Blogs and Stories
The Shelf Life of a Trophy Wife
Billy Joel and his famously young third wife, Katie Lee Joel, split last week. From Donald and Marla to Sarkozy and Carla, VIEW OUR GALLERY and read our guide to the art of marrying up.
Ever since older men caught on that younger women have a thing for money and the finer things in life, they have been getting themselves trophy wives. The trophy wife, a title that entered our lexicon in the 1950s after appearing in an article in The Economist, is typically defined as the second or third spouse of an older, successful gentleman. She is publicly derided behind the closed doors of her husband’s contemporaries as arm candy or a bimbo. Her own friends cringe at the thought of their pal having to hop in bed with such a wrinkled old codger.
Click Image Below To View Our Trophy Wives Gallery
But it’s these very women, the ones who hooked up with a man two or three decades their senior in what should be the prime of their lives, are often the ones having the last laugh. To the trophy wife, the period acting as nursemaid, arm candy, and perhaps even bimbo is a transitory stepping stone into a better life, and it doesn’t have to last forever. In fact just the opposite: The shelf life for the typical trophy wife—the time it takes her to increase her monetary and social standing for the rest of her days—is typically two or three years. Less than the time it takes for most doctors to finish their medical training. Consider, for instance, the five-year union of Billy Joel, 60, and Katie Lee Joel, 27, who announced last week they were getting divorced. In a joint statement to The New York Daily News’ George Rush, the couple’s publicist explained, “After nearly five years of marriage Billy and Katie have decided to separate. The decision is the result of much thought and consideration. Billy and Katie remain caring friends, with admiration and respect for each other.” The rumor mill has been buzzing for months that Katie Lee has been tiring of Billy and has been stepping out on “dates” in Miami with handsome Israeli fashion designer Yigal Azrouel, 36.
Joel reportedly has an iron-clad prenuptial agreement with his third wife so it is unlikely that she will walk away with the Grammy winner’s millions, but she is still expected to receive a healthy chunk of change and the couple’s swank Greenwich Village townhouse. In the near half-decade that Katie Lee Joel spent as Mrs. Piano Man, the former restaurant fishmonger transformed herself into a food critic, television host, and cookbook author. She became a fixture on the Manhattan social scene (where celebrities are often offered fees for party appearances), and will from now to eternity retain her status as the third wife of one of the best-known musicians on the planet. That’s not too shabby.
It is a relatively small price for most women to pay to be set for the rest of their lives. The initial value of their investment, Vi, is only a few years of youth but the final value, Vf, is a life of luxury. It’s a return on investment Warren Buffett would surely appreciate. Recall ex-stripper, Vicki Lynn Marshall, better known as the late Anna Nicole Smith, who flashed her ample assets for oil billionaire J. Howard Marshall, 63 years her senior, and after a 13-month marriage (her hubby died of natural causes) was able to parlay her wealth into a second career as a reality TV star. Smith reportedly never lived with Marshall so she was rarely around to change his diapers, but she contended until her death in 2007 that she truly loved the old man and that money had nothing to do with her decision to marry him, however briefly.
Real-estate magnate Donald Trump’s most famous trophy wife (he is still married to his most recent), Marla Maples, only walked away from their six-year union with about $1 million, but with enough property and child support to keep her in high heels and private jets for the rest of her life, in addition to the titles of socialite, actress, and spiritual adviser. “Golddigger” was among the kinder epithets used to describe the second marriage of Paul McCartney to former waitress and ski instructor turned model Heather Mills. But the often contemptuous blonde was paid dearly for enduring the six years of criticism from Beatle fans over the 26-year age gap between the two.
They merely have to grin and bear it for less than a decade—kiss some wrinkly ass, smile pretty, maybe give the old guy a roll in the sack, and they will walk away with a more secure future than a Wharton School graduate.
After a wicked and highly publicized divorce, during which Mills famously doused McCartney’s divorce lawyer with a cup of water in the courtroom, she received a lump sum payment of around $50 million in addition to $35,000 a year in support.
And in the ongoing high-profile split between United Technologies Corp. Chairman George David, 66, and his estranged wife, former Swedish socialite Marie Douglas-David, 36, she claims she deserves more than the roughly $43 million set out in the couple's post-nuptial agreement for six years of marriage. She wants to walk away with at least $100 million in cash plus $130,000 a month in support. Mrs. Douglas-David’s weekly expenses include $4,500 for clothes, $1,000 for hair and skin treatments, $1,500 for restaurants and entertainment, $8,000 for travel, $700 for limousine services, $2,209 for an assistant, $1,570 for horse care and $600 for flowers.
Call them bimbos all you want, but these ladies have enough brains to realize that while the rest of us are slaving away at assistant jobs in our 20s, living in tiny shared apartments and blowing thousands on higher education that will ultimately only catapult us to the upper middle class. They merely have to grin and bear it for less than a decade—kiss some wrinkly ass, smile pretty, and pose for pictures. Maybe, pop a Valium and give the old guy a roll in the sack once a week (month?), and they will walk away with a more secure future than a Wharton School graduate.
