Gold Digger Can’t Even Dig Gold

4

Carl e’Main

In our battle with the mainstream media, we ought to take a leaf from Cato’s book. “MSM delenda est” or “Furthermore, the mainstream media must be destroyed” should be our sign off on every Facebook comment, article and tweet.

  • Not just because they are the propaganda arm of the powers that be.
  • Not just because they are disingenuous liars.
  • Not just because they actively subvert and degenerate the public discourse and societal norms

Today, dear friends they have pushed me over the edge with the most truly batshit solipsistic article I have read. The fact that the “Money” editor at SMH thought this article was good content, my god…

At this point, our civilisation deserves the meteor more than the dinosaurs did:

Title: “I paid my half in everything but I still get called a gold digger”
Subtitle: “Jess Gately has sent herself broke trying to pay for half of everything in a relationship where her partner has more money.”

Opening paragraph: “We’re about to go out to lunch. My partner opens his wallet, pulls out some cash and I squash it into my purse self-consciously before shoving it away. When we arrive, I order as little as possible and try to pick the cheaper items on the menu. When the waiter brings the bill, I pull out the cash for both of us.”

What is going? Like, guys, seriously, what in the actual fuck is going on?

The title said she pays her half of everything, but she immediately says it was with his money? Newsflash, if it was with someone else’s money, you didn’t pay! Only the federal government gets away with that sort of reasoning.

“It’s unlikely anyone even noticed me get my wallet out.”

LMAO

This strong independent lass is mad that no one is witnessing her strong independent gesture.

“Once home, I give him back the remaining cash. I know the gestures are pointless and feel even worse now that the money I’m paying with is no longer my own.”

Are we meant to feel sorry for her?

“In the three years since my partner and I started dating, moments of discomfort like this have been a frequent reality. On this particular occasion, the people we were meeting had, only days earlier, confronted my partner and I with their accusations that I was “gold-digging” – an assumption I knew had been talked about behind our backs for years. We were both livid. So, we made sure I was the one seen to be paying.”

Imagine being this beta – the mind boggles.

“But this accusation had hung over us our entire relationship. By the third time I had met my partner’s family and friends, the word “prenup” had been mentioned more than once with very direct looks at me.

“This label of gold-digger has haunted me ever since. I couldn’t believe how easily it was pinned to me. I had never said or done anything to prompt this judgment; my crime was simply that I was not as rich as my partner. I’m still not. And I probably never will be.”

Never said or did anything, except for of course enjoying a standard of living far above what you would have experienced if your prosperity was dependent on just your own skillset.

“It seems ludicrous to judge a relationship based on the woman’s income when there is still a 15.3 per cent gender pay gap in Australia and women make up more than three out of five low-income earners.”

Probably because some woman choose to become writers, whilst their partners do something with more social and economic utility. It is interesting that she doesn’t mention what her partner does.

“There’s been plenty written on the gold-digging phenomenon but what most of these musings fail to reflect is that the label of a gold-digger is applied liberally, publicly and painfully to women. The propagation of media articles around high-stakes payouts to wives in divorce cases and the running commentary around women who date well-known or wealthy men is toxic.

“Unlike men, it would appear that women are subject to greater scrutiny. While men who marry women of greater wealth are applauded for supporting their wives and making smart financial decisions, women are lauded as gold-diggers and money-grabbers.”

Citation needed please. Being a man of limited or even average economic means is a romantic death sentence, that’s why you never hear about male gold diggers.

“When I realised what was being insinuated by the mentions of a prenup, I felt it was my job to prove them wrong. I paid my half in everything. Years later and I’m poorer now than I’ve ever been from trying to keep up with a lifestyle that is beyond my means. The poorer I got, the more debt I ran into, the more my status as a gold-digger was cemented. It’s a vicious cycle. And now not only am I being accused of gold-digging, but I no longer have the means to prove otherwise.”

LMAO.

Family and acquaintances try to warn partner that it’s a bad financial decision to attach himself to this woman. She attempts to prove them wrong, and goes broke and runs up debt, thereby proving them right.

“This is my label. I have to wear it. I can’t take it off myself. It was pinned to me by others and it can only be removed by others. I’m grateful to my partner: every time someone puts that label on me, he takes it off. He sees the value I bring to our relationship that isn’t measured by the money in my bank account.

“But I am curious, when will those of us with less money be afforded the same benefit of the doubt as our richer counterparts?”

Never, because just reading this made me cringe so hard imagining what that relationship must be like. She hasn’t really sold it to us as a viable model for love and bliss. I wouldn’t afford you the benefit of the doubt if I was friends with the partner, because I would seek to improve my friend’s life by advising him to cut off a financial anchor.

The absolute state of modern relationships is truly depressing. But even more depressing is that this narcissistic, indulgent, petulant tale of woe is unlikely to be met with a response in the media, because of the silencing cry of “misogyny”.

No wonder everyone is opting out of marriage:

My postmodern education told me that all perspectives are valid, but why did the media advantage or preference this view, I wonder?

Hmmmmm, really got my cashews grinding.

THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA MUST BE DESTROYED!

  • The Expanding Man

    “The title said she pays her half of everything, but she immediately says it was with his money? Newsflash, if it was with someone else’s money, you didn’t pay! ”

    “Family and acquaintances try to warn partner that it’s a bad financial decision to attach himself to this woman. She attempts to prove them wrong, and goes broke and runs up debt, thereby proving them right.”

    Mansplaining at it’s very worst. Don’t you know how demeaning this is to women?

  • He’ll marry someone younger without her personality defects.

  • Mattys Modern Life

    Has she even pushed out two or three kids for him yet? Nobody wants a woman’s money, men need fertility, women need men’s money.

    That’s how it works, gawd…

  • Noachideous

    Seein’ as how we’re talking about Money …. and cash is usually counted with two hands, each with five digits ……. here’s who you can thrill your mates with a demonstration on the determination of the dimension of the Australian $100 Note.

    Begin with the number 55 …. for the 5 digits on each hand.
    Then, for the fact that 55 can be a senary, six based number convert that number to a decimal number.

    For instance … 55 becomes … 5x6sum5 for …. 35…… That number can also be a senary number …. so do the same again… for …. 3x6sum5 …23 … same deal until you end up with a number that cannot be senary …. That is 6 or larger. You’ll end up with the following.

    55 35 23 15 11 7 …….. Now select two numbers that sum to 58 for the fact that 100-42=58.

    Providing 35 and 23 …… Then, by x+ of 35 then 23 is derived 15 8 then 6 5 … for 158 x 65 .

    The dimensions of the $100 Australian note…. with millimetric precision. Brought to you by GOD 26 … or 42 in six based senary.