Why is it that the higher up you go in the social ladder, the more enforced gender norms are?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
In my experience, 90% of men in challenging careers are not there for the “personal achievement” and self-actualization. Those men are there for the money to take care of the families. They aren’t particularity happy working. Occasionally you run into men who would do exactly what they are currently doing no matter what. You may be similar to that latter group of men, but you’re painting with a broad brush.

As for why men don’t stay home, women play a part in that as well: women, unlike men, have a harder time being attracted to potential partners who are not career oriented. Yes, there is a small subset of women who would marry and stay with men who are less ambitious than they are, but men who would prefer not to work have a real hard time finding and keeping a partner. Hell, these boards frequently feature posts from women who are frustrated by their husband’s lack of ambition. Very rare to hear men express the same sentiment about their wives.

Finally, while there are a whole host of factors that go into the longer life expectancy and better health outcomes of women vs men, I believe one of those factors is the stress that men experience with work.

None of this is to suggest that men should work and women should stay home with the kids. People should structure their lives as they please without facing the judgment and scorn of others. I always thought that was a major point for feminism and female empowerment, but this thread suggests otherwise.

Do you not see how the two statements contradict each other? If it's really all about the money, then any intelligent man would probably recognize that two careers that achieve 75% of their potential are probably better than one single career that reaches its full potential. My experience, as an ambitious woman married to a man who is not as overtly ambitious but internally gets a lot of job satisfaction, is that if he were willing to step back a smidge, I could earn a lot more. But he's not, so here we are. Both of us would be considered highly paid, but he earns twice what I earn. And, minus childcare, we could pretty much support our entire lifestyle on my current salary alone (it's pretty close to what our HHI was when we bought our house). In other words, if he stopped working and became the FT care provider, we would barely miss a beat.

As to why you don't see as many posts from DH's complaining about their DW's lack of ambition? I think that at least partially reflects the fact that there are more women on this forum than men. I've heard plenty of men complain about their DW's lack of ambition/willingness to earn an income. I suspect you're right that on balance it bothers women more, but it's not all or none.

Ultimately, though, I think I have a better deal than DH. I really don't want to devote my entire life and all my energy to my job...neither does DH. I just wish the constraints on what jobs I can have if I don't prioritize my job over everything in my life weren't so tight. I am more efficient than most of my (almost all male) co-workers. Any of my boss's will tell you that...but many employers won't take a chance on me, because I'm not willing to promise them my soul at the outset.

[Anonymous]

I've heard plenty of men complain about their DW's lack of ambition/willingness to earn an income.

Only if money is tight, her eyes are bigger than her stomach, or she sits at home doing nothing (vs. raising small kids).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP.

I can’t relate to a personal goal of raising kids. So I won’t argue, it’s too foreign to me (and to my SAHM who wanted to work, but couldn’t afford childcare).

I wonder if more than 0.5% of the male population EVER said that. "I have a personal goal of raising kids about all else." yeah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In my experience, 90% of men in challenging careers are not there for the “personal achievement” and self-actualization. Those men are there for the money to take care of the families. They aren’t particularity happy working. Occasionally you run into men who would do exactly what they are currently doing no matter what. You may be similar to that latter group of men, but you’re painting with a broad brush.

As for why men don’t stay home, women play a part in that as well: women, unlike men, have a harder time being attracted to potential partners who are not career oriented. Yes, there is a small subset of women who would marry and stay with men who are less ambitious than they are, but men who would prefer not to work have a real hard time finding and keeping a partner. Hell, these boards frequently feature posts from women who are frustrated by their husband’s lack of ambition. Very rare to hear men express the same sentiment about their wives.

Finally, while there are a whole host of factors that go into the longer life expectancy and better health outcomes of women vs men, I believe one of those factors is the stress that men experience with work.

None of this is to suggest that men should work and women should stay home with the kids. People should structure their lives as they please without facing the judgment and scorn of others. I always thought that was a major point for feminism and female empowerment, but this thread suggests otherwise.

Yet, when I got a $500k+2x bonus C-level job offer in a fine midwest city, workaholic DH wouldn't budge. Wouldn't leave his asinine job, wouldn't leave DC, wouldn't want to stay home with the kids, didn't even entertain the thought of relaxing for a couple years after doing an investment banking rat race for 15 years of uber high taxes, F'd up vacations, and ADD iPhone addiction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In my experience, 90% of men in challenging careers are not there for the “personal achievement” and self-actualization. Those men are there for the money to take care of the families. They aren’t particularity happy working. Occasionally you run into men who would do exactly what they are currently doing no matter what. You may be similar to that latter group of men, but you’re painting with a broad brush.

As for why men don’t stay home, women play a part in that as well: women, unlike men, have a harder time being attracted to potential partners who are not career oriented. Yes, there is a small subset of women who would marry and stay with men who are less ambitious than they are, but men who would prefer not to work have a real hard time finding and keeping a partner. Hell, these boards frequently feature posts from women who are frustrated by their husband’s lack of ambition. Very rare to hear men express the same sentiment about their wives.

