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!

Financial independence gives people more choice & freedom

You can see this more clearly via micro lending schemes

Education can also contribute in the same way

Dependence on a man is not inevitable for women. I decided at an early age I wasn’t going to go down that road, and I didn’t. I’m over 60, I have kids and I earn much more than my husband, so it’s not just younger generations who feel this way. If he left us tomorrow I’d be absolutely fine financially.

I would never, ever tell my DD she will “need” a partner to support her if she wants a “good lifestyle” (which is completely subjective anyway). That’s a horribly regressive message.

Just look at all the MN threads where women feel trapped with an appalling partner because they can’t support themselves if they leave. Financial independence, or the ability to become financially independent, is a path to freedom.

I think it is the middle ground where the debate lies.

Yes, to not aspire to work, seems unwise to me and a dangerous message to give to our children. I would give the message that people of both sexes should aspire to work. But I'd be interested to read stories and see data on how much it costs to run a household, alone, with three kids. I'd also be interested to hear stories and learn why some women are not supported substantially enough by their ex-partners after a split. I interpreted the OP as saying that they did not get financial help from their ex after splitting. That must be very hard.

I understood what you said and agree to an extent. People say one thing but do another. Sometimes it almost feels like a secret corpus of knowledge, this part of adulting.

For my part, I think there needs to be a lot more accessible and relevant personal finance education for everyone (it should be compulsory before you get married!).

I am a teacher and have been horrified over the years how many colleagues (both genders, variety of ages) don't know the pay scale, haven't read the pay policy and don't even try to negotiate salary on changing job. I mean, fair enough, there's often not much money in the budget but knowledge is power.

I run personal finance classes for sixth formers and they are always interested to learn -- but they tend to be a self-selecting sample.

OP, I agree with you. All in all, there are very few women with children who are genuinely financially independent on their own (as in - no contribution from a partner or from the government at all). And I say it as one of them, and no - I don't think there's anything particularly to be proud of here, as I am definitely a worse parent than I'd be if I was a SAHM.
I think the solution is that reproductive labour has to be recognised and compensated.

@FictionalCharacter

Dependence on a man is not inevitable for women. I decided at an early age I wasn’t going to go down that road, and I didn’t. I’m over 60, I have kids and I earn much more than my husband, so it’s not just younger generations who feel this way. If he left us tomorrow I’d be absolutely fine financially.

I would never, ever tell my DD she will “need” a partner to support her if she wants a “good lifestyle” (which is completely subjective anyway). That’s a horribly regressive message.

Just look at all the MN threads where women feel trapped with an appalling partner because they can’t support themselves if they leave. Financial independence, or the ability to become financially independent, is a path to freedom.

Would you have been equally OK financially had your husband left when your children were young?

You've missed the point - women SHOULD be financially independent where possible. All of your statistics prove that most women aren't - thus there's a problem, one that education and awareness can hopefully resolve

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

Living together is cheaper than living separately so of course if you have a partner living with you and you both earn, you are interdependent but independent too.

I am better off living with DH, as he is with me, but we both earn ok and we could go our separate ways if we didn't get on.

And I've never had to ask him if I could buy a pair of tights, like my mum had to with my dad, or if I could enter a running race.

Earning your own money means you can do what you want to do.

Shame on you OP - do a bit more research into domestic violence and financial dependence. Anyone who grew up a household like I did will be adamant that women must be financial independent.

@ChequerBoard - What should I be ashamed about? I am literally one of those women who has been financially dependent since 21 and raising two children on one salary, working FT.

Should I be ashamed to acknowledge that financial independence has become a trope, and is something out of the reach of many women? I'm not talking about professionals on MN who make 200k a year in their part-time consultancy roles. I'm talking about everyday people who have to rely on a partner to have some semblance of lifestyle.

When you are young, and looking to choose subjects to study at school, when looking at courses to take at university or college, and or career, stop and think, which will be the most enjoyable and allow me the most rewarding life i can lead? If its all about money then fine, or if its about something else its your choice to mske.

I kind of agree OP. A group of us who went to a girls grammar school and told we could have it all etc met up the other day.

