Do you care what your Partner does for a Living?

I'd care if they were a drug dealer or something else unsavoury as a 'profession,' but any legitimate job? Of course not.

And I certainly understand wanting financial security and the idea that money can buy freedom and some happiness - it's up to me, and me alone, to provide that for myself. Otherwise it doesn't really feel like security or freedom. I can't fathom being dependent on anyone else for it. It would make me feel like a child, financially dependent on my parents.

Yes, what someone does for a living is definitely important to me - in a partner but to a lesser extent in friends as well.

It's a question of values. I couldn't be with a Tory MP, an arms dealer, anyone who worked for big oil companies, a right-wing media grifter, anyone in the police or military, a lobbyist for cigarette companies etc etc.

It's not a question of salary or "status". One of the wealthiest people I've met was a lawyer who specialised in finding tax loopholes for the uber-rich. The idea of that being someone's contribution to society makes me feel nauseous. If you'd really rather date a man like that than, for example, a talented artist with great ethics but not much money (thinking of an old ex here)... I'd also judge you, frankly.

Yes, of course.

As long as he is a) happy and b) doing no harm in his job (ie not selling drugs etc!!) I couldn't give a shiny shit

And obviously that they enjoy it and it is positive for them.

Doesn't bother me as long as they're happy....
Which is just as well because my DH had to give up work- a job that he absolutely loved - several years ago due to health reasons. I'm now chief breadwinner, he just has benefits coming in which are less than a third of his wages. He hates it but it's life now!
Just remember....you don't know what's round the corner. Would you still want to be with your husband if he could no longer work?

To clarify - I am less bothered by the £ brought in and more by whether the job is useful to society.

Yes I do. I want my partner to be in a job he is good at, that is within his comfort zone and that he can perform well without causing him anxiety, stress or undue pressure. I want him to enjoy his work day, to know he's produced something useful he is proud of, and for the process to benefit his wellbeing and self esteem. I want the job to offer a good work life balance and not to take too great a toll of his physical or mental health so he suffers in old age. I couldn't care less whether people think his job has status or how well paid he is. These things are insignificant when compared to the benefits to us both of a job that ticks the other boxes. I am very fortunate to have pretty much always been in relationships with men with jobs like this.

I definitely care. They spend most of their life doing it and it's a huge part of who they are! It reflects on them and ( because I chose to marry him me by extension) so I do.

I've been si gle for 15 years. Brought up 3 children alone. I would romantically rather be with someone doing whatever it is they feel happiest doing but the reality of life on a very average wage alone makes higher earners a more attractive option. I have worked hard to be independent. I don't want an additional person who's needs I have to take care of from a financial perspective.

I think the question for those women saying they find non-achieving men unattractive is, is there a difference between a high status job and a high earning job?

A bin man manager might make 50k, just as an average doctor might make 50k (I'm guessing salaries here).

And conversely, say there was a man who 'got lucky', talked the talk, and ended up as a Harrod's sales assistant making 50k (for the sake of argument). His is still 'low status' and unambitious, but a high earner. Same unattractiveness?

Other than drug dealing or working in an abattoir, as long as he has enough to cover his share of the bills is all I ask. DP is an epileptic so the fact that he has a job at all is a win as far as I'm concerned.

No, its where someone has a high achieving spouse and despite not having achieved something specific themselves takes on the spouse's status eg nco/officers' wives in the forces (very common at one time). WAGs might be a better example.

Edited to add: and hang on to that spouse for that achievement despite every good reason not to.

I wouldn’t not date someone who is a bin man or a bus driver because of their job.
I wouldn’t date any of the ones in my first paragraph. And I do judge all of those roles harshly.

We don't owe any man a date, never mind a relationship. And we can choose a partner on any basis we like. Judging by the relationships board, women should be more choosy, not less.

^ I agree completely with you on this. It’s just never occurred to me to not date someone because of a legit job they have. I’ve ditched plenty who I find annoying/creepy/horrible/because they smell… all legit reasons imo.

