The anecdotal existence of someone who marries exclusively for money does not, in any way whatsoever, prove or even suggest that there are a lot of them, or many of them.
Same goes for looks.
It seems a couple people don't understand the problem, which is not the concept that money and financial stability plays a role in the choice to get married, it's that it's idiotic and insulting to cast a wide net on the wives of NHL players and call it the only determining factor for "a lot" or "many" of them.
The idea that instead of thinking "hey, gold digger or trophy wife are actually kind of ####ty things to say, let's use smarter language" you'd think, "hey, I'm actually going to go ahead and redefine gold digger to mean 'someone who considers financial stability in their marriage decisions' and trophy wife to mean 'a woman who, amongst many other important and valuable qualities, is also attractive' so I can continue to use those words"... is peak stupidity. And if you're defending those two phrases on the basis of those definitions, instead of their actual definitions, you're being silly.
I'm sure there are wives who find their husbands interesting, and attractive, and funny, and caring, or whatever. I would bet the majority of these people actually love each other and that's the deciding factor. I believe their lives are probably more typical than people imagine, outside a few ridiculous cases like Kane's gambling problems or McDavid's stark psycho mansion.
Point is, it's not derogatory to use the phrase gold digger for someone who marries exclusively for money. It's derogatory to use the phrase on a wide group of people where you have no idea their motivations, just simply the wealth of their husband. It's stupid.
|