i dare to doubt harper’s weekly
From this week’s missive. “A metastudy by several U.S. universities applied the Tightwad-Spendthrift scale to romantic relationships and determined that cheap and profligate people can love each other.”
I’m not saying it’s not possible, just highly unlikely, at least from where I’m standing. More from the study itself:
“That is, ‘tightwads,’ who generally spend less than they would ideally like to spend, and ’spendthrifts,’ who generally spend more than they would ideally like to spend, tend to marry each other, consistent with the notion that people are attracted to mates who possess characteristics dissimilar to those they deplore in themselves (Klohnen and Mendelsohn 1998). In spite of this complementary attraction, spendthrift/tightwad differences within a marriage predict conflict over finances, which in turn predict diminished marital well-being.”
I love the heavy parsing on “diminished marital well-being.” But I’m sad to hear that these tightwads are so ashamed and self-hating. I think moderate to extreme cheapness is one of the most attractive traits in a potential mate; I actually become very anxious around people who spend more than they should. But I never would have suspected that this is a rarity. Especially in this economy, amirite?
Kim wrote:
I am always anxious around people who spend more than they should - and I am probably a “tightwad” by this definition (though note: these definitions are kind of wackadoo). That said, I am definitely more of a cheap Jew than Will is (granted, he’s not a Jew).
Posted on 27-Aug-09 at 8:06 pm | Permalink