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!

Surely dependence/independence is a scale? On the on hand you have women who could survive easily on their own salary, have their own pensions, own their own home. On the other you have women who have been unmarried stay at home mums for years, with no income, pension or right to the family home. Most of us will fall somewhere in between, as will many men- DH couldn’t afford to look after DD on his own either. Encouraging people to be more financially independent is a good thing, but just because you can’t reach the far end of the scale and be wholly independent doesn’t mean you should just give up and stay home

ONS says 92.3% of men with dependent children are in employment (Full time84.3%, Part-time 5.4%).
I’d love to know how many of those men are non-resident parents and how many of those non-resident parents contribute meaningfully to the financial cost of those children. All too often when a relationship breaks down the woman ends up with the bulk of parenting responsibilities and minimal financial support, hence the advice to be as financially independent as possible. That doesn’t necessarily mean working full time but it does mean keeping your financial health firmly in the picture when planning a family.

All too often the decisions made in the haze of love, marriage and child birth don’t stand up to the cold light of relationship breakdown. No one anticipates being left holding the baby, until they’re left holding the baby.

Hmmm... I earn more than my husband working part time than he does full time. A few of my colleagues are in the same boat

I’m a high earner as is DH (both expats in technical roles). I earn slightly more than him. We obviously haven’t always been in this position.

I have, however, always been able to financially support myself since I left university. There were periods before we had children when we lived alone in separate countries. We both benefit from a dual income household now but I absolutely don’t need his salary to live a comfortable life. All of my colleagues and most of my friends are the same.

Your post OP, highlights exactly why we need to be encouraging women to prioritise their financial well-being themselves, rather than relying on the good will of men. It isn’t disingenuous whatsoever.

I think promoting it on MN is more about warning if the dangers when you need financial independence and its not there. Its insurance. I understand what you mean that often it is an easier life with shared finances but it's the same as saying that not paying an insurance premium means you have more money that month but you regret it when something happens.

I agree MN can be quite blasé about how hard financial independence can be to achieve as a mum. I've seen some ridiculous suggestions coupled with the concept of thousands of expectations of what it is to be a good parent that do not correlate.

Threads where posters are being told to financially protect themselves whilst in the same breath denouncing them for too much time at work away from DC.

I am now and mostly always have been financially independent from Exdh and DP. It was incredibly hard at times to balance everything but when my marriage ended it would have been absolutely horrific had I not been full time employed on a good wage.

It's a goal for most and I can speak from experience that life may seem easy in a marriage or relationship but when it's not, the financial ability to get you and your DC out is indescribably vital. Life will be easy day to day but the day you need it those financial barriers are terrifying.

I don't think it should ever be the case to teach young women to expect to be reliant on a partner but I do think the reality of life should be discussed. I love DP and have no problem marrying him. But at my age I have learnt to keep the war fund , to keep topping it up (it went during a job loss in covid and is now being restarted). I have and will make sacrifices to fund it because experience teaches me it is only an easy life until something goes wrong. That can happen for anyone at anytime. Reliance in someone else will not protect you when that happens.

@Waferbiscuit to answer your question, it’s all my own money in my pension pot. I was widowed a couple of years ago and before my husband died I was supporting both him and me for a couple of years. I always earned roughly double what he did. Yes, my house is nice because we had two incomes for quite a few years, but I already owned a house when we met and he was still renting then.

Being financially independent is hard, it does mean working full time and not having periods of being a SAHM. But it is the ideal because it puts you in control of your own life. That applies to men as well as women. I am so glad I always worked full time because my late husband became an alcoholic and everything went massively tits up in our marriage. But I could keep myself and our DDs going because by then I had a good career with a decent salary.

I wouldn't want my DDs to be in the position several of my friends found themselves in when their husbands dumped them for a younger woman.

Just because something isn't the current reality that doesn't mean it isn't worth aspiring to.

Men on average live shorter lives, men are more likely to die from car crashes and other so-called accidents, indeed men are more likely to die from Covid 19.

So even before you consider reasons such as escaping abuse or coercive control, there are enough reasons to have the concern about financial dependence.

What point are you trying to make? That because there is a gender pay gap and having children sets women back financially/professionally, women should give up their autonomy? 🤔

As a society, shouldn't we be encouraging men to enter careers or work hours that are viewed traditionally as being 'women's work' and be dispelling the sexist and outdated notion that the domain of parenting is primarily the role of the woman?