These women will always have the last laugh.
Johanna Piazza wrote the Full Disclosure column for the New York Daily News. A master's candidate in religious studies at NYU, she has contributed to the New York Times, Glamour, Blender, and is a regular contributor to CNN.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Amateur Hour at the White House
Leslie H. Gelb, a former New York Times columnist and senior government official, is author of Power Rules: How Common Sense Can Rescue American Foreign Policy (HarperCollins 2009), a book that shows how to think about and use power in the 21st century. He is president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Going Rogue: The Index
Christopher Buckley's books include Supreme Courtship, The White House Mess, Thank You for Smoking, Little Green Men, and Florence of Arabia. He was chief speechwriter for Vice President George H.W. Bush, and is editor-at-large of ForbesLife magazine. His new book is Losing Mum and Pup, a memoir. Buckley's Daily Beast column is the winner of an Online Journalism Award in the category of Online Commentary.
Cashing In on Coming Out
Johanna Piazza wrote the Full Disclosure column for the New York Daily News. A Masters candidate in Religious Studies at NYU, she has contributed to the New York Times, Glamour, Blender, and is a regular contributor to CNN.
Inside America's Holiest University
Johanna Piazza wrote the Full Disclosure column for the New York Daily News. A Masters candidate in Religious Studies at NYU, she has contributed to the New York Times, Glamour, Blender, and is a regular contributor to CNN.
Turning Pounds Into Dollars
Johanna Piazza wrote the Full Disclosure column for the New York Daily News. A Masters candidate in Religious Studies at NYU, she has contributed to the New York Times, Glamour, Blender, and is a regular contributor to CNN.
See where I think your wrong is in thinking most people are calling them "bimbos". The correct term is whore or high priced escort.
At the end of the day it is simply a question of personal morality or amorality as the case may be. I have no doubt they are set for life, significantly out earning their street corner bretheren but personally I'd rather live in a shared apartment and work hard at my education then sleep with someone for money, but then that's just me.
I don't understand the reasoning behind this piece. Is this what our culture has created? We are celebrating a woman that trades a piece of her soul for money? JoshAus had it right, these aren't women to be admired, they are women to be pitied, and they are without a doubt prostitutes (of the highest order).
There is another term to describe these women. Whores!
And the men?
Can't believe you included Jackie Kennedy as a *trophy wife*.
Of course not! She was madly in love with the gorgeous, virile young Aristotle Onassis, who in turn was captivated by her excellence as a book editor.
You get points for the best retort!
You may not remember it but Jackie Onassis took a major dive in public opinion when she married him. It revealed a side of her that wasn't what we imaged her to be -- *greedy* for wealth and power to the lengths of marrying someone as unsavory as him in so many ways.
Her iconic stature made pictures of them together look like a poster of America whoring itself to the highest bidder.
Only she knows what the situation was but it looked really bad, especially as their marriage quickly crumbled.
You should read more, Veronicaxy. It's a pretty well known fact that Jackie O. married Onassis for his money.
It's a business arrangement, like any other. The old guy gets to parade her around, and in so doing gets to think he still "has" it - and gets to believe WE think he still "has" it.
In exchange for that, the woman gets money and security. If she's a whore, the man is a sleaze. Let's call a spade a spade, and no laying the blame solely on the woman. They each get something they want from the arrangement, and neither of them is entirely deserving of it.
The victims? All the women who are age-appropriate for these sleazebags, whom they reject, who would make good spouses for older men, but who are passed over with a roll of the eyes, and taught they have no value at all.
The other victims are those of us who have to suffer in the marketplace at the hands of these overly empowered men who often don't contribute value in exchange for the riches they obtain.
These guys also have a sense of complete entitlement, where women are concerned. Ever been on the receiving end of one? Ew.
Life starts and ends being very tough for men. First they whack off the foreskin then it's financial and emotional castration in the divorce courts to only end up filled with the wisdom of old age with prostate problems.
They can't help the foreskin or the prostate, but they stand in line BEGGING for financial and emotional castration. A little honesty with themselves, self-awareness, and insight would save them (No, you do NOT still "have" it!!! You're just a sleazebag with money.) But, fortunately for young women, that's asking too much.
I agree. These guys want to be treated like status objects, and they are very often successful at preserving their riches even when they are ready to move on to the next sex object.
Doesn't anybody want any depth or meaning to his or her life anymore?
What's the big deal? Marriage is supposed to fulfill your needs on some level. Men desire sex, women desire security. This equation is as old as dirt.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
Love the snarkiness of this article!
Trophy wives are right to go for the gold. So what is the difference if they have to see a bit of poop? Wives of younger men have to put up with a lot of other poop for nothing.
Trophy wives may wind up with money and position. Let's hear it for them.
Do they wind up content with themselves?
Or do they forever deal with being high-priced courtesans?
And the men?
You want it, you pay for it. No complaining.
HI-larious but bittersweetly true.
