Can you be a feminist housewife?

beezer - Yeah, I've known flatmates like that.

I think the problem is, the good-hearted, 'well, we'll share it all out roughly' approach can, as laquitar says, work really well if the relationship is good, but it's awful in a bad relationship. My ex owes me a lot of money because I thought 'oh, I shouldn't be so picky about money, he'll treat me later on/he'll pay me back when he has it'. No such luck, and he never intended to. I have to admit it does make me see things with DH differently - no way am I prepared to give him babies and just hope i can get by on what I've saved, not expecting him to give me a penny unless he chooses!

but dp spends his own money so why woukd it impact upon me
he can buy as many whisks as he wishes hes not accountable to me for his finances
so long as joint stuff is covered i dont ask what he spends upon.why woukd i
nor do i have to account for my spending as its my money.thats the beauty of it my money,i dont have to explain were it goes or on wht

i only hear of accounting for whats spent if its one wage in the pot and wage earner wants a breakdown of specific spending

I think it's so hard to categorize whose money is whose because it's impossible to make a rigid distinction between things that can be valued in money and things that can't.

I am so thankful to my DH for all the things he did while I was applying for my grant, and it is partly down to him I got it. But it's still 'my' money in most people's eyes. How do you quantify that sort of thing?

Laquitar the difficulty comes that what may seem as a 'good' relationship with a 'good' partner can so rapidly change.

Even if not full on abuse. Just a relationship that goes sour and poof everything you as the SAHP thought you could count on disappears up in smoke.

laquitar, that is very true.

beezer - I don't think you sound spoilt!

real you do so over personalise.what are you not backing down about now?

what's so hard to understand about individual accounts for each salary
joint for house,nursery,food,utilities
most folk i know maintain this arrangement married or not
and this is how i chose to maintain my monies and no i dont get money from dp when i was pg.i wouldnt want it any other way

if one wants to conceptualise as shared and/or family money-up to you
my money is mine i earned it. and we discuss the joint purchases and agree to them all jointly

for me,independence and stability has huge financial component.and that is important to me

SM you delight in offending. Everywhere on MN not just on here, and I try to see beyond that and still engage but sometimes it does my head in.

In a good marriage with a normal person it doesn't make difference (assuming that you have a bank account, access to joint property and savings, you are taking part in the decisions and your status is not used against you).

In a bad and abusive marriage it does matter because it is harder to stand up to the abuser or to escape and start new life

Exactly LRD.
and when you do have kids - if you buy them the fancy red shoes for a fiver extra rather than the plain black ones - is that discretionary spending on your part that needs to be accounted for? it can be a real headmelt

Doesn't. get. irony. then?
If you (deliberately) being a complete and utter bitch with your words isn't anti feminist, I don't know what is.

There was absolutely no need for you to word your comments in the derisory way you did, it was intended for one purpose only.

Why 'priceless' SM?
unless you believe that all women are by default feminists, therefore everything they do and say is feminist.
I don't think you do believe that, do you?

Well put LRD

i do believe it was alok til you squawked bitchfest
and a feminist discussion
what a curios choice of derision..so the women are all bitches?
why not disagreement etc

a women calling other women discussion a bitchfest.priceless

Women as a whole (obviously there are exceptions here) earn less than men for the same job this is partly justified by employers saying that they are 'risky' because they may choose to have children and therefore need to take time off to have them.

So even if you don't have a child and you never take time out of employment for them you are still disadvantaged financially just because you are a woman and you potentially could.

I don't follow how, if you live as a couple, you could ever really determine who earned what and who is dependent on whom?

DH and I have no kids and I still find it complicated.

My DH goes out to work from 9-5. Does he owe me his hourly rate every time I stay in for the plumber, thus allowing him to stay at work and earn it? When he comes home stressed, we chat - does he owe me a therapists' fee? I drive the car because he can't - should I charge him local taxi rate?

I stay home and bring in more or less the same amount of money as a student grant. DH pays 75% council tax as a result (single-person rate, students don't count). Should we each pay half? I get him to proof-read my work - does that come at commercial rate or does it more or less even out against my driving him around?

Our rented house costs us each 335pcm; I was previously paying 400 pcm and he was staying with mates. Which of us gets to spend the saving? Our energy bills are lower than those for two single rooms combined - do I pay more of it because I stay in all day using the heating/electricity, or should he pay more because he likes to put the radio on for hours at the weekend?

IMO, even before you have children, it is a generalization at best, a myth at worst, to believe you can live as a normal, healthy couple and not be mutually dependent, including financially. It just doesn't happen. IMO there is nothing wrong with drawing a line and saying you're comfortable with a certain amount of shared finances but not with sharing everything - but if the way that works out is such that the woman always ends up poorer, I fail to see how you're promoting 'independence'?

yes,and thats the nub,if big pot and shared money works do it
i have never wanted it,have never done it. i don't expect anyone else to follow and as i have said joint shared monies to me is an anathema

Well, hasn't this turned into a total bitch-fest, due to Scottishmummy in the main, what with all the talk of dipping into someone's wages and pin money, could you be any more insulting do you think?

When you are married / have a family, there is no such thing as his money/your money, it's family money, well it is in an equal relationship at any rate. The attitude SM has is bizarre beyond belief.

Fair enough, SM.

I don't see parents who take on the tasks of bearing and raising children being supported financially by their partners as 'dipping into someone else's wages'

I see those wages as belonging to the family and distributed amongst family members. And believe that distribution should be equitable.

Actually even if both partners had equal income, I would see it the same way. All essential costs would be covered jointly (including childcare costs, savings and pension provision) and left-overs (if there are any) distributed equally for each to use as they wish.

women are finacially disadvantaged if they give up work and become dependent upon a sole wage earner, need to know that and weigh up pro and cons