Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think Tim Lott is out of order and his wife is right?

51 replies

GettingVerySleepy · 14/07/2013 12:35

Tim Lott thinks its only right that he has more disposable income and more decision-making power about household expenses than his wife because he earns more (even though he freely admits she does more of the cleaning, cooking and child are than he does). Besides, she has more power in the home because she takes care of their children so it's only fair Hmm

"This week I am going to write about the biggest taboo in relationships I know. Not sex, not death, not bodily functions. I'm going to write about money. Money in marriage is incendiary. It involves issues of power, feminism, patriarchy, trust and much besides. I have tried to write this column once before and had it flatly vetoed by my wife because she felt that the ground I was treading on was too dangerous.

This column appears only after an emotional and sometimes painful back-and-forth about the subject. She accused me of sexism, while I suggested she was using double standards (I asked her, in her imagination, to switch the gender roles to see how it would look then).

My wife works as a part-time associate lecturer and, like many part-time workers, who are predominantly women, tends to be discriminated against in terms of financial reward and employment opportunities. I, on the other hand, am reasonably well paid for challenging but not backbreaking work.

My wife does more of the childcare, cleaning and cooking than me. This is predominantly for practical reasons. She is physically at home for a lot more of the time than I am and, with a part-time career, she has more hours available. She also tackles all the laundry, having rejected my offers of participation in that area after I shrunk a cashmere sweater, pegged it out incorrectly and turned a dazzling white load grey.

I have somewhat more disposable income than my wife ? because I earn significantly more than her. Although I cover a good deal of the family, holiday and household expenses, she doesn't feel this gap in resources is fair. But I am not quite sure what might make a better alternative. The idea that when you get married all your finances merge into one, strikes both of us as rather archaic. We both want to have our own money and bank accounts, rather than everything being in just one joint account.

The income inequalities also mean that if there's a big expense, like a foreign holiday or house improvements, I tend to have the last say. She feels that infantilises her, as she needs to "ask me". But we both recognise that in any circumstances where consensus is required ? such as large expenditures ? we need to ask each other anyway.

My wife says that my having more money than her makes me feel powerful. She's right ? up to a point. It gives me an area of control, although I don't think I use it in order to control. I just think that some form of imbalance is inevitable.

When it comes to the house and children, my wife enjoys virtually total authority. She believes that she has earned that authority by putting the most effort into it. The power gravitates to her and she feels more comfortable with that arrangement.

Likewise, I believe there is bound to be a certain discrepancy over the amount of authority in financial matters so long as I generate most of the income. That is not to say I call all the shots or use the money to control my wife. I don't. There is just a discrepancy, and some measure of inequality in all marital arrangements is unavoidable. We get by.

I would say we have relatively few arguments about money. But it's tricky. There is a lot of counselling out there for emotional and familial difficulties in a relationship, whereas so far as I am aware there is very little practical advice on how to run family finances. And yet a number of studies identify disputes about money as causing more arguments in a relationship than any other issue.

Personally, I think the main solution is generosity of spirit and faith in the other person. I may be falling short in both these departments ? in which case it isn't only the bank account that needs a top up. It's my trust fund."

OP posts:
SoniaGluck · 14/07/2013 15:07

My point is exactly that - if he takes off for 8 or more hours then it is like a normal job, i.e. not flexible. You can't have it both ways.

Meglet · 14/07/2013 15:08

He wrote something a few weeks ago that made me think he was a bit of a prick.

janey68 · 14/07/2013 15:09

It wasnt about having it both ways actually. I just see 8 hours as very normal; it's not excessive and wouldn't preclude his wife also working full time. That's all.

janey68 · 14/07/2013 15:11

And btw I'm not a tim Lott fan. I am just pointing out that very often where is this perceived imbalance, both parties are actually quite content with the situation. It just doesn't sell as many papers if you write that though Smile

K8Middleton · 14/07/2013 15:11

If mrs Lott divorced him she'd get half. Possibly a bit more because she has a greater share of the domestic workload. Just saying Tim...

I don't read his column because it's usually deathly dull.

SoniaGluck · 14/07/2013 15:21

janey Yes, we made the decision that if we were to have children then he would continue with his well established career and I would stay at home.
It worked because he valued the contribution that I was making as highly as his own. He never made me feel inferior because I wasn't contributing financially.

inkyfingers · 14/07/2013 16:11

Their only problem is that they don't share the cash. Joint bank accounts, all going into one pot to be shared out and spent as a family unit. While they have 'my money' and 'your money' the argument will run and run....

maddy68 · 14/07/2013 18:23

I think its quite an honest piece TBH
he hasnt put his wife in a box - he hasnt said he doesnt consider his wife - I actually dont think he has said anything out of order - it works fot them and thats what matters -

janey68 · 14/07/2013 19:11

I agree maddy.

If I genuinely thought he was an abusive arse id be the first to say so. But I suspect there's a LOT of poetic licence gone into this piece... At the end of the day he's a writer making a quick buck, and people are more likely to read something that sounds a tad controversial than a bland piece which outlines their roles and says they have a contented relationship.
I suspect mrs Lott is perfectly happy with a part time lecturing post. very nice too- a respectable position so carries some kudos, while also leaving her with some nice 'me' time while the kids are at school. Of course, lecturing isn't highly paid, so how nice that she's got the full time working husband so she gets the benefits of his earnings too.
Honestly: I bet neither of them would want to change things even if the opportunity stared them in the face!
Lets save sympathy for women ( and men) who genuinely are in abusive relationships. If mrs Lott were that unhappy, she would no doubt make her feelings known.

sarahseashell · 14/07/2013 19:25

YANBU
never liked him after reading some other cobblers he wrote years ago

JustinBsMum · 14/07/2013 20:00

Writers write what will get them attention, readers and thus money from their employer/blog/newspaper.

