In the game community, "being a provider" carries a stigma — the belief that providing men get used for money, divorced, or cheated on. This material reframes the stigma: the failure mode isn't providing itself, it's being a low-value provider — a man who won the relationship through gifts and promises rather than personality and inherent value.
The same providing behavior (financial generosity, emotional follow-through) reads completely differently depending on whether attraction and value already exist independent of it. A high-value man who also provides is far more valuable, not more exploitable; a low-value man who provides is buying a substitute for value he doesn't have, and that's the actual setup for getting used. See Lover-Provider False Dichotomy for why this means providing and being a lover aren't opposed tracks, and Spending Framing: Buying Affection vs. Facilitating a Relationship for how this plays out in concrete spending decisions.
"there's a stigma around being a provider that all providers get like used for money and girls will divorce them and take half and providers get cheated on" — valid only for the low-value provider case, per this material.