Intelligence in a woman, a much undervalued commodity about to go through boom times, I suspect.
Twice in the last week I've heard this called "the century of the woman."
Old news. We all know trophy wives have the last laugh in the end that's why we resent them so much.
@TexasLefty
We resent their image, I suspect, and don't really envy them?
At some point we all have to learn to take responsibility for ourselves? There is no free lunch in relationships.
When money, status and image are everything to two people the arrangement just makes perfect sense: sometimes I'm sure everyone is happy to move on to something new with a few consolation prizes exchanged.
What really is a drag is watching the fight in the media between the old (less powerful) mate usually the woman and the new emerging trophy and how the more powerful mate just stands back and let the media feed on the rot, or do they feed the media frenzy? Sometimes I wonder.
But we generally don't keep a hot white spotlight on the good people in the world. We're strange that way.
What you are describing is a phenomenon of Patriarchy. The entitled man (who holds money, power) is free from criticism but is very effective, consciously or subconsciously at getting the women antagonistic toward each other.
I rather think what we are describing is a logical extension of the extent to which Western society, particularly the U.S. I suspect, worships wealth. Old, rich men want young, sexy women. Young, sexy women want easy money and know their physical attractiveness will command a high fair market price. It's a commodity exchange. Period.
Sentimentality for the rejected older wife is likely misplaced. Most of them undoubtedly married for monetary promise, if not monetary gain. It's not difficult to observe a young man's family and education and make an educated guess regarding his income potential. I seriously doubt many rejected first wives of rich men married for anything but a shot at the gold ring. They just misjudged the timing.
@rodtanner
I agree that wealth is power in Western society and I think we (regardless of gender) all want power to some degree, whether we admit it or not.
I disagree with the generalization you make about the motives of young first or second wives, though. I suspect some of them, and the men they married, are searching, consciously or not, for more than a commodity exchange. At a minimum any woman seeking to have children is going to be looking at whether the man will be of help in this, and if all he offers is money, then that is what he'll be used for. And some women may also be be looking for friendship & support, an ally in all of life's challenges and a more genuine deeper type love.
The woman-as-sex-object / man-as-status-object thing is indeed a type of commodity exchange, but it is very primitive.
Although it takes two to tango, male "conquest" and mercantile attitudes toward women, together with women's traditional socio-economic-political disempowerment plus the physical threat men can pose, creates this soup.
You are missing the value of women. Too bad.
If men can relax and learn to interact and be friends with women and appreciate all we have to offer, we can get out of this abusive Patriarchical loop.
PS- My understanding is that in a physical sense, the aging male does benefit from a more fertile partner, for a short time, in being able to become aroused and perhaps to have an orgasm. But eventually this wears off and he has to move to the next fertile partner.
I am told by men in the know that when he does this moving from trophy to trophy he misses out on a deeper type of sexual relationship and spiritual connection, in which ironically arousal and orgasm are easier and more satisfying. But it is tougher to get to this connection when the man and woman are not the same age (which includes capacity for sexual maturity and hormone-driven behavior wanes).
One other important abuse of Patriarchy I left out of this is the harm to children from having a bank account father instead of one who mans up to be a real Dad & husband. Again, the relational value of a real Dad & husband has been undervalued in Western society and I think is still misunderstood by many men and women.
The problem I see with the "arrangement" is the child that is almost always quickly conceived. She gets pregnant as soon as she can to insure her future, regardless of pre-nups. And he's happy since this proves his virility to the world. But now we have a FAMILY, such as it is. The child will never want for material things, but it's very existence was for leverage.
As a man, I'm jealous. Not bad work if you can get it. When I lived on the upper East Side of New York, I met a few of these women, and they seemed pretty content, not to mention well dressed.
Ms. Piazza has written a loathsome article that suggests an idea that is cynical, un-modern and narrow. Her thought process saddens me. Not only is she blandishing the work of gold-diggers, she is encouraging men to be suspicious and hateful of women. That Ms. Piazza is a candidate for a masters in religious studies is oxymoronic. Shame on her.
This user is no longer registered.
When I was 14, I married a man of 21.We had 4 kids in 4 years and there was rarely any money. We were together for 45 years, the last 12 he said he was impotent. I loved him so I stayed. Then he discovered Viagara and left me for a forty year old who didn't want to have to work and was content to live on his barely above poverty social security check although he has never married her. So what is she? Not a trophy "wife", not a gold digger. Just a former friend of my youngest daughter.
George David divorce to Marie Douglas David was the hot battle between the multi millionaires. Douglas David's lawyer is asking the judge to void the couples $43 million postnuptial agreement. It was also reported that Wendy Touton was the mistress of George David and he reportedly showered Touton with gifts. His wife is hardly strapped for cash, since she needs about $53,000 a week, including over $4,000 for clothes. (6 closets full of nothing to wear, and everyone goes to Switzerland to get their watch fixed.) At any rate, Wendy Touton won't suffer or need unsecured loans if he ponies up - he's still got $200 million in the bank.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.