“A person who cultivates personal relationships in order to attain money.” That’s the definition of a gold digger.
I don’t know anyone who has referred to someone as a gold digger with any level of admiration. It’s usually spewed out in disgust when referring to women who don’t have much to rely on but their physical attributes to get money from men so gullible, they would fall for anything from anyone with body parts different from their own. You know, women who are believed to not have a lot going for themselves so they use men to get what they couldn’t get otherwise. But I wonder, are gold-digger tendencies limited to the woman who doesn’t have much of her own, looking for a comeup? Who uses what she does have to get what she wants? Or can hard-working, educated career women who often laud themselves as “Ms. Independent” also be considered gold diggers?
After several conversations (10 to be exact) with self-proclaimed independent women, I couldn’t help but wonder if their independence was forced upon them and not actually a goal of their own based on some of their responses. What does this mean? Basically, I was left wondering if they paid their own bills simply because they hadn’t found a man, young or old, to do it just yet.
“Would you date a man you weren’t attracted to at all if he was willing to buy you gifts and pay a few bills?” I asked them. Many of these women reluctantly said yes. They admitted that they would talk to a man with no intention of being with him, simply to rack up the latest shoes and bags and travel the world on his dime. However, they said they’re not gold diggers because they could do it on their own. But if we refer to the definition of the word, are they technically gold diggers? Are they cultivating relationships merely to receive gifts and money?
Can women who believe themselves to be of high stature, who have more degrees than a thermometer, also be gold diggers? I’m sure most people will agree that using someone is the same whether you have your own money or not, and deceitfully talking to a man (or woman) for the sole purpose of receiving money and being kept isn’t a good look. And yet, how many of us have joked about finding sugar daddies and going on dates with a guy we don’t like for free meals?
In a day and age where materialism is at an all-time high and flaunting your possessions is as easy as “snap, save, and post,” more and more people are consumed with showing others what they have, even the woman who has worked hard to take care of her own needs and necessities. She wants to look as good as the woman who doesn’t appear to work nearly as hard but seems to pop up with expensive items courtesy of naive men. This certainly isn’t the case for everyone. And ultimately, what a woman chooses to do in her dating life is her prerogative. I get it. Most women love gifts; but is it fair to label one group of women gold-diggers, and not consider another group simply because of socioeconomic status and occupation?
What makes a woman a gold digger? Is she excluded because she works a 9-5? Here’s the thing: We, as grown-ups can do what we want to do, with no apologies; but is it accurate for a woman to consider herself independent and “different” from the rest when she’s, in a way, doing the same thing she shuns other women for doing? The only difference is that the money she’s stacking from men is combined with her own.
I don’t particularly like any terms that demean women, especially when it relates to the opposite sex. But I also don’t like terms that make one group of women appear better than another when they’re more similar than they would care to admit. Your money or education doesn’t make you less malicious or downright desperate than the next woman.
Ladies, what do you think? What makes a woman a gold digger? Can you be both independent and have gold-digger tendencies?
