Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry. I'd never marry someone with such low earning potential. If you're going to marry someone intelligent, why not marry someone intelligent enough to put that to work for a grown up paycheck?


At least you're honest.

This is so field and institution dependent. Many areas of STEM and economics can make plenty of money if the individual is a superstar. My husband's postdoc advisor (organic chemistry) took home about 500K per year. Maybe 275K came from the university (every time another school tries to recruit you, they have to make a counter offer). The rest came from awards, patent royalties, consulting fees from pharmaceutical companies, serving as an expert witness in patent lawsuits, etc. Some academics start up companies as well, which is an additional source of income.

Of course, not everyone is a superstar, but the earning potential is certainly there in some areas. Even without this, a paycheck for life is a pretty huge source of financial stability and very unusual. Even pre-tenure, how many jobs guarantee you a job for 5-7 years?

This post is shallow and stupid. You''ll get what you deserve. Enjoy the material things in life, however, you'll never have a meaningful relationship.

Actually, digging up old 2014 posts to attempt to make a point is shallow and stupid. But enjoy!

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry. I'd never marry someone with such low earning potential. If you're going to marry someone intelligent, why not marry someone intelligent enough to put that to work for a grown up paycheck?


At least you're honest.

This is so field and institution dependent. Many areas of STEM and economics can make plenty of money if the individual is a superstar. My husband's postdoc advisor (organic chemistry) took home about 500K per year. Maybe 275K came from the university (every time another school tries to recruit you, they have to make a counter offer). The rest came from awards, patent royalties, consulting fees from pharmaceutical companies, serving as an expert witness in patent lawsuits, etc. Some academics start up companies as well, which is an additional source of income.

Of course, not everyone is a superstar, but the earning potential is certainly there in some areas. Even without this, a paycheck for life is a pretty huge source of financial stability and very unusual. Even pre-tenure, how many jobs guarantee you a job for 5-7 years?

This post is shallow and stupid. You''ll get what you deserve. Enjoy the material things in life, however, you'll never have a meaningful relationship.

Adjunct is not the same as full time professor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, OP, why are you asking about this? Are you dating someone who is or hopes to be a prof? Or are you writing a novel and looking for background?

If you're dating someone and want advice, tell us what his/her field is and, if they're in grad school, whether they have a research or teaching assistantship.

Mostly just curiosity, but yes I am dating a PhD candidate!

And he's in a science field.

Hmmm, I don't know much about the market for PhDs in the sciences but here are a couple of things to consider: Is he in a top school? Does he have a research or teaching assistantship that pays his way? (That will be a sign to employers that he is a higher quality candidate.) Does he have an adviser who is helpful, good at mentoring him on how to manage a professional career and publish, and is also well-connected in the field and can introduce him to the right people? The adviser is really important. I made the mistake of coming up through an interdisciplinary department with few committed faculty and an adviser who was clueless about the demands of an academic career.

But ultimately, as I believe a pp has said, you [b]shouldn't marry someone based on their profession but on the strength of their character and the level of your compatibility.[/b]

You are joking. Women naturally marry based on this alone, especially in the 21st century. It is just natural mate selection anyway. Women want to know about security, stability, and quality of life that any potential mate will take with him. Mothers advise their daughters about this all the time.

For a triangulated perspective, I can relate my experience (not in the US but close enough). I am early 30s, single guy, with no kids. I have always held a full-time job in government and also an adjunct. Women from both office and university literally throw themselves at me because I am perceived to be up the proverbial ladder of success. I suppose, as some say, it is rare for a straight Black guy to have this profile and still be single without kids.

So while I appreciate the normative "shouldn't" ( and agree in principle), it is otherwise inconsistent with nature.

Wow, you're quite a catch, aren't you? Thanks, I get it all the time

Being inconsistent with your experience doesn't make it inconsistent with nature.

Clearly you have issues with what motivates women today (certainly not me)

Defensiveness...jealousy....narrow-mindedness, blinded by your own opinions, or refusal to learn from others' experiences.....? Pick whichever applies

Ha ha! That's hilarious! Jump to conclusions much?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, OP, why are you asking about this? Are you dating someone who is or hopes to be a prof? Or are you writing a novel and looking for background?