Suggesting that women may as well surrender their rights for equality and fairness due to their biology, societal expectations of gender roles and that men are ultimately worth more and therefore deserve more pay inflicts insidious socio-economic damage on the most vulnerable in society and only further corrupts the most privileged in society with greed and indifference.

Being financially independent is hard, it does mean working full time and not having periods of being a SAHM.

Not necessarily. I work part time and am financially independent, it did mean working very hard to reach a point in my career where I could step back easily and still have a good salary. It also meant having children later in life (something that as it turned out wasn’t in my control anyway), and making decisions about lifestyle but I don’t need to work full time to support myself and my kids.

Choices, blessed choices. These, or the lack of them, are what matters when the chips are down.
Earning one's own money, even if, at present, one is part of a partnership where two incomes contribute to maintaining a family's lifestyle, will grant a woman a wider range of choices both during the relationship and after its dissolution.
OP, you mention lifestyle. Many of the women I work with are living well on state benefits, either exclusively or topping up lower paid work. Infinitely better off than living in an abusive relationship with a well remunerated spouse.

But then as a 50-something woman your experiences will be very different.

I've just turned 50 so at the bottom end of this age range. It's true that women's opportunities changed very quickly so my opportunities as an educated woman at the bottom of the age range were much greater than the opportunities for a woman ten years older who didn't have the opportunity to go to university (I was at school with girls whose parents though a university education was wasted on girls and of course even for my age range only a small minority of people were able to go to university). I earn more than DH but I know only a few couples our age where that is true, even fewer where the women don't work at all though. Most people can't afford that luxury.

I agree with other posters that you are incorrectly disregarding the part time workers as not able to support themselves.
I work part time, my salary is almost 3 times the national average full time salary. If my relationship broke down and i could increase hours.

I work part time and my husband works full time, but my reduced hours are to facilitate the raising of our mutually owned children.

Yes there are basic clear gains to pooling financial resources in a couple but that’s obvious surely? And doesn’t necessarily mean the woman is dependant.

Your post states the percentage that are in work, out of work etc, not the % who are happy and financially stable which is what counts.
I am a single mum of one, I work full time (always have), own my own home, have my own pension etc. I am able to provide for us comfortably and I will retire at 62 or 63.
Had I not maintained my career I would have had to tolerate a controlling, misogynistic ex who carefully hid his views until I was 6 months pregnant and fully believed he had achieved a housekeeper for life. Who told me to my face at 6 months that 'no one else would want me now'. When I left he tried to starve me back and only contributed to childcare when I armed myself with a solicitor and threatened to expose his behaviour to his friends.
There are a lot of manipulative men out there. I am terribly concerned about two of my friends suffering the same with their exes, but who cannot afford to leave.

So no, the MN view is not disingenuous.

@riotlady

Surely dependence/independence is a scale? On the on hand you have women who could survive easily on their own salary, have their own pensions, own their own home. On the other you have women who have been unmarried stay at home mums for years, with no income, pension or right to the family home. Most of us will fall somewhere in between, as will many men- DH couldn’t afford to look after DD on his own either. Encouraging people to be more financially independent is a good thing, but just because you can’t reach the far end of the scale and be wholly independent doesn’t mean you should just give up and stay home

I have to agree with this. Financial independence is the ideal for everyone. Not everyone can be completely independent but it shouldn't stop them striving for some form of personal security. I've only been actively using Mumsnet for a few months and I've seen countless posts from women trapped in abusive or unhappy relationships because they don't work, have no savings and can't afford to leave. There are also posts from SAHMs lamenting the fact that they can't afford things and don't have access to their working partner's account.

I work part time, but I'm a high earner (yes, I know that MN has lots of those). My DH is also a high earner but only earns slightly more than me. I also know that my employer would take me fulltime at drop of a hat. I could absolutely support myself if I ever needed to, and my career choices have been based around round this
Same. I've technically been "part time" (4 days)since I had DC1 six years ago, but it's a skilled and well paid role and in that time I've increased what I earn hugely. If I'd taken time out altogether, it would take me years to get back to where I was before DC rather than being on nearly double that, FT equivalent. I plan to go back to FT hours, compressed/flexible, in a year when all my DC are at school FT. I also have the long term option of very well paid self employment, so I can control my own time round my life. I've built my career with that in mind. I have my own pension, savings, and assets as well as our joint ones.

