To think people are respected more if they are rich?

[TheFaultInOurStars]

Ive been in email correspondence with someone over a formal matter. I haven't met the person in RL. She gave me her address for posting something and I googled it to see where she lived. (Yes, I am nosy!)
It happened to be in a mahoosive house with a stunning garden in an affluent area which she paid three quarters of a million pounds for. She's also married to a doctor.

But now my perception of her has changed. In an instant. I suddenly thought shes more educated than me, she's more clever than me, shes better than me. I feel beneath her whereas before I didn't think anything of her really.

Am I right in thinking that people give you just that little bit more respect if you're rich, you're just that little bit more important?

I understand,. I just worry that some young women these days think they have to take a year out of full time work when they have a baby because all their friends do and no one takes less (or so they think) so the fact you could just take 2 or 6 weeks off after the baby is just another option and all options have pros and cons I don't think enough women are presented with happy examples of women who took short maternity leaves and it worked well, that's all - and yet we women who do and have done that are out there. Not everyone's choice but it can work. Instead there is public disdain like when Sarah Palin and also that French female cabinet member - they both took 2 weeks and no one said that's fine which they would do if they were a man. After all plenty of us as Miriam Gonzalez said recently is only to have what men have. Luckily plenty of us manage to gain that.

Timing of pregnancy can matter too. Not really to me as I work for myself but those employed. My parents waited until they had been married over 8 years for financial reasons mostly as both had careers. My grandfather was nearly 50 when my father was born. That waiting can help as it did in those two prior generations. I was 22 and that was difficult but not physically but child care was 50% of each of our salaries. I don't think years when life is financially difficult are bad for people as it can be an incentive to earn more.

Anyway back to the grindstone. Working day for many of us today.

flower, there are many women in the past who had short maternity leaves because that was the law and they didn't have other choices. While I personally didn't take a year's leave, I recognise that it was a hard fought for right to which I am grateful to the women who achieved it.

In this day and age, where women have choices, and the vast vast majority of women want to have more than 2 weeks or 6 weeks with their baby, I would imagine that you banging in about running from the hospital bed back to work is somewhat off putting. your way of doing it is just not palatable to most women.

I took relatively short maternity leaves (less than 6 months both times) but the message I give the women who work for me and whom I mentor is to do what's right for them rather than feel like they have to do what I did. my energies are far better spent ensuring that they don't get shoved onto the "mummy" track if they don't want to be on it and help them manage their post children careers.

What I find most disheartening about the op's post is that unwarranted respect and deference is seemingly afforded to this woman on the basis of who she has married, not what she's managed to achieve in her own right. Kind of reinforces the notion that 'success' for women is still sometimes couched in 'marry well' or 'snaring a good provider.

' She could be even more brilliant and successful or she could be a workshy waster who spends all day pissed up and every friday and saturday night sobering up in a Police cell, but I'd like to think my perception of a woman's esteem is not tied up in what her husband does.

I am not sure if the sexism or the class deference depresses me more.

Rachida Dati's pregnancy and maternity leave is hardly held up as some kind of role model in France. She was the laughing stock of le tout Paris and the rest of France.

I think there is something to be said for fixed maternity leave - in France, employers are used to managing four month leave cover, obstetricians manage pregnancies such that mothers are able to return to work at 10 weeks post-partum. It's not the optimal solution for breast feeding but it is a relatively successful macro-level compromise that everyone is used to and understands.

I think it is mainly due to confidence. I am confident enough to believe I am of equal value to those with, and those without money. I just treat people the same. And I demand the same respect from them. If someone was off with me because I didn't have their money or background, I'd just dismiss them as twats and wouldn't give them a second thought.

I think if people don't have that confidence, they would be second guessing every word or action and they may perceive slights where they are not intended. It is very easy to be intimidated and react differently than you would normally. This is a shame because you are not letting people see the real you, therefore you are not getting real reactions.

I treat everyone the same and assume everybody's reaction to me is a result of whether they are a nice person or not. I seem to get on ok with most people.

Yes, confidence is a very good topic to raise. I have never really minded being different from other people and that has been as important as things like getting the best exam results in the school. That ability to forge your own path and not care less if Jane next door thinks you should take 5 years off with each baby or whatever the pressure might be.

Women interviewed who have done well on the whole tend to have confidence and be happy with their choices - whatever those choices might be (and yes of course I am going to agree with Russ that women should be proud of earning a fortune rather than having the bust or sexual skills to hook a rich man).

