How attractive would this woman have to be for you to consider marriage with her?

[MatureDJ]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/missouri-high-school-teacher-ended-200000267.html

Her choices started in 1990, when she first enrolled in college, already married with children. After four years at Maryville University, she had accrued her first $26,278 in student loan debt (the equivalent of about $42,000 in 2015, Carey notes).

After three semesters of law school, a career path change to teaching — which required more graduate school from 1999 to 2004 — additional loans to cover child care for her four children, and steep interest rates, she owed $194,603 by April 2005, the Times reports.

One final educational endeavor post-2005 — a Ph.D. program at Texas A&M — tacked on an another $7,748 in loans.

It wasn't until this September that Kelley realized the extent of her debt, thanks to a call from her loan servicer. After 25 years of not making any payments, her total was a jaw-dropping $410,000

My opinion: She would have to look like a top-quality playmate for most men (and only those who could afford it) to consider marriage.

 

[sodbuster]

NEVER happen, even if she could suck a VW through a garden hose.... Kids who should be grown, but still 43 or 45? If you want a gold digger, you can find a newer model

 

[Bible_Belt]

It's not like that money is ever going to get repaid, like most student loan debt in the current bubble waiting to pop. There are people in their 60's who have never stopped being full-time students. As long as you never stop going to school, you never have to pay the money back, and you can often siphon off money to live on.

 

[zekko]

First off, I would not get married no matter who it is, because you can't guarantee she won't change 5, 10, 20, even 50 years down the line. You have no control over that.

That said, of course there is a baseline attractiveness level for a woman that you would marry. Hell, hopefully there is for a woman you would just bang. But you should never choose a wife based purely on how pretty she is. That's a recipe for disaster. Besides, her looks will fade.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

First off, I would not get married no matter who it is, because you can't guarantee she won't change 5, 10, 20, even 50 years down the line. You have no control over that.

That said, of course there is a baseline attractiveness level for a woman that you would marry. Hell, hopefully there is for a woman you would just bang. But you should never choose a wife based purely on how pretty she is. That's a recipe for disaster. Besides, her looks will fade.

Zekko NAILS it. You cannot marry based upon looks alone, it's completely irrational and stupid. You have to look at what
they do for you and what you get out of it. You may "love" them, but it may be based upon fleeting "infatuation".

 

[sharkbeat]

Marriage quality falls more on her tenacity to stay on track than her beauty. Attractiveness comes and goes. Marriage, with children, requires more mental, moral, and physical endurance. Obviously there's a baseline on looks, but IMO it should be lower than your expected baseline while sarging.

 

[SteR]

To quote Leo Tolstoy:

“Never, never marry, my friend. Here’s my advice to you: don’t marry until you can tell yourself that you’ve done all you could, and until you’ve stopped loving the woman you’ve chosen, until you see her clearly, otherwise you’ll be cruelly and irremediably mistaken. Marry when you’re old and good for nothing…Otherwise all that’s good and lofty in you will be lost.”