Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:If a couple wants a good marriage, stable home and happy kids, what's wrong with one or both to parent-track their career for child bearing and rearing years?
Sure. In OPs case her DH needs to be the parent-tracked one. This guy probably won’t make enough to be the breadwinner and NEEDS ops income but is too insecure to be the main parent of his own child.
Why would you assume that? She said she makes a little more not significantly more. May be he'll surpass. May be OP's income-debt-spending ratio limits her ability to be an equal contributor.
Why would you bet on things that haven’t happened over actual reality? Op makes more now. He is not happy about it and still expects her to be his house slave. Bizarre to give so much benefit of doubt to her partner but you won’t extend that to op. Women are allowed to work AND want to work. It’s not a crime.
I am a SAH, I made more than DH did when we were first married. Worked for a large company and was pretty high up. His path had a significantly higher ceiling. I wanted to be a SAH and made that clear to DH early on. If you need the income, I get it. But saying you want to climb the corporate ladder because that will make you feel accomplished is crazy. No one cares.
I am not a "house slave" in any way, shape or form. I don't know many men or woman who would pass up the opportunity to live very comfortably and not have to work. Sure there are some but in reality if you actually put that offer in front of people they would say would choose not to work.