AIBU to think we should encourage our daughters to 'marry well'?

[windygallows]

I know 'marrying well' is something our mothers and grandmothers crowed about but it's not a phrase I've heard much these days and it feels quite an anti-feminist sentiment in a world where women can do well without men.

Yet I wonder if marrying well - marrying into money or marrying someone who is in a well-paid profession - is something we should be encouraging our daughters to do. Why? Because not every woman wants to have a career and if you want to be a SAHM then really that's easiest if your DH is well paid. Also women still experience a pay gap and are in lower-paid roles by comparison, so having a well paid DH really does make up that pay gap.

Plus - when I look around at my female friends and peers (I'm mid-40s) of the ones who have a comfortable lifestyle and are able to work part-time or be SAHM, for about 3/4 that lifestyle is attributed to having a well-paid or wealthy DH. The other 1/4 got there through their work/career, family money etc. This is purely a sample of my peers, by no means the norm.

I'm a staunch feminist so it's a bit hard to write this but I'm also a single parent and know what a slog it can be making everything work on my own salary. Marrying well doesn't mean a good marriage or relationship but it does make things easier. In the end shouldn't we be having an honest conversation with our daughters about this and encouraging them to think a bit more about 'marrying well'?

I know quite a lot of SAHDs because I work in a creative industry where many don't end up earning well or predictably.

Actually, SAHD is probably wrong, as they are still working, just providing most of the child care too. Their DWs are the main bread winners.

Some of the DWs seem very happy with the situation. It allows them to pursue their (less flexible but better paid) career.

Some are less happy, seeing the bloke as pissing about.

notinagreatplace I agree with you.

I think a man who devotes himself to work and absents himself from familial responsibility would be highly unattractive to many women.

I think it's more important to encourage them to be able to support themselves well.....regardless of a partner, wealthy or not.

I was fortunate to marry someone who had a guaranteed job and have been able to pretty much be a SAHP for 13 years+. That works well for our family though and now that dd is thinking about future careers, and telling me she doesn't want to have a boyfriend or ever get married, I'm encouraging her to do something with her life that she enjoys, can sustain her lifestyle and which will make her happy.

Happiness in the long term is the most important thing.

I love your last post OP. 😃 I'm in the second category. Go me!

I have raised strong, ambitious, hard working, clever and independent D.C. (Now all adults - boys and girls ) So maybe that cancels out my gold digging 🤷🏻‍♀️

Notinagreatplace -At my DC's prep, I would say around 60% of mum's are SAHMs. None of us consider ourselves to be involved in prostitution.

I know four SAHD, one took early redundancy ten years ago, two have never worked since their dds were born (now15) and one I am fascinated by as they have six children and his wife works in London.

I live in the south east, middle aged, lots of SAHM too.

Is it better to go and work on the tills at Tesco rather than be called a prostitute . I don't think so.

I think it's really strange that women with no ambition or drive somehow still expect a nice lifestyle - it does feel pretty close to prostitution to me. Men who don't have good jobs somehow manage

I agree.

I'd have failed in parenting if my daughter felt all she had to do in life was find a man with a good bank account and not have to do much else.

Likewise we have shown our son that an equal partnership can be had and that he's not to believe that men work and women don't. It's no longer the 1950s and adults should be able to parent and work. It's not one or the other.

I don't know many SAHP either. I think this massively influences a person's opinion.

Amar1na - I didn't say all SAHMs were prostitutes.

I said that I think young women who can't be bothered to work but still assume that someone will provide for them and seek out a man who earns a lot are edging close to prostitution.

If you just find yourself in that position after a few years, I find it deeply strange - partly because, as I said above, I literally know no-one my age who was or is a SAHM to school-age children - but I didn't and wouldn't call you a prostitute.

I will raise dd to aim for the stars and smash the glass ceiling, including a completely independent financial situation. I'll be raising ds to understand that women are/ should be equal. Basically I'll raise them to marry their 'equals' - and I include intellect and values in that.

Rainbows - women do not "expect" anything. However, if they happen to find themselves in a situation where they don't need to work, they may feel that they have more value at home. And the DH may feel the same.
It's fairly obvious really.

One of my friends is a woman who always had drive and ambition and has done very well. She married for love, a man who has skills and a trade but now, it turns out, doesn't want to work. they have two children of school age and their father positions himself as a SAHD but actually their mother does as much of the day to day sorting-out of the children and he does, and he watches a lot of cricket. She works incredibly hard running hew own business and the stress is abominable. She never wanted or needed to find a man to support her, but now she finds that she is supporting someone who does very close to literally nothing - and she can't get rid of him because although he does very little, he would be able to position himself as "primary carer" and take her to the cleaners.

As childless, young people they had good times and she was probably attracted to his laid back personality - and realistically always knew she didn't need or want a sugar daddy. but how it has come to this, it is very very sad.

I think there is a huge danger for women when they present themselves to men, their potential partners, as materially independent. Be independent, yes. Don't tell them you are. because some men don't hear "independent". They hear "meal ticket". there are a lot of men out there just looking for women to do it all.

So yeah I would advise girls and young women to be looking for what their partner can do for them as well as what they intend to do for themselves (and their partners)

notinagreatplace you said that you only knew two who had been sahm out of 40/50 friends and that they went to work once the dc were at school.

Lots of my junior Dr/nursing friends had to stay at home as when two of you are juggling shifts on different rota schedules with little notice, you cannot get childcare.

