But with all due respect, isn't there a contradiction? If the woman lacks "two nickels to rub together", and consequently you "eat before [she] come by", while presumably if she's of adequate pecuniary means, the two of you would dine together... then would it be not be the case, that her finances are of some relevance, after all?...Doesn't really matter how much money they have. I'm not marrying them or letting them move in either way. As long as they can pay their half, we can continue interactions. If they don't have two nickels to rub together, I eat before they come by.
A women's finances is irrelevant to me. Her being kind and treating me good is.
We can of course be gracious and accommodating of the other person's financial situation, act with magnanimity, be slow to judge and quick to forgive, etc... and likely we should. Nevertheless, isn't there an obtrusive feeling, that if I was diligent and saved and invested etc., and she didn't, then there's a sense of inequality, where the one partner "deserves" more, for making better decisions? It takes effort to fight this feeling... at least it does, for me. Isn't this akin to how a lifelong investor might feel about capital gains taxes and crashing-out of ACA subsidy eligibility, while other folks, who maybe earned more but saved little, now pay next to zero tax, and get all sorts of benefits?