AIBU Mumsnetters are being disingenuous about the need for women to be financially independent

[Waferbiscuit]

MNers regularly stress the importance of being financially independent and any post about SAHMs usually has lots of cautions about being financially reliant on a partner. A recent post about marrying into money had virtually ever poster stating that telling our daughters to marry into money is a horrible idea and that the key thing we should be doing is teaching our daughters to be financially independent.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4234513-to-thin-k-women-still-teach-their-daughters?pg=2&&reverse=1

This is all good in principle, but it feels very disingenuous, almost like virtue signalling, because in reality only a minority of women are financially independent/support themselves financially.

Look at the stats (ONS 2019/2020):
• 29% of women of working age (16-64) are economically inactive! Only 71% are in some form of work. (Of course some of these will be students, but not all)
• Of women with dependent children, only 36% work full time, 37% work part time and the rest don’t work at all. For those working part-time unless you’re on a very high income you wouldn’t be making enough to support your family and will be contributing a lesser amount to the family.
• Anecdotally I’m in my 50s and I’ve seen so many women my age dropping out of the workforce or moving to very limited part-time. They can do this not because they’ve amassed huge savings over their career, but because they have a partner making a lot more money than them.

My question is why do we pretend to value financial independence for women when the majority of women are not. Most women don’t make enough money to support themselves on their own, they rely on someone else’s income to maintain their lives, and the vast majority of women with children wouldn’t be able to raise their family on their income alone.

I sound like I’m being critical but I’m not – this is reality for women: the gender pay gap and time off having children means they make less than men, having children makes it harder to work FT, and we live in an economy where you need two incomes to survive.

So why can’t we just be honest and tell our daughters ‘Yes, it’s good to have a job and an income, but if you want a good lifestyle you need to have a partner working to support you. And if you have children you will probably not make enough money to support your family solo, you will end up being reliant on someone else, so please be aware of the risks.’ Why BS about being financially independent when only a small percentage of women are – or can be?

My POV on this is that I’ve been single most of my life and aside from 7 years with someone, I have had to live and raise children on my one salary. So I do fall into the financial independent category, but it’s been a slog and frankly a lot of women are having a much easier time than me by being financially dependent!

Be careful how you interpret the 37% part time work, women who work PT do so in a variety of roles, it's not all pin money jobs with no prospects. DH and I both went PT when we had DC. As the DC got older we increased our hours again and now my youngest is 8 I've just returned to FT work, having been promoted twice while working PT. I earn well above average and while if something happened to DH there would obviously be an impact on my lifestyle I'd be able to support my family better than most couples.

It’s as hard as you make it.
I have always lived within my means and was realistic about that. I still had, and have, a good lifestyle.

Living within your means is not a bad thing but it’s something many, many people are terrible at.

My question is why do we pretend to value financial independence for women

We dont pretend to value it.

It's really desirable.

It's not always easy. But clearly millions of women are managing it.

Having the option to work full time and be independent is valuable and gives you choices. Even if you then choose to work part time at some point.

No DC and worked full time since I was 16. Financially independent and will be able to retire soon early 50s with my DH who earns similar.

I could have gone PT years ago but decided I wanted to work FT and secure an easier life later on. Others choose to not work or have worked PT to the detriment of their pension and financial independence.

As long as people understand the risk benefits of their life choices then everyone is free to do what they like. Pointing out the pitfalls of each choice is a good thing.

So, wait, you think that the statistics as they stand reflect the ideal? That it's a good thing?

Because when I read the relationships board, or talk to friends and acquaintances, or hell, do my job in the VAWG sector, I see the bitter consequences of NOT being financially independent. Everywhere.

These statistics reflect the very real, very dire situation of poverty that women face, due to being reliant upon others for their financial well-being. It's...not a good thing.

I'm not sure how it's disingenuous, the figures for women are the lowest ever I believe. What are the stats for men?

I think more women should strive to be financially independent. There is really no reason not to be, I've managed to bring up 3 children entirely within my own resources. I've worked 2 jobs when I've needed to, I have bought my house, saved for a pension etc. But I didn't recognise the need until l was in a violent my relationship with DC1s dad and couldn't leave due to finances.

@Waferbiscuit

Part of the point I'm trying to make is that actually being financially independent is HARD, it usually means working FT for your whole career, never taking your foot off the gas and it is a slog!

The seduction of financial dependence is having an easier life and I can see why women go down this route instead. So many women my age are having a much much easier time than me working part-time or not at all and they seem very happy! Telling them to WORKWORKWORK didn't work, did it?

You mean, like men do?

How is it possible for men and impossible for women?

Whatevergetsyouthroughthenight Congrats. Are you saying you can now afford to 'retire' purely from savings you made solo, or are you in a partnership where he is also contributing to paying the cost of living, mortgage etc? Because the latter is a bit different.

@waferbiscuit yes, financial independence is paying for all living expenses by yourself.
I could do it and most of my friends can and/or do.

I work full time as does my DH. I wouldn't be able to pay for everything we pay for between us on just my salary, but I would be able to get a smaller house for me and the kids and provide for them if needed.

So I am financially dependent/financially entwined with my DH, but capable of disentangling.

My personal view is that women should not turn their back on any type of career job. Go part time a couple of days a week while children are young if you don't want to work full time, but to get off the merry go round completely is very risky.

You mean, like men do? How is it possible for men and impossible for women?