Rachida D Well that's exactly what I saw too, bonsoir and that's very sad. A man returning to work when he chooses is not subjected to those views.

Also under English law yiou only get 6 weeks at 90% pay so most women returning later than that know they may not be able to pay the mortgage and can be subjected to societal pressure to take too long off. I just want them to have choices not to feel they cannot return sooner. It can work out very well and be easier on baby and mother if mother returns quickly. Nothing easier in some jobs than sitting at a desk compared with doing domestic chores, minding a toddler and a new baby. Work is a doddle by comparison for many of us.

Confidence is good, smugness not so much.

Is that directed at me?

No it wasn't. Sorry if you thought it was

Oh ok then

Flower, just curious, so women who have 'bust or sexual skills to hook a rich man' should not be proud of themselves, and are lesser human beings than career women? Yet more judgy stereotypes, if not yours then bandied around enough!
It's hardly ever enough to hook someone with just sexual skills unless possibly he is very young and naive, and most men do not marry early nowadays. Rich men who want sexual skills, can buy them, or can have endless flings. I get fed up with the cynicism, some women who are seen as sexy or have no career can be, believe it or not, decent human being who may share sense of humour, be supportive and caring, have saintly tolerance or DH working ungodly hours and being too absorbed in business to care for her emotional needs - and that's what these women are good at rather than making a fortune. Men do value these qualities, so do their dc if any. It seems like nowadays a woman has to ashamed if she married someone rich but has no career, regardless of her personal qualities/emotional intelligence.

'tolerance of DH' not 'or'

beagles I think it's perfectly fine for a couple to decide together that one if them needs to be at home or work part time.
But I would strongly advise either of my DC from entering into a relationship with someone who was planning this from the off, never bothered with an education or career.

It's interesting that you assume it will be the woman who has no career but saintly tolerance of her rich man...

I know lots and lots of women who have "hooked rich men". While I cannot vouch for their sexual skills, it's pretty obvious that their busts were not major players in the negotiation . However, their very broad and deep skill sets most definitely were!

Busts can go a long way. I once asked a boyfriend (income £1m a year) what was the main driver for him - not my wonderful personality, earning power, pleasant nature - no, it was the large breasts. They have never been a hindrance whether at work or play..... laughing as I type.

Yes, WF is right to raise the obvious point that it might well be saintly tolerance in a man which wins him the high earner wife. Indeed when successful women choose partners if they have any sense they will pick a man who is happy to have a wife with a career. My children's father moved hundreds of miles for my career. Lots of men do. Similarly my mother kept my father for about 12 years whilst he was a student and then qualifying as a doctor/consultant as he was going exams until he was over 30.

As for what women should be proud of themselves for... and men for that matter.... I would say be proud of things you can help. So the fact I don't look too bad or bust size (as I have not paid for the bust size) are not things I should be proud of. Whereas working hard and being able to keep your children might be something of which to be proud. Prostrating yourself before a man, giving everything up and cleaning his house may well not be something of which to be proud though because it may be damaging to the woman, to other women, to children and the like. On the other hand most major religions love to suggest women should do exactly that - it's one reason nuns always went in for making the most clever of them spend hours doing pointless cleaning in convents and once the floor was cleaned made them clean it again as a sacrifice and for humility supposedly good for the soul.

My mother was always pretty critical of that bit in the bible where Martha is rushing around cooking and serving food whilst the others including Mary M sat around with Jesus doing nothing. The lilies of the field who don't toil in real life do not get handed much on a plate and their idleness is rarely rewarded although I suppose if they are very pretty then all those stereotypes we see all the time come to the fore . I was just reading a profile of Julian Lloyd Webber - ex cellist. On wife number 4 now and I suspect she is not with him for his looks. Guess what - she is not 10 years older than he is.

Now Pride is a sin surely so perhaps no one should be proud of anything whether their husband, skills in bed, earning power, how "good" they are, their life long chastity or that they wash the feet of the poor in their spare time or whatever. Proud that you are prepared to be a door mat does not seem a particularly great thing to encourage girls in. Insisting our teenagers end up with a fair partner who is happy if both of them work and both do their bit at home is probably a better model.

at Bonsoir

I've not read the whole thread but yes, (some) people genuinely believe that having lots of money makes you a better person.

I experienced a change of attitude towards me/my family from other mums locally when I changed my car for a newer and more expensive one. You couldn't make it up really.