How he looks at you. How you look at him. Attractiveness and gender roles.

I'm hardly naive. Nor am I a prude about the reality of implied possible romping (rich men paying for young girls to enjoy a night out in great hope (but not insistence) of a high bedroom return for his high credit-card investment).

But, I had the gag reflex after seeing the  enormous generational gap (grandfathers flirting with granddaughters so to speak) and the exchange of "powers." Pretend flirting, possible sex in exchange for champagne and a Louis Vitton bag the next day. Ew.

If the wallet is mightier than the self-esteem for some women, fine. But let's not place a biological imperative on men and women; let's not assume our roles are run by auto-pilot thanks to evolution. Women and men switch roles and expectations all the time today, which implies choice.

Rich women with young studs, aka "Cougars." Fathers happily at home. Women CEOs. Women who choose child-free.   Sure, men and women have evolutionary primitive impulses (try not breathing a mile a minute when a car near misses yours) but we also have manual control.  We have mental overrides that trump societal expectations for how women and men should feel, for what we should do. 

The fat wallet can't negate the physical and emotional less-attractive qualities in a man no matter how rich he is, at least for me. Neither will (emotionally mature) men tolerate the ditsy, easy bombshell who's idea of conversation is to count how many cherries her Appletini will hold before she takes him home to show him her Hello Kitty bedroom (okay, maybe for one night he'll pretend he cares that the glass held twelve Maraschino's).  

What's good for the guy is now good for the not-so-good girl. 

The double standard disappearing is a tough pill to swallow for traditionalists but an absolutely inevitable reality.  And as Dennis says, I'm not going to tell you what you want to hear I'm going to tell you the truth.  

Further reading: What women want