Is romance simply a gimmick of the poor man?

When a man doesn’t have riches to offer, some say he turns to romance—words, poetry, promises—to prove his value. Romance becomes his currency. He can’t buy castles, but he can build fantasies. He can’t offer jewels, but he can offer devotion.

Top | New | Old

RisingMorningStar7 · 36-40, M

Romance and being in love is beautiful you should try it. It goes with rich and poor.

BillyMack · 46-50, M

I guess if that’s your view then you better ask up front how much a dude makes. Saves both of yall some effort

in10RjFox · MVIP

When he has riches to offer, obviously he becomes an arrogant buyer and wants to buy everything at once. So love and romance is greek and latin for him.

Whereas a true lover who is good in romance, won't offer jewels and won't buy castles even if he is wealthy.

zonavar68 · 56-60, M

@in10RjFox Men go into relationships for love. Women go into relationships for money.

If they can't get money, they have a meltdown and blame men for all the problems in the world.

Remember the disparity between men and women about sex:

- for women - "Who will I let sleep with me tonight?"
- for men - "Who will let me sleep with them tonight?"

Women often have a 'list' of men to choose from. Men don't usually have any 'list' of women to choose from.

zonavar68 · 56-60, M

Value isn't defined by financial wealth.

helenoftroy2000 · 22-25, F

A gimmick of the rich?

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

JustAGirlNotAGod · 26-30, F

@SomeMichGuy It’s not contempt, it’s analysis. When wealth can’t secure a mate, romance becomes the marketing strategy. Poor men often sustain their lineage not through resources, but through rhetoric — affection as persuasion. And women, taught to believe in that narrative, end up investing more emotionally than we ever receive, regardless of class.

SomeMichGuy · M

@JustAGirlNotAGod It's a very misanthropic analysis and reveals a bit more.

Add a comment...