Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you really love this guy, you could consider cross subsiding him. This is what (virtually all) men do for (virtually all) women and have done since the dawn of time.
+1 I married a woman with 2 kids and few assets but I knew it and it was what I accepted as part of the package deal. While I wish she had had a lot of assets it was my choice and I’m happy with it. I didn’t rush into the relationship until I knew I really liked her children and they liked me.
NO OP..do NOT do this!
Anonymous wrote:If he’s a professor he doesn’t have to retire. The stresses of being a professor are primarily from having to produce a lot of original research to get tenure and promotions. Once he’s retirement age he can just keep teaching and get his entire paycheck. Stopping or significantly reducing research amounts to more than a 60% reduction in work - especially since he will be used to his classes at that point.
He will have summers and all breaks off, you can travel easily. This is the ideal retirement situation. I don’t get why you’re stressing about it.
Anonymous wrote:If he’s a professor he doesn’t have to retire. The stresses of being a professor are primarily from having to produce a lot of original research to get tenure and promotions. Once he’s retirement age he can just keep teaching and get his entire paycheck. Stopping or significantly reducing research amounts to more than a 60% reduction in work - especially since he will be used to his classes at that point.
He will have summers and all breaks off, you can travel easily. This is the ideal retirement situation. I don’t get why you’re stressing about it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you really love this guy, you could consider cross subsiding him. This is what (virtually all) men do for (virtually all) women and have done since the dawn of time.
+1 I married a woman with 2 kids and few assets but I knew it and it was what I accepted as part of the package deal. While I wish she had had a lot of assets it was my choice and I’m happy with it. I didn’t rush into the relationship until I knew I really liked her children and they liked me.
Anonymous wrote:I have no idea why anyone in your situation would have ever gotten remarried. Helpful, I know. Why on earth did you marry this man? Is it because your exes moved on, and you wanted to look like you still “had it” and weren’t knocked on your @ss by your divorce to your social circles? Is it because you were scared of aging alone, and you thought this would insure against that? Was this an affair that became public and you needed to “legitimize” it by getting married? You seem like a planner with foresight, so I’m stumped.
You have gained nothing and even his kids will be further screwed when they apply for college financial aid. There’s already going to be a rift between the kids when one set has college paid for, but now his kids will hate you even more when they have to account for your income in the college application process, but won’t benefit from it.
I’d tell DH what you laid out here. I’d be completely resentful if I were in your situation, too. Tell him that he needs to nut up and get CS out of his ex or that this isn’t going to work out long term.
Anonymous wrote:If you really love this guy, you could consider cross subsiding him. This is what (virtually all) men do for (virtually all) women and have done since the dawn of time.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I made 5x what my wife made for our entire marriage. Are you suggesting that I shouldn’t “subsidize” her retirement?
Did she have a couple of kids with someone else?
Np here. What difference would that make? By the time retirement rolls around, presumably any kids are self-sufficient adults. Op’s dh will have some money in his name, op will have money in her name. I can’t imagine being married and thinking of our retirement funds as seperate assets. That just doesn’t make sense, even when it’s a second marriage with a blended family.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, I made 5x what my wife made for our entire marriage. Are you suggesting that I shouldn’t “subsidize” her retirement?
Did she have a couple of kids with someone else?
Np here. What difference would that make? By the time retirement rolls around, presumably any kids are self-sufficient adults. Op’s dh will have some money in his name, op will have money in her name. I can’t imagine being married and thinking of our retirement funds as seperate assets. That just doesn’t make sense, even when it’s a second marriage with a blended family.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Virtually every female breadwinner I know has OP’s attitude.
Yeah, true that! Not sure why.
It's because they never actually get to recreate in being a woman. Women like OP get to enjoy all the upside of being a modern, professional woman in their careers. Opportunity! Independence! Adventure! Money! Recognition! However, on the personal side, when career women have kids, they realize that they often sacrifice the few benefits that women historically have had at home. Namely, women weren't expected to play both roles of provider and caretaker. At the end of the day, as awestruck as OP is over the beautiful partnership she has with her new husband, she's still be stuck financing the whole venture. You even could argue that she's expected to play a husband-like role to the ex-wife. OP's current husband is still basically spoiling another woman at OP's eventual expense. OP will either be divorced again, or she will do without in retirement while the ex-wife will have enjoyed new outfits when she wanted them, weekend trips, etc. So empowering!
Did you miss the part where this is a blended family AND her DH is not bringing to the table everything he could? That makes a big difference. It's one thing to go all in when it's not a blended family (whether OP were a man or woman), let alone where her DH is paying his ex's part. Why should she subsidize him if he can't deal with his ex?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Virtually every female breadwinner I know has OP’s attitude.
Yeah, true that! Not sure why.
It's because they never actually get to recreate in being a woman. Women like OP get to enjoy all the upside of being a modern, professional woman in their careers. Opportunity! Independence! Adventure! Money! Recognition! However, on the personal side, when career women have kids, they realize that they often sacrifice the few benefits that women historically have had at home. Namely, women weren't expected to play both roles of provider and caretaker. At the end of the day, as awestruck as OP is over the beautiful partnership she has with her new husband, she's still be stuck financing the whole venture. You even could argue that she's expected to play a husband-like role to the ex-wife. OP's current husband is still basically spoiling another woman at OP's eventual expense. OP will either be divorced again, or she will do without in retirement while the ex-wife will have enjoyed new outfits when she wanted them, weekend trips, etc. So empowering!
Anonymous wrote:You’re either all in or you’re out. If you really love him, you will pool your retirement and find a way to make sure his kids get to college. If you can’t do those things, you have no business professing your love and being married.