If you're dating someone and want advice, tell us what his/her field is and, if they're in grad school, whether they have a research or teaching assistantship.

Mostly just curiosity, but yes I am dating a PhD candidate!

And he's in a science field.

Hmmm, I don't know much about the market for PhDs in the sciences but here are a couple of things to consider: Is he in a top school? Does he have a research or teaching assistantship that pays his way? (That will be a sign to employers that he is a higher quality candidate.) Does he have an adviser who is helpful, good at mentoring him on how to manage a professional career and publish, and is also well-connected in the field and can introduce him to the right people? The adviser is really important. I made the mistake of coming up through an interdisciplinary department with few committed faculty and an adviser who was clueless about the demands of an academic career.

But ultimately, as I believe a pp has said, you [b]shouldn't marry someone based on their profession but on the strength of their character and the level of your compatibility.[/b]

You are joking. Women naturally marry based on this alone, especially in the 21st century. It is just natural mate selection anyway. Women want to know about security, stability, and quality of life that any potential mate will take with him. Mothers advise their daughters about this all the time.

For a triangulated perspective, I can relate my experience (not in the US but close enough). I am early 30s, single guy, with no kids. I have always held a full-time job in government and also an adjunct. Women from both office and university literally throw themselves at me because I am perceived to be up the proverbial ladder of success. I suppose, as some say, it is rare for a straight Black guy to have this profile and still be single without kids.

So while I appreciate the normative "shouldn't" ( and agree in principle), it is otherwise inconsistent with nature.

Wow, you're quite a catch, aren't you? Thanks, I get it all the time

Being inconsistent with your experience doesn't make it inconsistent with nature.

Clearly you have issues with what motivates women today (certainly not me)

Defensiveness...jealousy....narrow-mindedness, blinded by your own opinions, or refusal to learn from others' experiences.....? Pick whichever applies

OP, if you're talking about marriage, I would think hard about a few things:
Are you planning on pursuing your own career? If your spouse is planning on going the academic route, I sure hope you have portable job, because there is absolutely no guarantee where your DH will end up until he gets tenure. The term is "trailing spouse" -- Google it and you'll come up with some good things to read.

Is your spouse going to spend all his time in the lab? If you're at home, a SAHM, with no DH around, and in a new town it can be really lonely.

What if DH doesn't t gets tenure? Would he be willing to go into industry? Or is he expecting you to come along for a longer ride with little economic certainty?

How will/does DH take into account your passions and ambitions? A lot of academic men, I'm afraid, are extremely self-centered while giving lot of lip service to gender equality.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, OP, why are you asking about this? Are you dating someone who is or hopes to be a prof? Or are you writing a novel and looking for background?

If you're dating someone and want advice, tell us what his/her field is and, if they're in grad school, whether they have a research or teaching assistantship.

Mostly just curiosity, but yes I am dating a PhD candidate!

And he's in a science field.

Hmmm, I don't know much about the market for PhDs in the sciences but here are a couple of things to consider: Is he in a top school? Does he have a research or teaching assistantship that pays his way? (That will be a sign to employers that he is a higher quality candidate.) Does he have an adviser who is helpful, good at mentoring him on how to manage a professional career and publish, and is also well-connected in the field and can introduce him to the right people? The adviser is really important. I made the mistake of coming up through an interdisciplinary department with few committed faculty and an adviser who was clueless about the demands of an academic career.

But ultimately, as I believe a pp has said, you [b]shouldn't marry someone based on their profession but on the strength of their character and the level of your compatibility.[/b]

You are joking. Women naturally marry based on this alone, especially in the 21st century. It is just natural mate selection anyway. Women want to know about security, stability, and quality of life that any potential mate will take with him. Mothers advise their daughters about this all the time.

For a triangulated perspective, I can relate my experience (not in the US but close enough). I am early 30s, single guy, with no kids. I have always held a full-time job in government and also an adjunct. Women from both office and university literally throw themselves at me because I am perceived to be up the proverbial ladder of success. I suppose, as some say, it is rare for a straight Black guy to have this profile and still be single without kids.

