If you strictly look at the biology aspect of this whole situation (I'm a zoologist so this is compulsive for me anyways), women are always going to be attracted to the male that shows better genes. Whether we realize it or not, we are a product of evolution. Meaning, a male with better genes to a dog might be one that is bigger and fights off others for dominance. In our society, that equals out to being who makes the most money. That only makes sense because, you would assume, the male with the more money has bigger ambitions, works harder for what they have or are perhaps more intelligent. Whether this is true or not is not of concern, its simply how we perceive things.

Men, however, are conditioned to look for a woman that would be a good mother. This means seeing those nurturing characteristics and that, in our society, equates to being submissive or not powerful. A woman with a low of ambition or power doesn't come across as a mother-type. And at the end of the day, we all just want to carry on our genes.

However, if we go into that it opens up a whole other can of worms. Because we also are not technically supposed to be monogamous. Mammals change partners every birthing cycle. I guess my point is, there are logical, scientific reasons why we want certain things in people and why marriages tend to break up after a certain amount of time. Everything we're talking about is our way of fighting evolution and fighting our natural biology. Its just up to you whether its worth the fight.