I went through the same thing with DH. It was so tough on our marriage. We almost divorced and argued non-stop. I also gave him an ultimatum which led to a total career change on his part. People underestimate the damage that financial stress can do to a marriage. We also did marriage counseling during that time. It won't 100% fix the issue, but it did help tide us over while he resolved his employment situation.

The recession hit men much worse than women from what I've read and unfortunately I know quite a few married men with degrees that don't have great paying jobs or who've struggled with unemployment so you are not alone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, and we wonder why women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes.

Who cares? Is your income the only way you measure the quality of your life?

We should all care that a woman's work is not as valued as a man's. Don't you value your daughters as much as your sons? Don't you educate your daughters as much as your sons?

The choose college majors that result in lower paying jobs.
Women take time off from the workforce which results in fewer raises and promotions.
Women take flexible jobs while children are small and exit the tracks to higher paying executive jobs.

So no, women's work is not valued less.

"But that's not fair! We should organize our society so that women don't have to take all of the childcare duties. We should try to make more women go into higher paying work (even though they frequently don't want to and aren't interested in it)." you say?

Well, nope, that's not going to work. Because:

1) When the rubber meets the road, women don't really want to have half of the financial burden for a household. And they frequently want to spend as much time as possible with their children.
2) Women CERTAINLY don't want to be married to men who take care of the entire household and don't work.
2) Men don't want to be married to angry, stressed out, resentful women.

Those are the constraints that seem small on the surface but CHANGE EVERYTHING.

But why is it such a problem? For women who want children, is giving up a serious career really such a bad sacrifice? Most of us are going to be healthy and working into our 70's. There is SO MUCH that a woman can do with flexible work, ramping up into more involved work as children get older in today's world.

I don't have a daughter, but of course I would value her as much as a son. I would want her to have a happy life with her own happy family and to be stimulated and fulfilled. We live in a world for the first time ever where that is possible.

But too many women are all about ego. They don't want a happy life. They want power and recognition and ego strokes. They want all of the glory and none of the responsibility.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I take issue with your emphasizing that she needed to get a job and contribute to the family financially. When I saw that written my stomach actually turned in disgust. I wouldn't suggest a man ever marry a woman with size-able student loans, and I wouldn't suggest that he marry someone without the expectation that he be taking the full financial load up through early childhood and significantly thereafter.

Most women, especially those with full-time jobs and children but even those staying at home with children, are seriously overworked and exhausted. So I would hardly call it retirement. The fact that you suggest so reveals even more of your pitiful and repulsive view on the matter. I'd be depressed if I was married to you, too. *Shiver*

So a man should be prepared to fully support his wife and children financially, simply because he is a man, but a woman should not expect that she might need to do the same?

Yes, that is 100% correct. You see, men and women are not the same.
Taking on children is scary and difficult for BOTH men and women. Sorry pal, if you can't handle it just get one of those robotic blow up dolls. I hear they're getting pretty good.

Then provide something of value to the man. $$$$, a clean house, and blow jobs. Pick any two.

I agree with this 100%. I don't see anyone suggesting that the man do all the work of life and the woman lay about.

I just think too many people buy into an ideal that doesn't work - namely that it's shameful for a woman to "only" take care of a family or not to have a fancy career.

Careers are a lot of work. Not a lot of glamour typically. Women need to learn that fact YOUNG and then make choices inline with that fact. Such as not go to expensive grad school unless she knows in her bones she wants to work in a serious way, which some women (but not most) do.

We actually live in a world with a lot of great advantages. Namely, the internet and long life expectancies mean that there are tons of exciting, fulfilling options available to women IF THEY MAKE GOOD CHOICES.

If I had a daughter, unless she was a very dedicated, talented, hard worker hell bent on a certain job, I would

a) encourage her to get married fairly young (25-28ish) to a man who could support a family reasonably well (rich not required).
b) encourage her to have realistic expectations about life and strongly discourage entitlement
c) hope that she would go on to live a rich and fulfilling life of interesting and rewarding work post small-child rearing, which is TOTALLY POSSIBLE in our world today. No, you can't drop out of the workforce and go back and get a job at director level. But there are many options in today's world for a creative, smart person to find decent and fulfilling work. There is nothing wrong with not being on a top executive track.

My two cents

What is this, the 50s? I agree its not a good idea to take out thousands of dollars worth of loans for a graduate degree if you have no intention of putting that degree to use. But the whole point of higher education is it gives women OPTIONS. It provides women with the ability to support themselves in the event they don't find their "white knight." Not all women marry men who are able to be the main breadwinner. That's the whole point of this post! If OP wasn't able to work her whole family would have REALLY been in trouble when her husband lost his job.

I think you should downsize your lives. Sell your house and move into something smaller. I don't think you can expect your husband to be making the same money he was before.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone getting married should assume that there may be a point in time where they have to carry the load financially for the family. That being said, I think that its much harder for a woman with children to be the main breadwinner. Even if a woman WANTS to lean in and have a demanding, high profile career, she will always have to battle the assumption that her husband is the main breadwinner, that she will stop putting in the same level of effort, or that she will eventually stop working to stay home with the kids. IMO, once a woman has kids, she is immediately "mommy tracked." On the other hand, men with kids are taken more seriously in the workplace, because its assumed that they will work harder when they have a family to support.

I work full time as an attorney and my husband and I have an 18 month old son. Since I had my son, I have been on several interviews, and I have been asked inappropriate questions about being a mother in about two thirds of them. In a final round interview, I was asked if I have kids, how old my son is, and if I have day care covered. The interview also went on to tell me that his wife stopped working once they had their second kid. I'm sorry, but there is NO WAY he would have brought this up if I were a man. I did not get the job.