Not particularly.

I would care if he had the type of job that would significantly impact me as I wouldn't want to be a trailing spouse, a vicar's wife, a military wife or similar.

I wouldn't be keen on being with someone who did shift work or very antisocial hours or worked away for long periods but it wouldn't be a deal breaker.

Due to my career anything illegal or borderline illegal would be a deal breaker. Same with anything politically dubious.

His salary or status don't particularly bother me if there is some drive and pride about him. DH earns very little but is incredibly talented needs to use his talent. I am very proud of him. Years ago I went out with a guy who worked on the sales desk at his favourite football club, that was a turnoff, he'd just gone full time in his Saturday job and never progressed, no ambition, no drive, no plan, no real job satisfaction, just coasting along on minimum wage.

There's a big difference between judging somebody and not wanting to be in a long-term relationship with them though. You want your partner to be someone who's an ideal match for you, not just someone you don't actively judge!

Presumably we'd all reject most people as a partner on the basis of all kinds of things, some trivial, some not trivial (e.g. physical and personality attributes, political views, to name but a few). For me, my ideal partner has certain things in common with me. Some MNers seem to think it's awful to rule out a relationship with any man unless he's a criminal or something. Nope. We don't owe any man a date, never mind a relationship. And we can choose a partner on any basis we like. Judging by the relationships board, women should be more choosy, not less.

I think that the research shows that women marry across or upwards (i.e. the minimum is the same level of achievement).

'Hanging onto coat tails' is a strange phrase. I am not sure exactly what it means. In my experience, women rarely marry 'down' with someone who is less achieving than them, as someone on the thread pointed out earlier, it might be fine when you are young and in lust, but a mortgage and kids changes that attraction instantly. Does 'hanging onto coat tails' mean that women do expect a certain level of 'provision' from men, especially when they have children? If so, I am all for that. I do think roles become very gendered when you first have kids - women can't work for starters and need a man who can provide for her and the child in the first months/years, so I am not sure what is wrong with that?

My Exdh had a good job when we met, he then left said job and flitted from role to role, generally in manual labour/minimum wage type jobs. I'm not sure if it was the roles themselves or the lack of ability to stay in a role that bothered me.
My now dp has a good job, has been in that sector always and I admit I have way more respect for him.
I don't have to worry about having to carry him financially when he decides he can't be arsed with going to work this week.....harsh but true.
So yes, I guess it does matter to me, less so the role, more so the work ethic.

I’d absolutely judge someone who was a pimp, hitman, drug dealer or loan shark. Or a Tory politician. I also wouldn’t date someone who was habitually unemployed because they couldn’t be arsed to make the effort. Oh, I’d also ditch anyone who started telling me about their “cryptocurrency job.” Fuck that. Basically, for me it’s about ethics.

Not sure what’s wrong with rubbish collecting or bus drivers. Both are vital roles and the people doing them are going out earning an honest living and from what I can understand, neither is an easy job a lot of the time.

I think it more boils down to money than the actual job. A fellow teacher was telling me not long ago that she would never date / marry another teacher as they don’t earn enough for her to go part time after having a baby. If they were to progress then the hours are too long. I’d never given that any thought as I don’t know any men who would say that they wouldn’t marry a teacher because they don’t earn enough.

I'd care if it was something I thought was unethical.

I care about a person's ethics and the values by which they choose to live. A person whose chosen career involved them living by values I couldn't share or bring myself to tolerate, wouldn't be the person for me.

With regard to my values, the most important thing to me is a good work ethic and the ability to reliably pay his way, but when I was dating I learned that it also mattered to me that he found his job meaningful to him.

Not so much types of job, but work style and having similar energy around it is important to me. For someone to settle down with I think I unconsciously avoided alpha types who would expect me to throw my career under a bus when we had kids and to do everything. Or who were workaholics and did very long hours.