1. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
Title of the essay:Money can’t buy my love, what can?
Student Number: 686679
Word count of the essay: 2837
“Cause I don’t care too much for money, money can’t buy me love” (John Lennon,
1964). Love ignites when there is an attraction between two people. Love can be an instant
hence the phrase “love at first sight”, however, some take time and effort. At first interaction,
judgements are made and this will determine if the relationship would be created or not.
When the romantic relationship is established, each other’s needs are acknowledged. But the
question is what exactly kindles these feelings that begin to develop and deepen. In this essay
we will explore the factors involved in romantic relationships.
How it evolved
Scientist proposed that humans evolved with sex differences to ensure maximum
survival for both themselves and offspring. Evolutionary theories suggest that women are
more likely to be materialistic than men. Trivers (1972) proposed the parental investment
theory which states, as women are the gender to carry the baby and fend for the baby hence
making the “greater prenatal and postnatal; contribution” (pregnancy and extended period of
childcare), they seek a man that would provide enough resources to care for her and the
children. Whereas, a man needs to spread his genes, hence he wants a fertile woman. This
would suggest why women are more concerned with emotional infidelity (their man taking
interest in another woman) as this would mean losing their resources, whereas, men are more
likely to be jealous of sexual infidelity (their woman having sex with another man) to try and
avoid the possibility of providing resources for a child that isn’t theirs (Cardwell and
Flanagan, 2011). Moreover, in hunter gatherer days, history has revealed that the male
generation would go hunting for the wife to cook and feed the home. This led to mate
competition to enable females choose the best man with the highest resources to ensure he is
willing to invest in her offspring (Trivers, 1972). Apart from the fact that empirical evidence
cannot be collected due to inability to go back to cavemen days, this research has severe
implications on the lives of adopted children or single mothers who find “new love”. This
theory suggests that the men don’t have to provide for children that are not from their loins.
Research disagrees and indicates that men don’t discriminate financially between their
children and those born to a current partner from their previous relationship (Anderson,

2. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
Kaplan & Lancaster, 1999). It could be that these men are willing to invest just to prove they
are “good providers”.
Looking at the evidence it would be unbiased to say women are more concerned
about finances when it comes to romantic relationships. This could be because of the way the
society has evolved and changed over the years. In the early days, women were seen as
inferior to men, therefore, they were restricted to do certain jobs. Moreover, it wasn’t until
the early 20th century that women were allowed to vote, and even in most countries they have
male rulers. So a woman’s best option would be to marry a man with sufficient finances to
provide for her. A study carried out in the late 20th century showed that dating after the 1920s
was like an exchange market where a man would give to receive (Belk and Coon, 1991). This
diminishes the value of love which should be the biggest factor in romantic relationships.
However as the women were restricted to be individually financially stable, that would have
been the only way for her to take care of herself without breaking society rules. Further
research support showed that men pay for women on a date while women would withhold sex
and give to the man she loves in exchange (Harayda, 1989). This is why “prostitution” is
more related to women. And it almost seems like women are the only ones who care about
love, but some men would disagree and say “I pay because it is my duty/ because I had to”.
As the society evolved over the years, men were seen as the dominant figure that should
provide resources for the family. That’s why the saying was developed: “A way to a man’s
heart is through his stomach, and, a way to a woman’s heart is through her purse”. This
identifies the idea that women are more concerned about financial status of their partners than
men.
What about now?
If there were no doubts about the evolutionary perspective, we should assume that
men and women preferences when it comes to romantic relationships hasn’t changed i.e. men
have a prenatal idea that the physical appearance of a woman is the most important factor in
choosing a mate, while a woman would believe that her “true love” should be rich. However,
the recent generation has changed in many different ways: the introduction of technology;
education and opportunities have been given to women. This has caused a change of belief
and an individuation in the way we think, express and interpret situations.
Technology has introduced new way of communication and this has enabled the
ability to get to know each other without any barriers or factors that may hinder this

3. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
possibility. Research has shown that 95% of 235 participants had formed an online
relationship and one forth was romantic (Anderson, 2005 cites Parks and Roberts, 1998). This
allows formation of relationship without factors such as money get involved while
personalities of the individuals are explored. Social media created online dating sites such as
e-harmony. But there are negatives of online romantic relationships, apart from removing the
excitement involved while searching for mates, there are safety concerns and the likelihood
of deception which can have negative impacts on the individual.
Additionally, it also prevents the interference of sexual desires which pre-marital sex which
has been on the rise as urbanisation occurred. Sex has become a huge part in romantic
relationships that sometimes it causes lust to be confused for love. Regan (1998) found that
partners with high sexual desire were more in love, satisfies, committed and jealous than the
partner that wasn’t sexually interested. This shows that sex is an important feature in
relationships and its existence has implications on the relationship. Willoughby, Carroll and
Busby (2014) studied 10932 individuals in an unmarried romantic relationship to find the link
between sexual timings and satisfaction, communication and stability. Results suggest a
negative correlation: having sex at an earlier time in a relationship correlates with less
commitment, satisfaction and stability in romantic relationships. However, this research
doesn’t indicate a causal relationship suggesting the influence of other factors. It could be
that those who abstained from sex concentrated on other parts of the relationship. Therefore,
if you remove sex from a relationship, what other factors attracts an individual? Flynn &
Adams (2009) investigated the link between the price of gifts and appreciation. Findings
suggest a positive correlation with gift-givers whereas, no correlation for gift-recipients. This
shows that money may not be a major aspect in romantic relationships. It could be that
because gift-givers are aware of the value of the gift, they assume expensive gifts should be
appreciated more. Besides there are individual differences in how things are valued.
Modernisation has led to a strong belief in “love at first sight” suggesting the
importance of physical characteristics. Castro & Lopes (2011) studied the mate preferences in
short and long term relationships. Findings suggest that male preferences fit with the Parental
Investment theory. But, they still considered other attributes when it was for a long term
relationship. Whereas women preferred physique for short term relationships and proof of
provision for long term relationships. This shows that a woman is more concerned about
finances as she wants the future of her and her children secured-desires a man that has
sufficient investments. Further evidence also suggests that only the male likings support the

4. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
evolutionary explanation. However, as this study was carried out on university students, it’s
not representative of other females; also, they were not worried about finances as the mate
choices were financially dependent on same source as they were. On the other hand, research
disagrees as it shows that even females with unlimited resources prefer a resourceful partner
(Castro et al, 2011 cites Buss, 1989). This suggests the importance of similarity when it
comes to choosing a mate: people chose partners who portray similar traits.
We cannot dispute the fact that the growing generation seem to be concentrating on
physical qualities in a mate. This is seen by the increase in plastic surgery, makeup users and
gym attendance. Although you can argue that the media influences this decision by
portraying the “ideal body”, physical appearance has become one of the important features in
choosing a romantic partner. Moreover, there are cultural differences in preferences which
should be considered as some societies are more developed than others.
Arranged marriages?
In every romantic union, we have identified factors that may be important aspects of
the relationship. But is this the same for those who were not given the choice of life partners?
Although some arranged marriages are to those with knowledge of each other, in some
developing/underdeveloped countries; there are still blind arranged marriages. How then will
the element of love be created? How can the factors involved in this unity be identified? Are
finances a big issue? The parents of each partner come to an agreement to join their children
in matrimony after weighing the profits and losses. But after the marriage is there a chance of
falling in love? Will the gain identified by the parents satisfy both partners?
Western cultures are modern therefore; they highly regard individual interest i.e.
individualistic cultures (a culture that values its dependence on self rather than others). That’s
why there is freedom of choice when it comes to forming a relationship. Whereas, non-
western cultures lack urban settings, so, they are collectivist (a culture that value the extent to
which the group live and work together e.g. Japan). Therefore, romantic unity is based on the
concerns of the family. Twaneley (2013) compared love desire between Gujurati Indians in
the UK and in India. He found that those in the UK valued love rather than material gain
hereby indulging in premarital sex, whereby, the non-westernised Indians saw love based on
physical attraction (“love at first sight”) as an inferior kind of love. Although we can assume
that relationships based on love rather than financial reasons results in producing more
compatible partners, parents may be in a better position to choose suitable spouses as they

5. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
wouldn’t ignore other areas which the young mind deems irrelevant due to them being
“blinded by love”. Moreover, we hold the belief that after falling in love, everything is a “bed
or roses”, but forget that “roses have thorns” i.e. financial factors are ignored. There is a
question of what type of relationship these factors are promoting: temporary or long-term.
While non-western cultures care more about ancestry, western cultures stresses the
significance of change and progress. Therefore, they are favouring short term romantic
relationships when blinded by their fantasies and ignoring reality and the importance of
finances.
When Regan, Lakhanpal and Anguiano (2012) examined 28 arranged marriages and
30 love marriages, they found that men were significantly more committed and satisfied with
it than women. It could be because women like the emotional adventure, of finding “the one”
that makes everyone else irrelevant, so, they might feel this experience was taken from them.
This is illustrated by the finding which suggests that women were happier in love based
marriages than the ones that were arranged (Regan et al, 2012). Further support also shows
that women who married for love had stable marriages (Xu and Whyte, 1990). An
explanation could be that the women in the love-marriages were aware of the outcome of the
unity (what will be gained) whereas; those whose marriages were arranged, their profits were
based on the parents’ perceptions.
Myers, Madathil and Tingle (2005) found no difference in marital satisfaction
between participants in India and United States. This illustrates that there are other factors
that are involved in making a relationship romantic. Moreover, individual differences occur,
therefore it’s only a person that truly knows what “floats their boat”. Recent research has
shown there are other factors that are involved in a romantic union apart from finances/gain.
Epstein, Pandit and Thakar (2013) carried out two studies to examine how love emerges in
arranged marriages and findings identified two major factors: commitment and sacrifice. And
other factors included: physical intimacy, communication and parenting. This shows that
money is not the only factor involved when someone falls in love. Findings also revealed that
men felt sacrifice and physical intimacy was important: “first love making…being grateful to
her for being easy going…”, whereas, women stressed more about commitment and
parenting: “his support for his children”. This supports evolutionary perspectives as it shows
that women are carers who want a resourceful man to form a relationship with. And the men
want a woman who can satisfy their physical needs. Hence, we can say women are turned on
by emotional intimacy while men desire physical intimacy. Suggesting that women are

6. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
passive while men are active, this is why men “fight or flight” while women “tend to
befriend” (David and Lyons-Ruth, 2005).
Further research derives from a study by Bowman and Dollawhite (2013) who found that in
arranged marriages, family and religion is important in marital happiness. This also suggests
that there are other factors that ignite love in a romantic relationship. It could be that sharing
same or similar values and ideas are significant to some people. However this idea cannot be
generalised as it is based on people’s personal experiences. Besides, cultural differences
exist, so, it is only relevant to certain cultures: in India, people value religion and family.
Moreover, these marriages are decreasing constantly as these countries are becoming more
educated and independent, but, this has caused the increase rate of divorce as urbanisation is
occurring due to the promotion of tourism. Nevertheless, in a romantic relationship with love
involved, both partners should be benefitting from it somehow.
Theories have indicated that in romantic relationships, gain is one of the main
factors involved; each partner is seeking out what they would profit from such unity. If you
ask a female “would you marry a poor man”, her response would be “yes because I would
marry for love”. But let us face the reality that the only reason she says that is because she
does not want to be seen as a gold digger, we live in a society that is trying to make sense of
everything by putting a name tag on it – it is either you are this or that. In the male’s case, he
would not want to be labelled a gigolo. But the truth is humans have evolved to see the men
as providers of the family and women as carers as they fend for the children, hence a
“housewife”. Research shows that based on perception of women as partners and payment
discourses, men are described as the providers in a romantic relationship (Jaramillo-Sierra &
Allen, 2013). Therefore, the men want a woman who can provide children and the woman
wants a man that could provide resources.
Even in cases such as arranged marriages, the arrangers’ reasons are down to “how
will it be profitable”. Both parties are mostly concerned with what they perceive would make
their children happy. Hence, money can’t buy love because love is unmeasurable and cannot
be defined, however, in this century; you need money for those little things that would put a
smile on your face. So, it would be safe to say money can’t buy love or happiness but it can

7. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
make you happy, and happiness plays a huge role in romantic relationships. We also need to
acknowledge other factors that are involved in love such as similar personality trait and
physical appearance which stimulates sexual desires, moreover, the western societies are
developed; so, finances can be a factor involved, but, in the non-western societies that are still
developing; they may value other things that cannot be price tagged. This could be why
divorce is higher in western communities as they are not committed due to the lack of
appreciation of non-material things. For example, rich men tend to go for models (females
with the best waist to hip ration: signifies their fertility), but, in the case of a sudden loss of
wealth, they lose attraction and abandon relationship. While men can lose their interest if they
no longer find the woman sexually attractive. This is why I believe the evolutionary
explanation gives a better insight into the things that cause humans to “fall in love”. But, we
need to acknowledge the fact that some views cannot be generalised and some are subjective.
But, for a successful romantic relationship, a compromise is needed; both partners need to
come to an agreement to satisfy each various needs in the best way, to ensure a long lasting
relationship which is only possible with communication and understanding.
References
Anderson, G. K., Kaplan, H. & Lancaster, J. (1999). Paternal care by genetic fathers and
stepfathers 1: Reports from Albuquerque. Evolution and Human Behaviour, Vol 20(6) pp.
406-431
Belk, R.W, & Coon, G.S. (1991). Can’t buy me love: Dating, money and gifts. Advances in
Consumer Research, Vol 18 pp 521-527
Bowman, J.L. & Dollawhite, D.C. (2013). Why would such a person dream about heaven?
Family, Faith and Happiness in Arranged Marriages in India. Journal of Comparative Family
Studies, Vol 44(2) pp 205-225

8. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
Buss, D.M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypothesis
tested in 37 cultures. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, Vol 12 pp 1-49
Cardwell, M. & Flanagan, C. (2011). Psychology A2: The Mini Companion (2nd edition).
Oxford: Oxford University Press
Castro, F. N. & Lopes, F. (2011). Romantic Preferences in Brazilian Undergraduate Students:
From the Short term to the Long term. Journal of Sex Research, Vol 48 (5) pp 479-485
Castro, F. N., Hattori, W.T. & Lopes, F. (2012). Relationship maintenance or preference
Satisfaction? Male and Female Strategies in romantic partner choice. Journal of Social,
Evolutionary and Cultural Psychology, Vol 6(2) pp 217-226
David, D.H. & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2005). Differential attachment responses of male and female
infants to frightening maternal behaviour: Tend or befriend versus fight or flight? Infant
Mental Health Journal, Vol 26(1) pp 1-18
Epstein, R., Pandit, M. & Thakar, M. (2013). How love emerges in arranged marriages: Two
cross-cultural studies. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, Vol 44(3) pp 341-360
Flynn, F.J. & Adams, G.S. (2009). Money can’t buy my love: Asymmetric beliefs about gift
price and feelings of appreciation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Vol 45(2) pp
404-409
Harayda, J. (1989). “The New Dating Game”. New Woman, Vol 19 pp 55-57
Jaramillo-Sierra, A.L. & Allen, K.R. (2013). Who pays after the first date? Young men’s
discourses of male-provider role. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, Vol 14(4) pp. 389-399
Lennon, J. & McCartney, P. (1964). Can’t buy me Love. On A hard day’s night (CD).
London: Parlophone
Myers, J.B., Madathil, M & Tingle, L.R. (2005). Marriage satisfaction and wellness in India
and the United States: A Preliminary comparison of Arranged marriages and marriages of
choice. Journal of Counselling and Development, Vol 83 (2) pp 183-190
Parks, M.R. & Roberts, L.D. (1998). “Making MOOsic”: The Development of personal
relationships online and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social and
Personal relationships, Vol 15 pp 517-537

9. MoneyCan’t BuyMy Love,What Can?
Regan, P.C. (1998). Of lust and love: Beliefs about the role of sexual desires in romantic
relationships. Personal relationships, Vol 15(2) pp 139-157
Regan, P. C., Lakhanpal, S. & Anguiano, C. (2012). The Relationship outcomes in Indian-
American love based and arranged marriages. Psychological Reports, Vol 110(3) pp 915-924
Trivers, R.L. (1972). Parental Investment and sexual selection. Illinois: Aldine Publishing
Company
Twaneley, K. (2013). Love desire amongst middle class Gujurati Indians in the UK and India.
Culture, Health and Sexuality, Vol 115(3) pp 327-340
Willoughby, B.J., Carroll, J.S & Busby, D.M. (2014). Differing Relationship Outcomes when Sex
happens before, on and after the first dates. Journal of Sex Research,Vol 15(1) pp 52-61
Xu, X. & Whyte, M.K. (1990). Love matches and arranged marriages: A Chinese Replication.
Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol 50(3) pp 702-722