Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I make about 200% more than my husband (i'm at 200K, he's at 50K or will be when he finds a job. He keeps getting laid off.) He's helpful around the house. I am the one who spends money so that works out. But I do get resentful if more than 50% of the parenting falls to me. As long as he is pulling his weigh on that front, it's ok with me

200k is about 200% more than 50k.... wut?

Where do you work that they pay you 200k?

LOL. I was trying to work out any possible way she could have done that math and... nothin'.

50k is 0% more than 50k

55k is 10% more than 50k

75k is 50% more than 50k

100k is 100% more than 50k

200k is 200% more than 50k wrong

See above

Good call. In my defense, it was late and I was tired.

Yeah, I have trouble with 5th grade math when I'm tired too.

Anonymous wrote:When we married, DH made 8x what I made. He now makes half of what he currently owned and I've increased my salary substantially to the point of where I make almost twice of what he does. It hasn't been a good dynamic for us. I resent that I have to work so hard to achieve the lifestyle I had taken for granted initially and he feels like a failure that he's not as successful as he thought he'd be.

This does not say good things about you, PP. Yikes.

I made way more than my wife through our first 10 years or so together. During that time she was able to pay off her debts, we bought two homes and stashed away a good bit for retirement/kids' college. Now her career is taking off and she makes more money than me. I'm happy for her, and it's been great for our family. Really don't see the big deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a profound difference between, on the one hand, a marriage where the husband is making enough to support the family and the wife simply makes more (scenario #1), and on the other hand, a marriage where the husband makes an insufficient amount to support the family and the wife is the primary or sole breadwinner (scenario #2).

I personally make significantly more than my wife and always have. But I would welcome scenario #1 and be uncomfortable and inadequate in scenario #2.

Maybe that makes me old-fashioned and outdated. Okay.

Why do you keep using the phrase "support the family" only with respect to a husband's earnings? I also don't understand why the distinction is meaningful between your two scenarios. In all couples, there may be one making all or most of the money to support the family. Or they may be earning roughly equal amounts. It may have some bearing on which partner is the default parent and is responsible for household management but not much else.

I am just speaking from my own perspective as a husband and father who feels that he has various obligations to his family. For me, personally, the distinction between the 2 scenarios is simply whether I would *feel* I was living up to those obligations, and how I would *feel* about being the husband in both scenarios. I would *feel* uncomfortable and inadequate if I didn't make enough to support the family. It's one of the obligations that I *feel* that I have. If my wife makes more or less than I do is irrelevant to whether I am fulfilling the obligations that I *feel* that I have.

I'm a PP who makes more than my husband and I think you articulated his position very well. He makes six figures so we would never go hungry or lose our house or anything like that without my salary, and he is 100% fine with the fact that I make a lot more money because it means more for everybody. If he lost his job or made too little to cover our bare-bones obligations, I think he'd be very uncomfortable. I don't completely agree with his stance on a man "taking care" of the family (I'm more of the mindset that adults/parents need to step up, regardless of gender), but it's a distinction without a difference in terms of how we live our lives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's a profound difference between, on the one hand, a marriage where the husband is making enough to support the family and the wife simply makes more (scenario #1), and on the other hand, a marriage where the husband makes an insufficient amount to support the family and the wife is the primary or sole breadwinner (scenario #2).

I personally make significantly more than my wife and always have. But I would welcome scenario #1 and be uncomfortable and inadequate in scenario #2.

Maybe that makes me old-fashioned and outdated. Okay.

Why do you keep using the phrase "support the family" only with respect to a husband's earnings? I also don't understand why the distinction is meaningful between your two scenarios. In all couples, there may be one making all or most of the money to support the family. Or they may be earning roughly equal amounts. It may have some bearing on which partner is the default parent and is responsible for household management but not much else.

