Women who forget not everyone has access to money from men

[windygallows]

With 34.5% of the population aged over 16 in England ‘single and not cohabiting’ (2015 stats), it’s clear that a significant number of women in the UK, many parents, are single and having to fend for themselves/live on one income.

Yet I'm amazed at the number of women who forget that not every woman has access to a second income from a partner. In fact the privilege of having access to another’s (usually a man’s) income is often naturalized and many women are, or become, totally oblivious to this privilege.

For example just this last week I experienced:

• A woman at work going on and on about the importance of her life/work balance and suggesting I drop my hours to have similar. She works just 2 days/week and seems to forget that such a setup is an absolute privilege, thanks to a husband who works FT.

• Another woman I know who is on quite a low salary bragging about her 3 luxury holidays per year, again thanks to the income from an IT Director husband. She thought she'd give me travel tips in case I wanted to go to the same 5star holiday.

There are a million reasons why women might have to rely on men’s income but I don’t think I ABU in asking women to recognize that their lifestyle and having access to men’s money isn’t the NORM for up to 1/3 of women, who are having to get by on their own accord and lack the same privilege or financial flexibility.

Trust me I’m cringing far more for the state of the world for women if you’re teaching your daughters to accept they’ll unavoidably have to sacrifice and compromise because that’s just what life is for women. It’s honestly like women’s liberation never happened reading your responses. I’m very glad the world I inhabit IRL doesn’t reflect what’s going on here

Walkabout is comprehension difficult for you or something? Find me the place I said men were oppressed? Men as a class are the oppressors, that has consistently been my point throughout this entire thread? I’m not sure if you’re being wilfully oblivious or just lack any critical thinking capability. High earning men suffering negative consequences of being the sole provider is a SYMPTOM OF THE PATRIARCHY THEY CREATED. Yes, on an individual level it may be detrimental to them but on a class/societal level it’s not oppression. Christ. When did this become basic A-level sociology?

Dodge -your link doesn’t work?

Look, I can kind of understand where you’re coming from and I’m not offended by any of your comments at all, but I do think perhaps you could think a bit more flexibly.

“Career” to you seems to mean something you bang away at for years. But, you must realise, many people change career-direction multiple times over the course of a lifetime. Or they might become self-employed at some point. As I explained earlier, I’m thinking of returning to work, but I want to be able to set my own hours and work privately. It will be sessional work with clients in the field of psychology (without being too specific). This is a job, where the older you are the better, in many ways.

My DH did not “tell” me to give up work in so many words. It’s more a case that he knew I was the type of woman who would prefer to stay with my kids and we had discussed this well before. Is this a crime now?

You would say his culture is misogynistic, but there is no concept of looking down at mothers raising their children at home, in the way you do. Also men are not allowed to “have it all” in the sense people in the UK seem to think is “equality.”

My DH has NEVER made me feel “lesser” than him because he’s in a paid role and I’m not. We just don’t think like that. He has never made me feel beholden to him for money. Everything we do, ultimately, is for the kids. He works so that they can have a nice home, good schools, opportunities and financial help longer-term (eg uni, first flat etc). It just happens that he’s better placed to do this than me because of the nature of what he does. On the other hand, I take care of the day to day stuff because this comes more naturally to me. Both are equally important roles.

If my DH had ever made me feel beholden to him for money, I wouid have been off years ago. In fact, I wouldn’t have been a SAHM in the first place.

If DH had never have met me, well yes, he would still have built up hid companies etc, but who would he have been doing it for? What wouid have been the point if financial success if you have nobody to share it with? As for me, if I followed your vision of feminism, Aid just be in my own, in a flat or maybe a small house somewhere, no kids. Yay!

I've not read the whole thread but can imagine some of the replies after reading this corker at the beginning:

It makes sense for DH to work full time as he earns around £120,000 if I worked full time my salary would be around £40,000.
Why the need to mention this with the full figures? It's so crass and boastful to mention stuff like this on a parenting website in the middle of a recession when the average wage in the North is far less than £30K a year. I don't get it.

Happens all the time on here.

I followed your vision of feminism, Aid just be in my own, in a flat or maybe a small house somewhere, no kids. Yay!

Why’s that a bad thing? Sounds like absolute bliss to me!

But no, seriously, I get not everyone wants that and people want to couple up and have children. But in my opinion a misogynist arrangement does not have to include overtly negative things like being belittled or made to feel beholden or grateful to a man, being told what you can and can’t do, made to feel lesser etc - you could have the most generous, selfless, loving husband who may not himself exhibit misogynist behaviour but the traditions, expectations, societal structures that underpin the provider/homemaker dynamic are misogynist at their core, but this is as much to do with individual situations as it is wider society. I’m of the position that an conscious individual rejection of these norms is the first step to bringing about change, because without people on a micro level critiquing and challenging things, those structures - like the idea of ‘men’s jobs’ vs ‘women’s jobs’, lack of workplace flexibility, not enough support structures for mothers (workplace creche, free childcare etc) - these things won’t come about without women demanding them to enable them to be mothers without having to make the sacrifices that men generally don’t. I’m actually not against one parent staying at home before children reach school age. But there needs to be a wider societal effort to make that a viable possibility for men and women, not place the expectation solely on women. I get the argument that some women actively want to be the SAHP for years beyond toddlerhood, but my stance is that in current society and the way it’s set up, it cannot ever be a truly free choice. Only with people questioning and challenging things and opting out of it, thus passing some of that burden on to men, will that ever change

dodgeballchamp - good heavens, was it not you who asked what about the poor man wanting to take a career break if he is the only financial earner, then?! I must have dreamed it...

