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'?

There are, of course, some young women who do nothing but spend their money on clothes and beauty treatments and hang around premiership footballers solely to end up being a WAG and be pampered for the rest of their days. Maybe OP's daughters could do that?

Never base any happiness on the actions of anyone else.

What's the point of telling your daughter to marry for money - she can't choose who she falls in love with or who falls in love with her?

I'd tell any child of mine to choose a partner who was hard working, stable and kind.

It's s huge generalisation to say that all uber wealthy men are generally arrogant and tend to trade in their wives for younger models. The reality is of course, that they're a cross section of personalities, like men in any other sector of life. It is true though that they tend to be extremely focused and driven, often to the exclusion of other things, like family life. In my experience, there are more men who seem able to be "selfish" in this way than there are women.

I sort of get where you are coming from OP.

I do knowledge that the grind of a two income family can be a pressure. I think this is especially true for women who often shoulder an unfair burden of housework and "wife-work" as well as breadwinning.

I also think that many women would like to spend more time at home caring for their kids.

So I can see how a rich man might seem like a solution.

But, If I had to give my daughter advice, it would probably be the opposite. I would advise her to look for a man who would be willing to sacrifice his own career for his wife and family.

Me and DH both work part time at opposite ends of the week. This allows us to only pay for childcare on one day- Wednesday.

We are in lower middle class type jobs and probably earn less than many on Mumsnet. I wouldn't mind betting that our disposable income is higher though- because of our very low childcare costs.

Its a really nice, relaxed way to do family life. Plus we both have the pleasure and validation of a career, albeit one temporarily in the slow lane!

We have both had to sacrifice career opportunities for this arrangement but that's as it should be. Children do require sacrifice.

What I see in life is many, many women making the decision to sacrifice career opportunities and hardly any men willing to do the same. Then the women's aspirations get squeezed aside by the need to support their man's. This is probably more true of rich men than most. I bet you need a really supportive wife taking care of everything at home in order to get rich in the first place.

I'd like my daughters to marry someone with the humility to reign in his own ambitions a little and leave space for hers.

I'm just really confused OP.

You say you're a staunch feminist and yet almost every single time you update the thread, you appear (to me anyway) as the polar opposite

I feel (in middle life this has changed) that we can fall in love with any number of people. I've also formed the opinion that women either enjoy the domestic life or they enjoy work: not a lot vastly enjoy both. So if a woman enjoys making a home for her family and sewing and baking and gardening, and a man with enough income would like that sort of set-up, then personally I wish I'd steered more in that direction. As well as put some thought into what personality type would make me happy versus getting fixated on one man to whom I was very ill-suited.

And can I just say I find it offensive as a former SAHM this "trading sex for cash" line. There's a hell of a lot more to being a SAHM than sex, and that opinion seems to imply that women don't enjoy sex (or not if they're SAHMs anyway) and only have it in exchange for lifestyle. Which is a pretty weird point of view! When I think of the SAHMs I know and knew growing up, I'm assuming they are their partners feel it's good for the kids, makes the family more relaxed, means a tidier house, lovingly prepared meals, someone to do errands and wipe away all the shit I have to cram into my weekends (online banking, groceries, getting stuff fixed, booking courses for family, baking for the week as I'm too tired in the week, etc).

OP l see where you are coming from......l have two successful girlfriends who married unemployable idiots for some reason, and their lives have been much harder than they needed to be, particularly when they had children.........

If the roles were reversed it would not be as bad as the Dh would be successfully earning a good income, allowing the DW to not have to be so well paid and juggle a pressured job whilst pregnant/breastfeeding /bringing up Dcs. The fact remains a man cannot take over these things.

Of course all should marry for love.....but l think teaching our daughters to also prioritise kindness, being financially responsible, hardworking and have some ambition is VERY important......

Its all very well being fiercely independant when young, but much more difficult when DCs come along especially if they have complex needs.

I think so many women set the bar far too low in what they expect of a partner .......If we truly want a marriage to be sustainable then many things are needed, love, respect, similar views on certain things, and yes frank discussions on money and views of.

Just read UNLIMITEDs post...totally agree, very well put

I wonder how attractive a single man would be if he told any prospective partners that he wanted to be a stay at home dad? Not very I would wager. On this forum at least it would take less then a page before accusations of being a 'cockloger' or 'lazy' started being bandied about.

Not aimed at this particular poster, but quite a few comments like this on the thread.

I don't agree with the OP exactly, but I think contribution to the household - financially or otherwise - very much needs to be factored in.

I admit that for me, being a SAHM seems like a dream (am single and childless: reality may be different!). But when my ex mentioned he'd love to be a stay-at-home-dad, I was aghast for different reasons. He had no aptitude or inclination for any household type things. Except "male performance cooking" (as one genius poster on here dubbed it!). He didnt even do DIY (owned a big manly toolbox, though ). I could just see myself run ragged doing EVERYTHING. OTOH, if I was the high earner but with a lovely, responsible man, it would be much easier going to work every day if he actually took responsibility for home-domain stuff. So I wouldn't have to worry about housework or what's for dinner, etc. And I bet I'd do a lot more childcare than a lot of dads in the same position - because I'd want to make up the time I was missing by WOH! (And I'd still do basic housework like not leaving crap/used coffee mugs/laundry lying around, and would tidy as I go etc, something else that often goes unnoticed.)