I am just speaking from my own perspective as a husband and father who feels that he has various obligations to his family. For me, personally, the distinction between the 2 scenarios is simply whether I would *feel* I was living up to those obligations, and how I would *feel* about being the husband in both scenarios. I would *feel* uncomfortable and inadequate if I didn't make enough to support the family. It's one of the obligations that I *feel* that I have. If my wife makes more or less than I do is irrelevant to whether I am fulfilling the obligations that I *feel* that I have.

Anonymous wrote:There's a profound difference between, on the one hand, a marriage where the husband is making enough to support the family and the wife simply makes more (scenario #1), and on the other hand, a marriage where the husband makes an insufficient amount to support the family and the wife is the primary or sole breadwinner (scenario #2).

I personally make significantly more than my wife and always have. But I would welcome scenario #1 and be uncomfortable and inadequate in scenario #2.

Maybe that makes me old-fashioned and outdated. Okay.

Why do you keep using the phrase "support the family" only with respect to a husband's earnings? I also don't understand why the distinction is meaningful between your two scenarios. In all couples, there may be one making all or most of the money to support the family. Or they may be earning roughly equal amounts. It may have some bearing on which partner is the default parent and is responsible for household management but not much else.

There's a profound difference between, on the one hand, a marriage where the husband is making enough to support the family and the wife simply makes more (scenario #1), and on the other hand, a marriage where the husband makes an insufficient amount to support the family and the wife is the primary or sole breadwinner (scenario #2).

I personally make significantly more than my wife and always have. But I would welcome scenario #1 and be uncomfortable and inadequate in scenario #2.

Maybe that makes me old-fashioned and outdated. Okay.

Anonymous wrote:I make $240k and DH makes $120k. I have always outearned him & he doesn’t care. He’s proud of my achievements. All the money goes into one big pot, it’s ours togther. We split the housework 50/50 and we deliberately have no kids. One golden retriever who goes to doggy daycare & we split the schlepping around.

Sounds like your husband is very secure, and you're mature enough not to base the health of your marriage on a dollar figure. Plus the fact that even though you double his salary, your husband earns more than about 80% of the men in the US.

I make $240k and DH makes $120k. I have always outearned him & he doesn’t care. He’s proud of my achievements. All the money goes into one big pot, it’s ours togther. We split the housework 50/50 and we deliberately have no kids. One golden retriever who goes to doggy daycare & we split the schlepping around.

You have to have a pretty fragile male ego and a pretty extreme sense of gender roles to be bothered by earning less than your wife. DW started earning 2x my $250k in the last few years and will out earn me by a lot for the rest of our careers. We met in college and she had better grades and went to law school right away. So I went to work and put her through law school. After DC was born, I went to grad school, and it was her turn to pay the bills, including for a nanny. Then for the next decade plus, I significantly out earned her as she worked in government, but we thought we were doing pretty well. Splitting the domestic work has never been an issue because we both work long hours and we pay other people to do it for us, except for cooking b/c I enjoy it. When she went to a firm and suddenly started making big bucks, it felt like I won the lottery.

Anonymous wrote:My two sisters married lazy guys and make more. It is funny as at parties the men wear aprons and prepare meals while my sisters sit in living room and chat. They bring drinks out, appetizers etc. Lots of resentment going on

Not a feminist, are you?

I make significantly more than DH, but that is because my field compensates employees extremely well. Although he is at the top of his field he doesn’t have the same earning potential.

We are pretty much 50/50 at home with a full time nanny/housekeeper to make everything work.

I make 3x DH’s salary, like several PPs. Also the default parent. Also often resentful. I believe if our roles were reversed, I’d be doing a lot more than DH does to run the house (minimal effort) and support my career (nothing).

I make 3x what DH does, and we works about 20hrs more per week. He’s ambitious, but does nothing to help himself move forward in his career. His resentment comes out in every fight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My two sisters married lazy guys and make more. It is funny as at parties the men wear aprons and prepare meals while my sisters sit in living room and chat. They bring drinks out, appetizers etc. Lots of resentment going on

I know lazy guys. And trust me -- lazy guys don't put on aprons and prepare meals and serve drinks.

The large point, men who make less vs their wives are lazy. Women who make less vs their husbands are not lazy.