Finally, while there are a whole host of factors that go into the longer life expectancy and better health outcomes of women vs men, I believe one of those factors is the stress that men experience with work.

None of this is to suggest that men should work and women should stay home with the kids. People should structure their lives as they please without facing the judgment and scorn of others. I always thought that was a major point for feminism and female empowerment, but this thread suggests otherwise.

Yet, when I got a $500k+2x bonus C-level job offer in a fine midwest city, workaholic DH wouldn't budge. Wouldn't leave his asinine job, wouldn't leave DC, wouldn't want to stay home with the kids, didn't even entertain the thought of relaxing for a couple years after doing an investment banking rat race for 15 years of uber high taxes, F'd up vacations, and ADD iPhone addiction.

I responded to this above, and I had a similar situation...though in my case it wouldn't have required relocation. It would realistically have required him to cut back at work. He wasn't willing to try that, and I wasn't willing to sacrifice my kids in a game of career brinksmanship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
In my experience, 90% of men in challenging careers are not there for the “personal achievement” and self-actualization. Those men are there for the money to take care of the families. They aren’t particularity happy working. Occasionally you run into men who would do exactly what they are currently doing no matter what. You may be similar to that latter group of men, but you’re painting with a broad brush.

As for why men don’t stay home, women play a part in that as well: women, unlike men, have a harder time being attracted to potential partners who are not career oriented. Yes, there is a small subset of women who would marry and stay with men who are less ambitious than they are, but men who would prefer not to work have a real hard time finding and keeping a partner. Hell, these boards frequently feature posts from women who are frustrated by their husband’s lack of ambition. Very rare to hear men express the same sentiment about their wives.

Finally, while there are a whole host of factors that go into the longer life expectancy and better health outcomes of women vs men, I believe one of those factors is the stress that men experience with work.

None of this is to suggest that men should work and women should stay home with the kids. People should structure their lives as they please without facing the judgment and scorn of others. I always thought that was a major point for feminism and female empowerment, but this thread suggests otherwise.

Do you not see how the two statements contradict each other? If it's really all about the money, then any intelligent man would probably recognize that two careers that achieve 75% of their potential are probably better than one single career that reaches its full potential. My experience, as an ambitious woman married to a man who is not as overtly ambitious but internally gets a lot of job satisfaction, is that if he were willing to step back a smidge, I could earn a lot more. But he's not, so here we are. Both of us would be considered highly paid, but he earns twice what I earn. And, minus childcare, we could pretty much support our entire lifestyle on my current salary alone (it's pretty close to what our HHI was when we bought our house). In other words, if he stopped working and became the FT care provider, we would barely miss a beat.

As to why you don't see as many posts from DH's complaining about their DW's lack of ambition? I think that at least partially reflects the fact that there are more women on this forum than men. I've heard plenty of men complain about their DW's lack of ambition/willingness to earn an income. I suspect you're right that on balance it bothers women more, but it's not all or none.

Ultimately, though, I think I have a better deal than DH. I really don't want to devote my entire life and all my energy to my job...neither does DH. I just wish the constraints on what jobs I can have if I don't prioritize my job over everything in my life weren't so tight. I am more efficient than most of my (almost all male) co-workers. Any of my boss's will tell you that...but many employers won't take a chance on me, because I'm not willing to promise them my soul at the outset.

What is highly paid in your view? Could you fully make up his income if he stopped working?

I don’t think my two statements contradict. First, I mentioned guys in challenging careers (though I should have said ambitious, high earning careers that don’t allow for work life balance). I’m trying to get at outlier compensation jobs. Second, the math is not so simple. In my household with outlier base compensation, I work 60-70 hours per week on average. If my spouse and I were both working in well balanced jobs, we could probably get to 75% total of my total base (ignoring bonuses) while working about 20 hours more combined (then add in time for commuting and additional work necessitated stuff and the math gets worse). On top of that, I would undoubtedly be less stressed but my spouse’s stress would undoubtedly increase more than my relative stress would decrease.

Perhaps we’re traveling in different circles, but in my experience, around guys making a minimum of $500k/year, I’ve never heard a complaint about a SAHM’s lack of ambition or career. Perhaps the incremental income doesn’t really do much for those households, and those guys would be complaining if they were making less and the incremental income had more value to them. I just don’t think the math here is as simple as you suggest and I know for a fact that in my circles, I’ve never heard a guy complain about his SAHW’s lack of a career.

Finally, even if my spouse could earn my full income, I think she would be less willing than I am to accept the time commitment and availability demands required. I’m not complaining and she would do it if necessary, but on a relative basis, she would be less happy than I am with the work demands.

I get what you’re getting at in your last sentence, but as long as some people are willing to fully commit to their jobs at the expense of other things in their lives (admittedly, overwhelmingly married men and childless workers of both genders), what can be done?

[Anonymous]

Of course men working demanding jobs aren't complaining that their wife is doing everything on the home front, kid front, budget front, etc. She's like his Mother all over again!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, something has to give. It’s usually female ambition.

yep.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FACE IT FOLKS -- We ALL wish we had a stay-at-home spouse to do everything for us.