Would I have the same size of house/quality of life on my own without DH's also high income? No, but nor would he. (Unless he died rather than left, in which case I'd be set for life.) Could I house and feed my children and have a good life with everything we needed on my own and a good retirement? Yup. And I love that. I love that I am with DH because I actively choose to be, because he improves my life, and not because I need him or couldn't pay the bills without him.

I spent all almost all my married life safe in the knowledge I could walk out the door if DH pissed me off because I would still be able to have a decent standard of living I then had a major illness and am now disabled. Whilst I was waiting for occupational health and the reports from the consultants and my GP was the only time I have felt financially vulnerable. I was thankfully awarded my quite decent pension. So if we split up now it would be harder for me financially than when working but I have an income still. My standard of living would slip a little but that is more to do with being disabled. When couples split a slip in the standard of living is quite common it just depends on how far that slip is.

My Mother left her first husband back in 1960 as he had affairs, she instigated divorce which was quite rare back then. Shen told all her daughters to never rely on a man for money. She was by no means perfect but she was 100% correct and it was the best advice I was ever given.

Your OP uses phrasing that implies that you think that the status quo for mothers and work/earnings is women’s fault. (Eg ‘most women don’t make enough money to support themselves on their own’ ‘rely on someone else’s income to maintain their lives’.)

@Dozer - I have tried not to be critical and in the next paragraph explain the gender pay gap and the many other restrictions that can limit women's salary or ability to work.

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.

Because some of us don't believe that.

I will be encouraging my dd to be financially independent because I believe that this will offer her the greatest security and freedom in the longer term. Yes, it means that she will have to work hard, but I see no particular value in idleness.

My SAH mum taught both my dsis and me about the importance of being able to support ourselves financially because she bitterly regretted the fact that she couldn't - despite the fact that she is still happily married to my dad, who has always supported her.

My dsis and I both heeded her advice. Both of us could support our families comfortably on our incomes alone, and we like it that way. Why would I teach my dd that she needs to depend on someone else?

Surely dependence/independence is a scale?

@riotlady - This is a really good point. I get frustrated when MNers claim to be financially independent but all they're saying is that they make enough money that if everything went tits up, they would be okay --- as often they have savings amassed through the benefit of being in a high-salaried couple. That's not the same as paying for everything yourself as a single parent - but that's for another post.

We see time and time again on here. Women who have been totally blindsided by their marriage ending and finding themselves in a financially vulnerable situation or unable to leave an abusive relationship due to economics.

A lot of us have see it in real life too.

The point isn't that women should always work full time, but that they should leave themselves choices, have an exit plan in case they do need to support their family by themselves.

To not assume that their partner or husband will always be there to support them.

That might mean having an escape fund rather than working for example.

Btw I work part time and earn six figures. I know many others working in professional roles part time that could easily go back FT if their marriage ended and support themselves. PT working isn't always pin money.

Learning the importance of being financially independent and budgeting money are skills we must definitely SHOULD be teaching in schools, @Waferbiscuit! I am late 40s, single (never married), no kids and have always worked. Everything I own I have paid for myself, including car and home. I would hate to be financially dependent on anyone else! You cannot put a price on the satisfaction you get from, for example, booking a nice holiday or ordering a good bottle of wine in a restaurant and thinking, "I paid for this myself!" I have no respect for women who expect men (including both current and former partners) to support them financially. It is not an attitude or way of life I can relate to.

Op, your assumption that the sats don't show that independent financial security is achievable so we should all stop advocating it on MN is ridiculous. Every week there's a post from someone who sleepwalked into dependence, looking for advice. I imagine for every 1 of those posts, another 500 in a similar set up reads it, and hopefully, after seeing the outcome and advice, makes changes to get some independence back. Not to mention those with daughter's who need to be brought up to expect to be independent.
Advice of 'marrying well' is old fashioned and unrealistic with average UK salaries circa 31k.

@paralysedbyinertia is right. The OP's views just support the status quo that leaves so many women in unhappy situations. 'Being a bit of a slog' is a terrible reason to risk financial dependence.
My dm was of the generation who were forced to give up work when they married. As a result she had a much less happy life than she could have had.
We should do everything we can to avoid that being true into the next generation, by educating daughters that independence is not just a good idea but fundamental to a happy balanced relationship.

Learning the importance of being financially independent and budgeting money are skills we must definitely SHOULD be teaching in schools, @Waferbiscuit!

@Rosie492 I agree with you although I'd prefer to change that to 'teaching at home' as I don't expect schools to teach all life skills. What I'd like them to teach in school is how investments work/accrue and how the stock market functions (and how to use it). Now that should be essential!