I often find that the most judgy are those doing 9-5 or with family help.

Elisa actually preconceived ideas are still gong strong and the idea that a man would want to be a SAHP whilst his wife has a high flying career wouldn't go down well. Actually it is unlikely to be what a man is aiming for in life because he would be seen as a looser.

Proof?

It's a fact that there are some high earning women who have SAHD partners. Some of them post on here: I don't feel comfortable singling out certain posters by name, but if you're here enough you'll see them. That's not to say there wouldn't also be women whose view would be the one you articulate. No doubt there would. But that goes back to my point that it depends what the prospective partner is looking for.

It's also worth pointing out that there are those amongst us who wouldn't be willing to consider marrying the sort of person OP is holding up as the ideal. I wouldn't have. If they were rich and high earning without having to do that much, yes, but realistically most people earning high salaries do need to put in a lot of hours. There's no way I'd have been willing to tolerate that sort of absence from partnership and family life. The extra money wouldn't be worth the sacrifice and it's not the sort of existence I want.

Again, different strokes.

Rainbows - women do not "expect" anything. However, if they happen to find themselves in a situation where they don't need to work, they may feel that they have more value at home. And the DH may feel the same

Strange how they find themselves in that situation and how it's always the woman though. Men don't have the same choice and I'd imagine a huge percentage never wanted to be the sole earner but were forced into it.

What sort of man values his wife that he feels her only contribution should be in the home doing housework and unemployed. If not want that kind of marriage for my daughter, little point in gaining ad education to do nothing with it.

But Amar1na isn't the whole point of this thread that the OP does think we should raise our daughters to expect something? That we should basically be saying: it doesn't matter if you don't have the ambition to be self-sufficient because your husband can be expected to support you as long as you choose the right man?

I think being a SAHM because both partners see that this is the best use of your resources is a great choice. Growing up thinking "I don't have to make an effort about anything else because I have the right to be a SAHM" is a different thing.

The number of stay-at-home fathers in Britain has reached a record high, according to figures from the Office for National Statistics

There are now 229,000 men who stay at home with their children - up from 111,000 in 1993

Meanwhile the number of women at home has fallen in the past year by 45,000 to 2.04million

I don't understand why people are claiming that men don't have the choice?

They do and I know some.

Tiny numbers but still increasing.

Has anyone mentioned that for some people the pressure of being the only earner in what can be a very stressful and long-hours position is immense, to the point of being detrimental to their mental health? Surely it's better to take any job your potential spouse has as temporary?

Imagine you're in the US as a SAHP of 2 and your husband goes to work at Lehman Brothers in 2008 to find himself booted out with a box of belongings. No pay for time worked, severance, etc. There are no jobs in financial services available for years. Then what?

But Amar1na isn't the whole point of this thread that the OP does think we should raise our daughters to expect something? That we should basically be saying: it doesn't matter if you don't have the ambition to be self-sufficient because your husband can be expected to support you as long as you choose the right man?

No it wasn't the point of this thread but I was acknowledging that not all women are ambitious, will be skilled or are clever - so not all women will 'reach for the stars' even if this is what parents want or what you try to teach your DDs.

Look around you. Lots of women have much easier lives because they have a DH that does well financially. Some may have looked for wealth and for other couples, it just turned out that way which may make them lucky rather than mercurial. We cannot deny the impact that a wealthy partner has on a quality of life. True, independence is great but very few women will have a high quality of life on one income alone.

Useful points also being made that there are men who are effective/near SAHPs but we're less likely to call it that. I have observed on here that there are women who will refer to themselves as SAHPs when they're also doing a bit of paid work around the children. There isn't the same tendency with dads, I don't think. We don't necessarily apply the labels evenly across the sexes.

I'll be advising my daughters to marry a man whom they love who also has a reasonable income.
I hope that I will have instilled them with enough positive self regard to consider themselves worthy of doing so.

I dont want them to follow my own piss poor example after all.

My exh doesn't contribute towards his children and my OH is a sahp.
I earn an above average salary but my God its difficult being the sole earner with all of the incumbent financial responsibility/worry.
Plus my OH is the love of my life and a wonderful father/stepfather but hes not the greatest housekeeper. We still outsource cleaning and laundry or I would go crazy trying to pick up the slack with five DC.

Now I'm thirty four and peers express surprise that I didn't 'snag' a rich partner, after all I'm clever, funny, extremely attractive (not a boast really just a statement of most people's honest apprsisal) kind and educated.

It gave me pause for thought...
Why didnt I seek out a solvent partner?

Well I didnt think myself worthy of a partners financial assistance; mostly due to very negative relations with my father and a prevailing sense of utter unworthiness.

My daughters categorically will not suffer the same fate under my watch.
I will be very honest regarding my own experiences and cross my everything that they choose differently.

To the masses I'm the epitome of a feminist in word and deed but there you have my unabashed candour.

We cannot deny the impact that a wealthy partner has on a quality of life.

Why are you only considering the positives OP, rather than what impact the level of work usually needed to achieve wealth might have?

Elisaveta - of course there are sacrifices made when you have a DP working long hours or you yourself do. But that suggests that only high earners have to deal with a lot of drudgery or absent husbands -- talk to the women doing low paid shift work in conjuction with their husbands also doing low-paid shift work who never get to see each other as they try to jointly work and manage childcare between them. The loneliness of life with a long-working hedge fund manager doesn't compare, frankly.