@Getyourarseofffthequattro Agree, of course men use women and rely on them for income and domestic and sexual servitude too (sorry to sound cynical)! Am not endorsing that either.

I’m 50, and have never been financially dependent on a man. I can see how it can happen, any woman who gives up work in order to care for children or sick or elderly relatives can be very vulnerable. Even if you can only work part time, it gives you more options and makes a potential return to full time work easier. I would always advocate that even if you have a joint account for family money, you keep a separate personal account and make sure you have something in it. You never know when you may need to fall back on your own resources for whatever reason.

My friend was married to a high earner, they are now divorcing. His income certainly supported the family but her p/t well paid job has meant she has more choices.

You don't need both parents to be working really. One could become a sahp and be the childcare so you don't have that cost. What we need to change the view of is that the parent needs to be the woman.

My partner is already aware that if we have kids, yeah we could afford childcare under both salaries, but it wouldn't leave any extra, his wage would cover childcare and maybe food and that's it. Whereas my salary can cover everything on its own without childcare. So unless he gets a massive pay rise in the next few years, he will be leaving his job and being the sahp. And he'll have the extra chores around the house to do. Suddenly he's not so keen on kids. He thought he could handle all bills on his salary and half of mine so I could do the extra work, but that's a big nope.

I don't exactly see any boundaries though for anything. I'm more confident than other women because they haven't had a good upbringing or good role models, which isn't their fault. They believe that they are secure having a partner, not husband, that pays for everything. They aren't. It's information that needs to be given from an early age, in school really.

I also think you’re deliberately dismissing/downplaying women in part-time work
“Of women with dependent children, only 36% work full time, 37% work part time”

Many women go part-time when their children are tiny and then go full-time again. Also four days a week could could towards those half time figures. I’m the higher earner even when I’m part-time. Many of these 37% of women could still be financially independent - or, if their partner left them, could switch up to full-time very easily. So in reality, 36%+37% = 73% of women with children who are maintaining their career and not reliant on a man. So I don’t get your point at all

Also as PP mentioned, many men couldn’t financially support their family on their one income either. Most households need two incomes. I think your experience as a 50-something women is very different to the experience of young families today.

@Waferbiscuit

You mean, like men do? How is it possible for men and impossible for women?

@Getyourarseofffthequattro Agree, of course men use women and rely on them for income and domestic and sexual servitude too (sorry to sound cynical)! Am not endorsing that either.

No, you said work full time for your whole career as if that were something unusual. But most men do it.

@JaninaDuszejko

Be careful how you interpret the 37% part time work, women who work PT do so in a variety of roles, it's not all pin money jobs with no prospects. DH and I both went PT when we had DC. As the DC got older we increased our hours again and now my youngest is 8 I've just returned to FT work, having been promoted twice while working PT. I earn well above average and while if something happened to DH there would obviously be an impact on my lifestyle I'd be able to support my family better than most couples.

Absolutely agree with this. I would also say that any woman who works part time is "keeping her hand in" , so to speak. If they did need/want to increase their hours, for whatever reason, they'd still be employable at the same level. We see so many women post on here that they're struggling to get back into employment after a few years out to raise a family. That's what kills the opportunity of financial independence, not working part time.

I think it’s more nuanced than that. The advice doesn’t tend to be ‘don’t be financially reliant on a man’, it is ‘don’t give up your job to be a SAHM who is financially dependent on the kids’ father unless you are married’. In other words, don’t make yourself financially vulnerable without the legal protections offered by marriage. I think that’s generally sensible advice.

I think it's important to explain what is meant by financial independence. I agree that a lot of women can't fully achieve that. But I see so many younger women getting fucked over because they think financial independence means not being financially supported, especially during maternity leave and with childcare costs. I was a SAHM in the 80's/90's, my DH, like many others was paid in cash and it was given to me to work things out. I see women now being all things to all people like never before. They pay their way, do most of the wife work and are expected to look good to a level that we never were. I think the message to not lose yourself and demand to be an equal in your relationship is more important. As well as recognising that if you both want children, one will have to do the grunt work and one may have to do the earning (and paying) for a while. Make sure what 'wanting a baby' means to your partner.

Because if we don't keep telling our daughters that their financial independence is of utmost importance - those stats will never change.

I work full time, have a child and am fully financially independent. If my DH decided to leave us, lost his job or just wanted to be a SAHP - I could support us without an issue. My mum and dad raised both my sister and me not to rely on anyone and I thank them for that every day. I appreciate not everyone wants to work FT when they have children - it is their choice, and I don't judge them. I work because I love the independence and security it brings me.

I can afford all the living expenses on my salary alone , I have savings & a good pension. Yes if single I will have to reduce luxuries & treats & likely increase my hours however I'm financially independent. I would say that's true for most of my friends.

Part of the point I'm trying to make is that actually being financially independent is HARD, it usually means working FT for your whole career, never taking your foot off the gas and it is a slog!

Huh? So women should opt out of ‘the slog’ and get a man to slog away instead? Fucks sake.

Part of the point I'm trying to make is that actually being financially independent is HARD, it usually means working FT for your whole career, never taking your foot off the gas and it is a slog!

But isn't there more pressure on men to do the above particularly of they need to be the sole earner for a family?

I'm in my late 50s and work part time. I have a stonking civil service "gold plated" index linked pension that I took early to enable this. No everyone who works part time has no other income.

(I don't tell colleagues about it as some work all hours god sends for much less....)