What is more shallow, only wanting a woman for beauty or only wanting a man for money?

To be completely honest, I think some women want a wealthy husband so their kids can have the best life possible. So I think it's more shallow to want a partner only because of beauty.





Not saying both of those couldn't be reversed, but you hear that men are 'visual creatures' and women want providers more than the other way around.|||Equally shallow. If you don't want someone for who they are, but rather what they can give you or do for you, then you are a shallow person.





Edit:


There is nothing wrong with wanting an attractive partner or wanting financial stability. But if that is the only thing that draws you to a person, then you are shallow, and likely to end up very unhappy.|||Beauty is an indicator of youth and fertility in a woman. Being a normal male who wishes to have children of his own, fertility is not-at-all shallow REQUIREMENT for me to date a woman with any serious intent. So desiring some level of beauty is not shallow. But I would and have never gone so far with it as to require supermodel good looks.





Likewise, desiring a modest level of income in a man is not shallow, as it indicates an ability to provide for children. Requiring an exorbitant amount of income IS shallow however, as it is totally unnecessary other than to make a woman feel that she has high social status.





So both are shallow in excess, but not in moderation.|||Both, honestly. If you choose to be with someone due to only one aspect of them, you are setting your life up for failure if feelings on that singular point fade or change. In other words, you may no longer find a person as attractive or their wealth so appealing, or the wealth or beauty may fade over time. It's not enough to choose one point of a person and base love only that. Any relationship, especially romantic, should be about the many attributes we all have, and their compatibility.





I'm in love with a woman now because of many reasons, including her beauty, intelligence and personality.|||No wanting wealth is material wanting beauty is an interest in the human.





I think feminists and many women will move the goal posts depending on which ever works out best for them, for example when it comes to a woman going for wealth, its not shallow, when a woman is selling sex cheaply and without strings its a crime (because she is undercutting). When a woman is bedding hot men because they are hot, its empowering and when a man does the same it becomes shallow.|||I'm going to go with money as being way more shallow. (I'm not sure why you put genders in there--men are money-grabbing whores as well, sometimes. And women like a good-looking guy as much as anyone else)





It's a god bet that if someone is beautiful, s/he is symmetrical, which indicates good health. So, ultimately, wanting a good-looking partner is about getting a healthy partner. (However, if a guy finds a Bunny who has high cholesterol, I doubt he's kicking her out of bed because she's sick)|||If the two got together, it would be a perfect match.





You assume that the woman wants the best for her kids. So you answered your own question.





Both are pretty shallow, beauty can be taken away in heartbeat and fades anyway. A guy could go bankrupt especially in the this economy. If the guy really has the money, he can take an plain woman and make her beautiful. The reverse is not true.|||The word "only" makes it shallow... There is nothing wrong with wanting someone because they're beautiful... Beauty is a sign of health, but if you only want her because she's beautiful...that's shallow.





There's nothing wrong with wanting someone financially stable...but if you only want someone because of their wealth, or financial status... That's being shallow.|||beautiful people usually have good genetics, so beauty is sought after in order to pass the genetics to their children.


and money, well that's sought after in order to provide children with a good start in life.


both are shallow, but they're totally reasonable, because our purpose in life is to reproduce.








Ivy


x|||I sdon't think either is very sensible. You have to live with someone, after all, and neither beauty nor money is enough to sustain a satisfactory relationship. Beauty can fade with time, and people can lose money. You need other things to keep a marriage going.|||Beauty often signifies good health/genetics. Thus men who procreate with beautiful women instinctual believe that their children will be healthier. Women who find wealthy men know that their children will be will provided for. The point that I am getting at is that we are all baboons.|||well wanting a woman for beauty is a natural instinct. Wanting a man for money is materialistic so money is more shallow.|||It's not shallow for men to be attracted to looks, but it is probably shallow if they just stop there and don't look at the personality.|||Equally shallow. If you don't want someone for who they are then it's automatic hypocrisy... Pretending to like them for something else.|||All of that is shallow and distasteful to me. Either way it's about using someone.|||How much money? It lasts longer than beauty.|||So this is why rich women are single.|||Both because when either run out, what are you going to do then?|||i dont judge, normally.|||Actually, neither is shallow. A woman's beauty is reflective of health and fertility and, consequently, reflects a woman's ability to have children. A man's wealth is reflective of his ability to care for a woman during and after pregnancy. Both reflect mutual desire for commitment and family and neither are necessarily shallow unless they are reduced to crass shallowness.





Feminists have tried to classify deep and important signals such as these as nothing but sexual overtones. Feminists have incorrectly interpreted these things as "shallow" because...well...they're wrong about most everything.