So while I appreciate the normative "shouldn't" ( and agree in principle), it is otherwise inconsistent with nature.

Wow, you're quite a catch, aren't you?

Being inconsistent with your experience doesn't make it inconsistent with nature.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, OP, why are you asking about this? Are you dating someone who is or hopes to be a prof? Or are you writing a novel and looking for background?

If you're dating someone and want advice, tell us what his/her field is and, if they're in grad school, whether they have a research or teaching assistantship.

Mostly just curiosity, but yes I am dating a PhD candidate!

And he's in a science field.

Hmmm, I don't know much about the market for PhDs in the sciences but here are a couple of things to consider: Is he in a top school? Does he have a research or teaching assistantship that pays his way? (That will be a sign to employers that he is a higher quality candidate.) Does he have an adviser who is helpful, good at mentoring him on how to manage a professional career and publish, and is also well-connected in the field and can introduce him to the right people? The adviser is really important. I made the mistake of coming up through an interdisciplinary department with few committed faculty and an adviser who was clueless about the demands of an academic career.

But ultimately, as I believe a pp has said, you shouldn't marry someone based on their profession but on the strength of their character and the level of your compatibility.

I agree with this. Even if your BF wants to be a professor, there are very few slots these days. If he's not a top student at a top 25 school, it's likely to be a teaching position without any research and very low paid, or a job outside academia.

signed, a current tenure-track prof who did a very long job search

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, OP, why are you asking about this? Are you dating someone who is or hopes to be a prof? Or are you writing a novel and looking for background?

If you're dating someone and want advice, tell us what his/her field is and, if they're in grad school, whether they have a research or teaching assistantship.

Mostly just curiosity, but yes I am dating a PhD candidate!

And he's in a science field.

Hmmm, I don't know much about the market for PhDs in the sciences but here are a couple of things to consider: Is he in a top school? Does he have a research or teaching assistantship that pays his way? (That will be a sign to employers that he is a higher quality candidate.) Does he have an adviser who is helpful, good at mentoring him on how to manage a professional career and publish, and is also well-connected in the field and can introduce him to the right people? The adviser is really important. I made the mistake of coming up through an interdisciplinary department with few committed faculty and an adviser who was clueless about the demands of an academic career.

But ultimately, as I believe a pp has said, you [b]shouldn't marry someone based on their profession but on the strength of their character and the level of your compatibility.[/b]

You are joking. Women naturally marry based on this alone, especially in the 21st century. It is just natural mate selection anyway. Women want to know about security, stability, and quality of life that any potential mate will take with him. Mothers advise their daughters about this all the time.

For a triangulated perspective, I can relate my experience (not in the US but close enough). I am early 30s, single guy, with no kids. I have always held a full-time job in government and also an adjunct. Women from both office and university literally throw themselves at me because I am perceived to be up the proverbial ladder of success. I suppose, as some say, it is rare for a straight Black guy to have this profile and still be single without kids.

So while I appreciate the normative "shouldn't" ( and agree in principle), it is otherwise inconsistent with nature.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, OP, why are you asking about this? Are you dating someone who is or hopes to be a prof? Or are you writing a novel and looking for background?

If you're dating someone and want advice, tell us what his/her field is and, if they're in grad school, whether they have a research or teaching assistantship.

Mostly just curiosity, but yes I am dating a PhD candidate!

And he's in a science field.

Hmmm, I don't know much about the market for PhDs in the sciences but here are a couple of things to consider: Is he in a top school? Does he have a research or teaching assistantship that pays his way? (That will be a sign to employers that he is a higher quality candidate.) Does he have an adviser who is helpful, good at mentoring him on how to manage a professional career and publish, and is also well-connected in the field and can introduce him to the right people? The adviser is really important. I made the mistake of coming up through an interdisciplinary department with few committed faculty and an adviser who was clueless about the demands of an academic career.