I NEVER got questions like this when I was unmarried without children.

1. I've watch both of my sisters get married and then begin having children. both of them told their employers that they were not going to stay home after child birth. Each of them stayed until they gave birth.... took FLMA leave... then on their first day back gave their notice. While I understand that they wanted to stay home with their children employers know that a significant portion of the time as woman will stay just long enough to keep medical insurance and then get FLMA and paid vacation.

2. everyone thinks their plight is worse than the other. While I know you want to think working women have it worse women get a lot of perks being in the work force... especially when they are younger.

So what are these "perks" you mention? FMLA only guarantees that you have a job at the end of maternity leave; its not paid leave. And last time I checked, paid maternity leave benefits women AND men. Men benefit just as much by having their wife collect a paycheck while on maternity leave.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone getting married should assume that there may be a point in time where they have to carry the load financially for the family. That being said, I think that its much harder for a woman with children to be the main breadwinner. Even if a woman WANTS to lean in and have a demanding, high profile career, she will always have to battle the assumption that her husband is the main breadwinner, that she will stop putting in the same level of effort, or that she will eventually stop working to stay home with the kids. IMO, once a woman has kids, she is immediately "mommy tracked." On the other hand, men with kids are taken more seriously in the workplace, because its assumed that they will work harder when they have a family to support.

I work full time as an attorney and my husband and I have an 18 month old son. Since I had my son, I have been on several interviews, and I have been asked inappropriate questions about being a mother in about two thirds of them. In a final round interview, I was asked if I have kids, how old my son is, and if I have day care covered. The interview also went on to tell me that his wife stopped working once they had their second kid. I'm sorry, but there is NO WAY he would have brought this up if I were a man. I did not get the job.

I NEVER got questions like this when I was unmarried without children.

How would these interviewers know that you had a child?

They flat out asked me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, and we wonder why women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes.

Who cares? Is your income the only way you measure the quality of your life?

We should all care that a woman's work is not as valued as a man's. Don't you value your daughters as much as your sons? Don't you educate your daughters as much as your sons?

Anonymous wrote:The posts here creep me out. As if DH getting a job is a silver bullet, and DW is an innocent victim.

I know. DW needs to go to grad school so she can sit around at home and think deep thoughts while the kids are in daycare and the house a mess.

No wonder the suicide rate for men is four times than for women.

The posts here creep me out. As if DH getting a job is a silver bullet, and DW is an innocent victim.

Anonymous wrote:Wow, and we wonder why women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes.

Who cares? Is your income the only way you measure the quality of your life?

I admit that I didn't read every post, but I'm a teacher and my XH is a teacher with a work history pattern similar to OP's DH, so here goes...

He needs to get his certifications in order, then apply everywhere in DCUMville. Even DCPS and BCPSS.

Meanwhile, he should be working outside the house at least part-time to rebuild those work habits such as time management skills and prioritizing tasks that teachers rely on.

Wow, and we wonder why women make 77 cents for every dollar a man makes.

I think the bartending job is a lot more fun than teaching, and he gets to fart around all day with no responsibilities. So he is not eager to change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I take issue with your emphasizing that she needed to get a job and contribute to the family financially. When I saw that written my stomach actually turned in disgust. I wouldn't suggest a man ever marry a woman with size-able student loans, and I wouldn't suggest that he marry someone without the expectation that he be taking the full financial load up through early childhood and significantly thereafter.

Most women, especially those with full-time jobs and children but even those staying at home with children, are seriously overworked and exhausted. So I would hardly call it retirement. The fact that you suggest so reveals even more of your pitiful and repulsive view on the matter. I'd be depressed if I was married to you, too. *Shiver*

So a man should be prepared to fully support his wife and children financially, simply because he is a man, but a woman should not expect that she might need to do the same?

Yes, that is 100% correct. You see, men and women are not the same.
Taking on children is scary and difficult for BOTH men and women. Sorry pal, if you can't handle it just get one of those robotic blow up dolls. I hear they're getting pretty good.

Then provide something of value to the man. $$$$, a clean house, and blow jobs. Pick any two.

I agree with this 100%. I don't see anyone suggesting that the man do all the work of life and the woman lay about.

I just think too many people buy into an ideal that doesn't work - namely that it's shameful for a woman to "only" take care of a family or not to have a fancy career.

Careers are a lot of work. Not a lot of glamour typically. Women need to learn that fact YOUNG and then make choices inline with that fact. Such as not go to expensive grad school unless she knows in her bones she wants to work in a serious way, which some women (but not most) do.

We actually live in a world with a lot of great advantages. Namely, the internet and long life expectancies mean that there are tons of exciting, fulfilling options available to women IF THEY MAKE GOOD CHOICES.

If I had a daughter, unless she was a very dedicated, talented, hard worker hell bent on a certain job, I would

a) encourage her to get married fairly young (25-28ish) to a man who could support a family reasonably well (rich not required).
b) encourage her to have realistic expectations about life and strongly discourage entitlement
c) hope that she would go on to live a rich and fulfilling life of interesting and rewarding work post small-child rearing, which is TOTALLY POSSIBLE in our world today. No, you can't drop out of the workforce and go back and get a job at director level. But there are many options in today's world for a creative, smart person to find decent and fulfilling work. There is nothing wrong with not being on a top executive track.

My two cents