Tell me I am Wrong: Woman secure resources and financial stability through marriage

[Anonymous]

Um, you are not wrong. You just left out the under patriarchy part.

[Anonymous]

I am female, I am the breadwinner. I make 6x what DH does. Being married costs me money/lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Why are we indulging this ridiculously sexist premise by the OP? This should have been left to wither and die in OP’s mother’s basement where it belongs.

[Anonymous]

ME! I make a bit more than my husband and have only 45K less in investments. I have worked for 32 years, raised 2 kids, both went to college (I paid). And I do whatever I want when I want! Ya'll should have tried working!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are we indulging this ridiculously sexist premise by the OP? This should have been left to wither and die in OP’s mother’s basement where it belongs.

Those are the kind of idiot women I have no time for. It's very archaic. They perpetuate the centuries old model of women are helpless and the man is the breadwinner and authoritarian.

I also find those kind of women incredibly lazy and vapid.

These women are different from women that chose actively with their spouses in the course of their marriage and later pregnancy to work out a model that works best for the family unit...and sometimes, yes, the one that earns more (whether it's man or woman) will lean into their career more, while the other temporarily leans out for the good of the family unit. AND--this can and does change over time.

[Anonymous]

I benefit from my DH‘s salary. He wanted a wife and children. We had three and I stay home with them. He is very happy, and would say his salary is well worth his wife and progeny.

[Anonymous]

Women run the home and raise the children. Of course they want money for these jobs. Since the dawn of time and will continue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we indulging this ridiculously sexist premise by the OP? This should have been left to wither and die in OP’s mother’s basement where it belongs.

Those are the kind of idiot women I have no time for. It's very archaic. They perpetuate the centuries old model of women are helpless and the man is the breadwinner and authoritarian.

I also find those kind of women incredibly lazy and vapid.

These women are different from women that chose actively with their spouses in the course of their marriage and later pregnancy to work out a model that works best for the family unit...and sometimes, yes, the one that earns more (whether it's man or woman) will lean into their career more, while the other temporarily leans out for the good of the family unit. AND--this can and does change over time.

Have you seen how many men cannot handle parenting or taking care of a home?

I find men who only work on their job and not the kids, marriage, finances, home, health, and spiritual needs lazy and vapid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we indulging this ridiculously sexist premise by the OP? This should have been left to wither and die in OP’s mother’s basement where it belongs.

Those are the kind of idiot women I have no time for. It's very archaic. They perpetuate the centuries old model of women are helpless and the man is the breadwinner and authoritarian.

I also find those kind of women incredibly lazy and vapid.

These women are different from women that chose actively with their spouses in the course of their marriage and later pregnancy to work out a model that works best for the family unit...and sometimes, yes, the one that earns more (whether it's man or woman) will lean into their career more, while the other temporarily leans out for the good of the family unit. AND--this can and does change over time.

Have you seen how many men cannot handle parenting or taking care of a home?

I find men who only work on their job and not the kids, marriage, finances, home, health, and spiritual needs lazy and vapid.

I totally agree. I was a SAHM and raised the three kids we had in three years basically solo. He travelled a lot for work.

When I divorced and went back to work I was like wait, seriously? This is SO MUCH EASIER than being alone with three babies all day.

Also, I out earn him now.

[Anonymous]

Uh...I make 60% more than my husband does, have way more in my 401k and several of my friends are in the same boat. Go back to 1955 OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since the dawn of time women have used marriage to improve their prospects. Even now, it is relatively rare to find a couple where the wife is the higher earner. 95% of women significantly improve their wealth and lifestyle through marriage to a higher status/wealthier man.

Among all of my friends who married, none of them lived nicer lives than they did after marriage. Their husbands are all well to do.

Let's start with historically. Yes, women generally needed to rely on a man since they couldn't make a living on their own, couldn't own property, have bank accounts, etc. Marriages were often used to unify two different families.

That is kind of irrelevant. These days, both sexes are better off financially if they marry. But, married men are happier than unmarried, and the opposite is true for women (apparently).

Husband out earns me slightly now, but took a long time in education so I started investing first. Wealth from my earnings would be more than his, if we divided things. It's a mutually beneficial relationship, financially and other ways. You can also diversify risk (two jobs) and specialize (someone focus on home, someone focuses on earning)

This is our situation as well. I started working and investing earlier than my husband as he was getting his advanced degree and so currently we're equal in terms of wealth even though his salary is a bit more than mine. DH is a good husband and a father and so marriage has been valuable for other reasons. Wondering how many people think like OP does which is a surprise!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m actually thinking women have no incentive to get married if they make their own money : who wants to work all day and come home to still take care of the family.

We just are pickier about who we marry.

I have a good career and family money. When I married my husband he had potential for a good career but made really low salary for his education level (60k, graduate degree from a top school). I married him because he's great company, kind, smart, and pulls his weight. He cooks, cleans, keeps the kids busy when I need quiet to work, and coordinates home maintenance. I didn't marry him for his ability to 'provide' but now he makes much more than he did previously (and more than me in terms of income), but he still chips in plenty with household work and we outsource where we can.

I would not have married someone who expected me to come home and take care of everything, and I had the financial freedom to be picky. We are also now financially much better off than either of us would be individually, and we have a lot of fun together.

It was never just about the money or security, he makes my life brighter.

[Anonymous]

Currently, I think OP's statement only tends to be true with UMC women. Many poor women and LMC women are the breadwinners, even if they are married.

My middle class (US middle class, not DC middle class) DH and I are a team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was going to say the same thing as PP. Female breadwinners are becoming the norm in educated circles. I believe this has mixed implications.

It’s been the norm in the black community since forever lol

[Anonymous]

education and investing. I am self made and was "worth" about 150K when I met now husband. More by the time we married. I'm now worth half of 4M. and I made most of it.