We agreed we would at some point advise our daughters to have half an eye to jobs you could go part time on

@Waferbiscuit 'Should I be ashamed to acknowledge that financial independence has become a trope, and is so'

Yes you should - your point makes no sense at all. Just because you and many others have struggled to be financial independent does not make it an unattainable goal.

If all women thought that way we would never have got the vote!

.. in or arent all consumimg simply as we've seen so many who want to spend time with their children and found they cant pick their work back up or dont want to do the long hours anymore etc.

In our circle we know very few women who work full time.

There is no more reason for a woman to be dependent on a man than there is for a man to be dependent upon a woman.

UNTIL children. So women need to be married before they have children. Children WILL impact their earning potential. Choosing a career they can do part time also makes sense for this reason

It is not disingenuous to say any of this.

@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?

Why are you saying WORKWORKWORK ? It really doesnt make you look like you are intelligent or interested in meaningful debate but a bit silly.

The answer is to get men involved in CC and doing their fair share and thus enabling women to be financially independent.
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

Anecdotally Im surrounded at work by women who are now looking at working until 68 because they went PT to look after DC.
Many are divorced and very bitter.
Never rely on a man .

Christmasfluff exactly.

@ChequerBoard I don't think there's anything wrong with reflecting on the kind of things we are calling out women to do/be on MN.

A lot of the women stating the importance of financial independence on MN have partners making a lot of money so have never had to make it on their own. Some may not know how impossible it is to be financially independent on a low salary. Etcetera. Etcetera.

I am a huge advocate for financial independence and would like to think I am living what I preach. But other people may find that financial independence isn't possible or the alternative is easier.

I just don’t get the point here. Being financially independent is harder for women than men, and much harder once you have children. So.. it’s hard so we should stop telling women it’s a goal? How silly is that statement? (I’m financially independent by the way, work ft with two young dc, because I’m well qualified and like my work)

Anecdotally Im surrounded at work by women who are now looking at working until 68 because they went PT to look after DC. Many are divorced and very bitter.

@Templetreebreeze - That's depressing. It may be the sector I'm in/my peer group but most friends and colleagues have moved to PT and many women I know have left work altogether. At 52, I am the oldest person in my team at work - all the other women my age reduced their hours slowly and eventually left.

@Waferbiscuit

Anecdotally Im surrounded at work by women who are now looking at working until 68 because they went PT to look after DC. Many are divorced and very bitter.

@Templetreebreeze - That's depressing. It may be the sector I'm in/my peer group but most friends and colleagues have moved to PT and many women I know have left work altogether. At 52, I am the oldest person in my team at work - all the other women my age reduced their hours slowly and eventually left.

Its depressing for them Yes I agree which is why women should work to ensure their financial security not just hope their DH will provide for them.

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 that's not true 🙄

True would be the same for both sexes - if you have a partner and both work full time then you're more likely to have a good lifestyle. That's harder to maintain on one salary so its best to work as hard as you can and maintain your own income stream at the best level you can, to ensure you're as independant as possible if you're single by choice or chance. Don't ever rely solely on another person's salary.

I rely solely on my income for me and ds with just child benefit. The only thing I go without is annual holidays but I enjoy independence and not being man reliant.

I was a SAHM and worked part time when my kids were young. I hated work when I had young kids and found it very stressful.

Now I am older and don’t have to worry about the kids I absolutely love working and am happy to be working until pension age.

I also love being financially independent and divorced, but it wasn’t a priority when I had young kids.

A lot of the women stating the importance of financial independence on MN have partners making a lot of money so have never had to make it on their own. Some may not know how impossible it is to be financially independent on a low salary. Etcetera. Etcetera.

But surely the point then is to encourage women to build their career before having children, to not sacrifice their working life to protect the man in the very important job, to both take a smaller hit on their careers to support raising children. I can’t help but think it’s incredibly short sighted to take time out of the workplace completely because childcare will swallow a lot of the additional wage, or because his is the larger income. It creates a situation where women continue in low paying jobs and become increasingly financially dependent - I think it’s both fair enough to point this out and to actively encourage women to do it differently.

Most people, men and women, never have careers. They just have jobs.