Cocklodgers are surely like my ex, who just wants an easy life and wouldn't "work" in either domain! Problem is, so few men actually seem to be any good at housework and so on. They like the idea of the fun parts of parenting, and not having a boss, but not actually putting the graft in to make a pleasant home and look after their family.

Also, I hate the way society has become that paid work is everything and we need two incomes to raise a family (especially as it rules out single motherhood by choice in my position), and for many even to pay the bills without flatsharing. Why weren't men taking over housework and childcare in droves when women started working outside the home more? That's where the problem is. Traditional "women's work" and anything that doesn't turn someone else a profit is still not valued, but we're now having to do it all, as PPs have pointed out.

On the single parent point, while it's true that there are male single parents, there are a lot more female. It's much more likely to happen to your girl child than your boy child. I admit it isn't something I had particularly thought of talking to my DD about, but if we're talking about considering the future etc, it is silly to pretend this isn't much more likely for one sex than the other.

Unlimiteddilutingjuice made my point more nicely than I did. And if you want that balance, you have to 'marry well' very differently from what the OP has in mind.

"allowing the DW to not have to be so well paid and juggle a pressured job whilst pregnant/breastfeeding /bringing up Dcs. The fact remains a man cannot take over these things."

Can't take over being pregnant and bf, but why can't a man take over bringing up Dcs (once no longer bf)?

Isn't the awful truth that if you are only looking at things from a financial point of view the dm would be advising her well-paid dd or ds not to marry a lower earner? So the option to 'marry well' may not be there for a lower paid worker - well-paid dd and ds may decide to protect their assets or earnings.

I do think - and I realise this is different - that it is not sensible to marry someone with v different attitudes to saving, spending, borrowing, gambling etc! That does lead to disharmony i think.

Yes to BBCnewsrave's post!!

And what if you have a pretty face, a high IQ but just don't feel fulfilled doing paid work? I always hated working (& hate it again now), find it massively stressful, and only felt fulfilled and relaxed when caring for the kids and house. Some women loathe taking care of kids - it doesn't mean they're smarter than I am, it just means they're geared differently. Being a SAHM is not a refuge for the thick, all are welcome :D

And I used to know a couple of dads who did all the child care and housework. They did just fine, homes were clean, kids were happy, high-earning wives were at work as they preferred. Not cocklodgers at all as hey pulled their weight in the home arena.

If you have neither then unfortunately you don't have the option of using either to advantage your future prospects.

That is no reason to ignore the prudency of realistically appraising ones attributes and tailoring ones aspirations and actions accordingly.

I'll say it once again, I wish that my mother had sat ne down and had a frank discussion with me on the whole subject.

I had both and by my own estimation I have wasted them.
My DDs will have ample opportunity to learn from my poor choices.

"Being a SAHM is not a refuge for the thick, all are welcome :D"

And all sahds must also be welcome - I suppose for some women that would presumably be marrying well, if they wanted to pursue their career but have their dc to be looked after by a parent.

Im only halfway through page one. I think itd be interesting to see what those who have had/ having/ will have an arranged marriage think of this concept of marrying well

And when your DS is really successful and needs his DP to stay at home with the DCs because he doesn't have time to do drop off and pick up or anything else in between, given that he's so successful

Any adult that can't work without another being home is either in the wrong job, has the wrong childcare or simply can't cope as an adult. Quite damning of a character if they can't function at work without another adult supporting them.

How on earth do you think the millions of families cope with two working adults.

Saying one needs to be home makes the worker sound feeble and the unemployed one using it as an excuse.

BBCNewsRave - completely agree with that whole excellent post, epecially this last part:

"Also, I hate the way society has become that paid work is everything and we need two incomes to raise a family (especially as it rules out single motherhood by choice in my position), and for many even to pay the bills without flatsharing. Why weren't men taking over housework and childcare in droves when women started working outside the home more? That's where the problem is. Traditional "women's work" and anything that doesn't turn someone else a profit is still not valued, but we're now having to do it all, as PPs have pointed out."

Yabu. My sister stopped speaking to me because of my choice of DH. He earns a lot less than me. We are happily married with a DS and have a very equal relationship

Antigrinch - yes!! It's the undervaluing of work and stress of making ends meet. I work for the govt and one of the women said she's saving money by not having a car and not having tenants insurance. Surely those two things are not living high on the hog (my car is 30 years old and I view it as transportation not a lifestyle statement).

Rainbows - it doesn't sound as if you've met many workaholic men tbh. Yes my DH could do his job without a wife at home, but he couldn't have children and done his job without rificulous levels of childcare and this was not something we were prepared to do.

Honestly in such a case I'll be advising them to marry for love, get a job which they enjoy and not to have too many children as their salary (ies) probably wont stretch too far.

In lots of ways its probably easier to meet your potential, have a satisfactory existence and swerve all the existential, hellish navel gazing if you're both dumb and ugly.

Sometimes I envy such people and no, I'm not at all intending to be facetious.