Even my wife wants a wife. So to speak.

by the definition of 'wife' I'm seeing here, yes, we all need our own wife.

now, back to TV and emails while wifey multi-tasks around the house.

[Anonymous]

I think we can all agree as parents that if money grew on trees, we’d all stay home, make waffles in the AM leisurely around 10am after a few cups of coffee. This isn’t reality.

Someone has to work. At that juncture in life where two parents have a career track, they jointly decide the Mom should take second fiddle in most cases. Many men don’t budge on daddy tracking or leaving the workforce. Why?

I’ll tell you my case, my DH doesn’t have to work. There’s no way he’d quit his job. He can’t fathom giving up his independence and how that might change our marriage dynamic.

I totally get it. I’m flabbergasted that more women don’t get this.

Once you leave the workforce, you’ll likely never reach your same potential, even 10 years later. You’ve lost a ton of leverage in the marriage and will be willing to accept some major BS behavior down the road as you are financially dependent on someone.

Should the marriage dissolve, the working spouse wins the long game. You’re banking on never divorcing and you likely kowtow to his leverage on the daily.

It’s not equal. It’s not a partnership. He’s financing you as a dependent.

For the record, it’s utterly ridiculous to state high earning men aren’t detail oriented. They can figure out when the household needs more OJ, they’ve just delegated all the BS to you as operations without a paycheck.

Another silly post, men can deal better with working crap like answering to bosses or long hours or getting that TPS report in on time. SAHMs can juggle a hella of a lot more, and they do it daily to support your male ambition.

It’s not equal. It’s the patriarchy selling women on a very shitty contract for life. Not to mention the role model you are as a 2018 woman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
What is highly paid in your view? Could you fully make up his income if he stopped working?

I don’t think my two statements contradict. First, I mentioned guys in challenging careers (though I should have said ambitious, high earning careers that don’t allow for work life balance). I’m trying to get at outlier compensation jobs. Second, the math is not so simple. In my household with outlier base compensation, I work 60-70 hours per week on average. If my spouse and I were both working in well balanced jobs, we could probably get to 75% total of my total base (ignoring bonuses) while working about 20 hours more combined (then add in time for commuting and additional work necessitated stuff and the math gets worse). On top of that, I would undoubtedly be less stressed but my spouse’s stress would undoubtedly increase more than my relative stress would decrease.

Perhaps we’re traveling in different circles, but in my experience, around guys making a minimum of $500k/year, I’ve never heard a complaint about a SAHM’s lack of ambition or career. Perhaps the incremental income doesn’t really do much for those households, and those guys would be complaining if they were making less and the incremental income had more value to them. I just don’t think the math here is as simple as you suggest and I know for a fact that in my circles, I’ve never heard a guy complain about his SAHW’s lack of a career.

Finally, even if my spouse could earn my full income, I think she would be less willing than I am to accept the time commitment and availability demands required. I’m not complaining and she would do it if necessary, but on a relative basis, she would be less happy than I am with the work demands.

I get what you’re getting at in your last sentence, but as long as some people are willing to fully commit to their jobs at the expense of other things in their lives (admittedly, overwhelmingly married men and childless workers of both genders), what can be done?

Clipping the top responses cuz they're long.

Highly-paid - me: ~$250K, DH: ~$500-600K, I turned down a job that could have crossed 7-figures with bonus, so, yeah, I could make it up.

I agree that you don't see high-earning DH's complaining about their SAHW's lack of ambition...but similarly you don't see high-earning DW's complaining about their spouse's lack of ambition. You hear them complaining that their DH doesn't do anything to pull their weight, no housework, little childcare, etc.

I think the math you're doing isn't so straightforward, and you also have to take into account what's being missed. There are tangible benefits to having two people earning an income, and ultimately the question is, "How much money do you really need?". We earn way, way more than we really need. DH knows this, and he talks about cutting back. But he really doesn't want to...because he likes what he's doing. Maybe your DW is happy in her situation, but I know many talented, educated, ambitious women who ended up making career sacrifices that they feel pretty ambivalent about.

TBH, I don't really know what this discussion is about anymore. The reality is that I honestly don't believe it's healthy for anyone to "fully commit to their jobs at the expense of other things in their lives". My dad is looking back on his life from the other end, and he has tons of regrets he doesn't know how to begin addressing...and in reality he can't. I see DH entering into a similar pattern, and it's almost like he feels powerless to stop it. I've worked in more than one sector and at more than one organization, and the one constant I've seen is how much time people (esp. those ambitious men) waste on useless work. There is definitely room for change in these oh-so-important careers, if people wanted to try. I don't, truly, know what the answer is other than "ambitious men" collectively coming to the realization that there's a better way...but I don't think we should pretend that everyone is happy with the current, UMC gender dynamics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I've heard plenty of men complain about their DW's lack of ambition/willingness to earn an income.

Only if money is tight, her eyes are bigger than her stomach, or she sits at home doing nothing (vs. raising small kids).

+ 1

You won't hear men making more than 500k say this.