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.
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.
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)
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.
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.
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.