I am all for changing power structures in society so as to reduce abuses of power. I just don't agree that women aping men and also looking down on caring roles, because they are financially less rewarding, is the way to go about changing society. Stop haranguing women for being attracted to lower paying careers if that is what attracts them - putting everyone off such roles because they do not pay well is just stupid and buying into the traditional view of what is important that was established by men. Stop pretending women or men who take some time out of paid employment actually do become unemployable, rather than this being a feature of a flawed society. Stop haranguing women for wanting to prioritise their own families rather than to make themselves the centre of the universe. Stop telling everyone this is a dog eat dog world where you look after number one or deserve to get crushed under the feet of those with economic power but fuck all sense of domestic responsibility and you might just find more people agreeing with you.

good heavens, was it not you who asked what about the poor man wanting to take a career break if he is the only financial earner, then?! I must have dreamed it...

If you think that’s the same as arguing men are oppressed you don’t understand my point. As I explained at length, this is a self-own by men. In real terms for some individuals this may lead to them suffering but it is happening because of the patriarchy they created! How are you not getting this!

And I agree with you it’s societal structures. I’ve never said or thought anything different. You’ve misunderstood me completely. I’m not going to repeat myself but mass change can only start from individuals. Neither have I ever discouraged anyone from low paying careers either! That’s a separate issue, many of the most valuable roles in society like nurses, caring staff etc are low paid. I think you’re just not understanding the difference between (and intersection of) society and individuals in my argument.

It IS a dog-eat-dog world though where you have to look after number one, though. It’s called capitalism.

And until your last post, you most certainly did not give the impression you were against women staying at home at any point!

Sorry, *for.

And no, I’m not going to stop. If anything this thread has only spurred me on to keep fighting this cause even harder.

dodgeballchamp - I can only suggest you read through all your posts again, because you very much come across as looking down on anyone unable to support themselves and their entire family financially at any point in their lives without the need for any male involvement. So - are you anti-capitalist, or are you anti-anybody staying at home at any point to look after their kids, as you have confirmed this is a dog eat dog world where caring is revealing weakness?

And until your last post, you most certainly did not give the impression you were against women staying at home at any point!

I don’t think there’s a valid reason for it once children are at school (for women or men). I do think if you want to do it you should financially prepare yourself beforehand especially if you want to do it for a long time. But I think the Nordic model of more state support for parents with children below school age is a good one. It means it can be arranged genuinely equally between parents.

Walkaround I hate capitalism. The structures I’d like to see put in place are socialist (way beyond anything to do with parenting). But that ain’t happening anytime soon. And I do think it’s foolish not to prioritise being able to financially support yourself in the current society, so no, I haven’t changed my mind on that. That’s what I mean when I say widespread change can only start with individuals. Women prioritising themselves and their financial well-being first and foremost would eventually force more caring responsibilities onto men and level the playing field.

dodgeballchamp - that does really reveal your ignorance of reality again, though. School is not available 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. Sick children are not welcome in school. Employers cannot enable all their workers to take the same holidays, to fit in with children's teaching timetables. And parent workers having time off to deal with urgent family matters are bad for capitalism. Money cannot solve every problem in society. And whilst it is very easy as a childless person to expect individuals to sacrifice their own children on the altar of your desired change, it's not so easy for the individuals actually affected by that to do so - particularly when they are not convinced it is leading to the changes desired, but is actually just harming the children that are their reason to want to live and earn and making their lives even more stressful, somthat they feel like hamsters trapped in wheels, running faster and faster, harming the environment more and more, havingmless and less time to do what they want, and not getting anywhere they want to, whilst a tiny minority experience the benefits.

dodgeballchamp - you see, saying you hate capitalism, but then going along with it for the time being isn't much different from women hating caring roles being looked down on, but doing them anyway - neither result in a move away from capitalism...

There are plenty of things I refuse to do that are capitalism related because I don’t want to uphold the system but they’re not really relevant to this discussion. I do think though if you spend 20+ years as a SAHM then find yourself screwed if your husband leaves then yes, society is to blame, but so is the individual for not taking personal responsibility. I would like socialist structures that support people better when they can’t support themselves but even within that framework I think personal responsibility should be encouraged

And do you know what I see as more women get to positions of power and wealth? More women complaining about their hard earned money being wasted on taxes, childcare being too expensive, and more women looking down on other women for choosing low paid careers. This is the way to creating a new underclass of carers and essential workers who are expected only to assume those positions if they lack the talent to do anything else. It's not far off slavery, tbh. Meanwhile people who want to care are told not to, because it is unprofitable and therefore self-indulgent. They should leave their loved ones to the care of the underclass.

Dodge - there is a thread on here now, I don’t know if you’ve seen it - basically it’s a married woman who is taking a short maternity to look after her baby and she’s now having to live off her own savings (!) until she goes back to work. She has totally separate finances to the husband. He has taken no time out and has no concept of supporting his wife at all. Apparently this woman thinks she’s “lucky”

This is the reality of your feminist vision of self-sufficiency.

Do you think for one second I wouid have had a baby with a man who wouldn’t even share his money with me while I’m sat at home breastfeeding his child every few hours and up half the night. You must be having a laugh!