There isn't enough info to discuss this - what extra share of the money does he get? - he has 3 Ferraris or goes to the footie once every 6 months.

He sounds a sexist arsehole so we should leave him in unnoticed oblivion and ignore.

janey68 · 14/07/2013 20:21

Oh I completely agree he's doing it for the money and it doesn't necessarily reflect their real life at all

I was just making the point that even if there is a perceived imbalance, I'd bet my last dollar they are in reality quite happy with the status quo. His treat may be a season ticket to the football or the casting vote in where they go on their hols, but hers is a day or however much off each week, with husband at work and kids at school.

I just think its a bit disingenuous to pretend that she isn't getting quite a lot out of their set up too.

(Btw if she had toddler kids at home during her time off it would be different, but with school age kids she is definitely benefiting)

SueDoku · 14/07/2013 20:53

I have spent FAR too much time this weekend writing down a variety of simple ways that this could be solved trying to reduce it to words of one syllable so that Tim Lott would be able to understand
Then I realised that he's just a twat, so I gave up Grin

janey68 · 14/07/2013 20:55

A doing-very-nicely twat though !

Snazzyenjoyingsummer · 14/07/2013 21:04

I can see your point, Janey, but what niggles at me slightly is the thought that all the observations you make could probably have been made about Nigella Lawson and Charles Saatchi - e.g. she is probably happy with things as they are, he is the really rich one and she gets to have a fulfilling job she loves, if she was really unhappy she would say so, it's not a real abusive relationship etc.

On the issue of Mrs Lott's job, I don't wish to be too identifying but from the job title given sounds like she works in a lecturing post where most of the learning is distance learning, so she probably is able to do almost all of it from home. Although of course, so is Mr Lott if he so chooses.

McGeeDiNozzo · 15/07/2013 07:09

What if you're the only earner and live with a SAHM? Does she get NO say in how to spend the money, even though she's the one at home all day and therefore the one who has to do most of the actual spending?

I don't get the logic. How is Lott going to behave when the boot is on the other foot and she is getting lots of work and he none?

MeSoFunny · 15/07/2013 10:19

He should definitely try a month of role reversal. Having taught one of his daughters I can predict a less than easy ride.

Dackyduddles · 15/07/2013 10:28

Money just isn't discussed. My dh and I were astounded and embarrassed to find it was part of the classes we had before being wed in church. Then through those chats we realised we had different views and only because of these chats did we resolve some fundamental views before our wedding day!

Treague · 15/07/2013 10:31

I was a sahm with a high-earning spouse.
There was just absolutely no question of my having no access or restricted access to money. Decisions made jointly. I do prefer to earn my own money but this was how things panned out for a while.
I read this article and thanked my lucky stars I've not hitched my wagon to a twunt.

BarbarianMum · 15/07/2013 10:36

I find the idea that 1 partner in a marriage has more disposable income than the other breathtaking.

I never even discussed how finances would be shared with by (then dp) before marriage, nor when we got married or had children, or when I gave up work to look after them. I just assumed that it was our money and whatever was left after the necessities were purchased was shared equally.

Clearly I was naive to assume this was a given, luckily for me dh is equally naive, eh?

In terms of who makes decisions on things I actually make more cause I run the home therefore notice more when insurance is due etc, and care more about stuff like holidays. But dh is certainly an equal partner in decision-making over big stuff - like what schools the kids go to - and small stuff (whenever he can be bothered).

And I thought that was normal.

Suelford · 15/07/2013 10:43

If she refuses to share money, then she's making a rod for her own back. If they keep up a system of 'his' and 'hers', and she insists on working part-time, then she will inevitably have to ask him for money, or feel less powerful because he earns more. They should merge finances, or she should get a better paying job.

janey68 · 15/07/2013 11:07

Whether tim Lott js a twunt or not, the article makes it plain that they both want this arrangement. They don't want a joint account. She wants to work part time and have more time than him in the home - he writes that she has almost total authority in the home, the power with the home and children gravitates towards her and she is comfortable with that.
I'm not saying this is the best way of doing things. Some of us find it breathtaking that some men are happy to delegate child rearing to their wives, as if once they've donated their sperm they sit back, job done. Some of us find it breathtaking that some women are happy to let their career take a back seat and perhaps never work full time again after giving birth.
What I am saying is: what strikes me most about the article is not inequality, because actually they both hold the upper hand with major aspects of their life - he with money, she with children and home. It strikes me as a description of quite a traditional marriage where they have fairly polarised roles and seem reasonably content with it. Which is fine if it floats their boat- just not madly newsworthy

K8Middleton · 15/07/2013 11:21

Did she choose that total authority in the home or did she get it when he abdicated the majority of responsibility? There's quite a big difference.

quoteunquote · 15/07/2013 11:22

I read the article yesterday and just thought what a massive twonk, and she is really silly to set that example to her children.

Treague · 15/07/2013 11:32

Almost every male-female relationship has taken the route that the father retains full rights to work as before and the mother subjugates her job in some way, or rather in a variety of insidious ways, which cause strife and anguish and loss of earnings and did I mention strife? I can think of one couple I know, where they both work p/t by design and share childcare, sorting out of childcare, household chores etc. One.

There are so many arguments against this model and I agree with every one of them, but in reality the solution is that men get the fucking point and do something about it. We don't know anything about this relationship beyond what he's written/possibly fabricated. It's slightly hateful to come down hard on her for 'weakness' - fgs most of us are living the same type of argument every day, whether it's access to finances or who sorts the babysitting or why the dishwasher can't be filled without prompting.
Reams of column copy, shame it has to be the woman getting it in the neck again.