money is the last part of it, really.

Well, yeah. If Mr Sphinx were a drag on earnings, that would be a problem. Or a hoarder, or drug abuser. Or abusive.

Hard to know what happened with the Gates’, but that money can buy a very large breakfast table.

quote:

Originally posted by Cindysphinx:
Well, yeah. If Mr Sphinx were a drag on earnings, that would be a problem. Or a hoarder, or drug abuser. Or abusive.

Hard to know what happened with the Gates’, but that money can buy a very large breakfast table.

Just try to sleep in the same bed or be together for a family crisis...

Money is nothing compared to support, love and loyalty...I would give up the money for truth and love...and I did.

When you have that much money..it is worthless.

About Melinda's "pairability"...My experience in observing couples pairing off, is that for the most part there are trades.

If the man is richer and has more money-making potential generally, he can attract a mate who is poorer as long as she is a combination of beautiful, socially ept and good arm candy.

The more there is an age difference, the more such trades exist.

When they are close in age, regardless of physical appearance, the potential mates seem to gravitate to similarity in wealth - either inherited and/or potential earning power.

I say this based on my observation of not a few peers who have great wealth, mostly inherited but also (especially on the part of the men) in potential wealth. They don't seem to want to marry outside of their income/wealth bracket disregarding other "points" of potential appeal which might play a significant role in families from lower social/economic classes .

It seems they don't want an imbalance of resources to risk the richer party's attracting poorer ones to them for phony reasons. If they are more equal, they seem to feel safer and more comfortable. (Similar social backgrounds as illustrated in more elite brand schooling also equalizes the pairing.)

I'm thinking among others, of the extremely rich girls I went to boarding to school with (some heiresses of name-brands) and assorted coupling overseas based on other dynasties.

(And if the girls fall in love with a poor boy, from the perspective of time, I see they all ended up divorced.)

Maybe these represent a small minority but it's certainly illustrated to me how much equality of wealth plays a major role in match-making. There always seems to be an equation with certain factors contributing similar "points" in making the pairing come out balanced. (This is why I can see Melinda's having more trouble now finding a suitable mate - as compared to Bill, for instance). Her great wealth is bound to attract suitors with pecuniary motives, especially since she is (rightfully) dedicated to finding a mate who is "worthy" of her now matured self. (Not that she couldn't see through them.)

Having taken to reading the NYTimes marriage pages, I see that in more or less arranged marriages of upper class 3rd world families (in the US) couples seem to be especially well-matched even if they meet through culturally restricted "OK, Cupid" sites.

It's really not all that different from Jane Austen's day!

It also fascinates me to see such couples pairing off, even when both are high level professionals (e.g. MD.PhDs), moving directly from parental homes to their new marital abodes. And the wife-to-be will have been chaperoned until the wedding.

Was in a bar in Newport, R.I. years ago with a very wealthy friend from the area.
He told me the bar was full of very wealthy people that were there to meet people that had more money than they had. The taboo was marrying anyone with less money.

quote:

Bottom line: I would be happier with him than without.

That's always what it comes down to, isn't it?

I am also married to someone who is mildly "on the spectrum" (I always had a weakness for the class brain, so this is what it gets me)

He's absolutely brilliant, but yes, it is easy to get worn out. A big turning point for me was a) recognizing who and what he is--his son and I figured it out together b) accepting this is who he is and c) stop trying to change him or take charge. For that matter, no marriage can work without full acceptance of each other. And the only remedy for burnout is to abdicate any attempts at control.. it's wonderfully freeing.. Stuff that used to throw us into a fever-pitched battle we now just laugh off. It just gets better and better.

quote:

Originally posted by BeeLady:
It is not about the toys..it is about what you contributed to the marriage, that may or may not include future earnings.

Besos' wife did it well..she is giving it all away.

I suspect Melinda will do the same.

In the end..can you live with the person looking across from you at the breakfast table...Do they support you? Do you believe in them? Can you trust them?

The money is the last part of it, really.

So very true. A good heart is the most precious of "commodities "