But ultimately, as I believe a pp has said, you shouldn't marry someone based on their profession but on the strength of their character and the level of your compatibility.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a professor and my ex-husband was also a professor, in a different field. I'd say:

1) Salary etc varies dramatically depending on field and univiersity (I teach at a professional school and make about $240,000/year, seven years post-tenure; ex-spouse is in the humanities and makes $200,000, 20 years post tenure). We both teach at top schools; salaries at State U of Outer Podunk are much lower. (Though so is the cost of living).

2) As a mom, I love the job security and flexibility. As a human, I love not having a "boss." By and large I can teach what I want and write what I want.

3) Ex-hubby never took advantage of the flexibility: acts like missing a faculty meeting would be the end of the world. This was a source of maritial tension, since it meant that I ended up doing most of the child care even though in theory his schedule was every bit as flexible as mine.

4) Ex-spouse is currently living with one of his female former grad students; relationship started when he was on her dissertation committee. Not why we broke up, but yes, male professors hooking up with grad students/former students remains an embarrassingly common thing. Yuck.

5) Despite the flexible schedule, it's true than the work is unending. Lots of pressure to keep churning out articles, serving on committees, going to conferences, teaching new courses. It is possible to resist some of those pressures but it is definitely not the case that academics don't have to work hard. If you want to a) get a good job in the first place, b) get tenure and c) be reasonably respected in your field and get raises, you have to work VERY hard, and the nature of the work is that it tends to bleed into everything. The flipside of flexibility is that there are no boundaries.

6) The people? They vary. Some are amazing; some are assholes. In my experience older male professors do tend to become overly fond of hearing themselves pontificate.

Well said, pp. Yes, the autonomy [#2] is fabulous and that is why I will always miss being a college prof. I loved it. But pp also does a great job of describing #5 -- as I used to say - academia is very flexible. You have to work 12 hours a day but you can choose any 12 hours!

I'm a professor and my ex-husband was also a professor, in a different field. I'd say:

1) Salary etc varies dramatically depending on field and univiersity (I teach at a professional school and make about $240,000/year, seven years post-tenure; ex-spouse is in the humanities and makes $200,000, 20 years post tenure). We both teach at top schools; salaries at State U of Outer Podunk are much lower. (Though so is the cost of living).

2) As a mom, I love the job security and flexibility. As a human, I love not having a "boss." By and large I can teach what I want and write what I want.

3) Ex-hubby never took advantage of the flexibility: acts like missing a faculty meeting would be the end of the world. This was a source of maritial tension, since it meant that I ended up doing most of the child care even though in theory his schedule was every bit as flexible as mine.

4) Ex-spouse is currently living with one of his female former grad students; relationship started when he was on her dissertation committee. Not why we broke up, but yes, male professors hooking up with grad students/former students remains an embarrassingly common thing. Yuck.

5) Despite the flexible schedule, it's true than the work is unending. Lots of pressure to keep churning out articles, serving on committees, going to conferences, teaching new courses. It is possible to resist some of those pressures but it is definitely not the case that academics don't have to work hard. If you want to a) get a good job in the first place, b) get tenure and c) be reasonably respected in your field and get raises, you have to work VERY hard, and the nature of the work is that it tends to bleed into everything. The flipside of flexibility is that there are no boundaries.

6) The people? They vary. Some are amazing; some are assholes. In my experience older male professors do tend to become overly fond of hearing themselves pontificate.

Anonymous wrote:Middle of nowhere can be a great life. Great for raising kids. Great for building community. Since you're stuck in the MON you have more opportunity to meet like-minded people seeking same. I find it harder to meet academic families here in the middle of sprawl. My DH's university is a commute away, none of his colleagues live near each other. I visit my dad who is an academic in MON and they have awesome parties with interesting smart people and close friendships.

Middle of nowhere can be a serious problem for spouse' career.

I am sure it is dreamy. You can never judge a book by its cover

Middle of nowhere can be a great life. Great for raising kids. Great for building community. Since you're stuck in the MON you have more opportunity to meet like-minded people seeking same. I find it harder to meet academic families here in the middle of sprawl. My DH's university is a commute away, none of his colleagues live near each other. I visit my dad who is an academic in MON and they have awesome parties with interesting smart people and close friendships.