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!

So you are asking the question why encourage women to be financially independent when a lot of women aren't currently financially independent? Why raise our daughters to strive for financial independence when currently a lot of women rely on a man?

Surely it is obvious that it is because so many women lack financial autonomy that we need to shout it from the rooftops? How else do we achieve change?

Kind of like living in 1900 and asking why women bother to shout about getting the vote when women can't vote.

Change happens when people shout! Accepting inequality has never changed anything

Because it's simply not true! Women can earn enough to fund their own lifestyle

@SnackSizeRaisin - Are you seriously saying that any woman should be able to fund their own life, regardless of salary/skills? Because realistically only women in the top 20% salaries can afford to so that. I'm on 60k as a single parent living of 2 in the South East and it is hard for me to get by on that salary. How is someone on 30k or 20k supposed to do the same?

Financial independence is impossible for many women so whether they work 2 days/week, 4 days/week or not at all they are probably still going to rely on another person to pay the hhld bills therefore they really aren't independent at all.

[quote Waferbiscuit]@Bathsandnaps how do you define financial independence? I'm assuming paying for all living expenses on your own?

Many of my female peers could survive on their own but they are in their 50s on professional salaries. However I don't know if the majority of women can pay for themselves - or if they did their lifestyle would be very poor.[/quote]
It stands to reason that two incomes = more comfortable lifestyle. If my DH and I were to separate, it's entirely possible the family home woukd have to be sold. But, because I work, I would have options eg buy somewhere smaller, or private rental.if I didn't work, it's likely my options would be more limited. That's a no brainer, surely?

[quote Waferbiscuit]@GappyValley I agree with you but I feel we ARE being disingenuous saying to women BE FINANCIALLY INDEPENDENT, WORK WORK WORK when it is almost impossible not to rely on someone financially. And many women are having a better quality of life NOT WORKWORKWORKing.[/quote]
But things will never change if people aren't encouraged to change it. Plus your stats are no doubt skewed by the older end of the age range when women didnt have so many opportunities and weren't as encouraged to earn and earn well. I will of course be encouraging my child to make sure her partner is ambitious and can pay his way too as it gives better opportunities for them all - but I dont think its disingenuous to be telling her to make sure she is also earning well and can support herself if necessary. And to be fair, just like her mum. I am the breadwinner. So is my sister. Our mother was a SAHM. I'm pleased our mother disingenuously told us to work hard and be able to support ourselves. I've never felt I've needed a man, chose my husband for love not money, have a fulfilling career, a partnership where we are both responsible for my child and I'm not stuck doing wife work all the time which wouldn't be my choice (appreciate for some it is).

I don’t know Takeaway. Housing is very complex. Women with middling jobs or even low paid jobs can fall into a trap where they are too poor to get a mortgage but too wealthy to get help from a housing department. Housing association properties are often better in many ways than private rental.

I think it would have been financially better for me and my kids if I had been a SAHM during divorce.

@VettiyaIruken

So you are asking the question why encourage women to be financially independent when a lot of women aren't currently financially independent? Why raise our daughters to strive for financial independence when currently a lot of women rely on a man?

Surely it is obvious that it is because so many women lack financial autonomy that we need to shout it from the rooftops? How else do we achieve change?

Kind of like living in 1900 and asking why women bother to shout about getting the vote when women can't vote.

Change happens when people shout! Accepting inequality has never changed anything

👏👏👏

Small children require a lot of care
Either one or both of their parents need to provide it or it has to be paid for by one or both parents
It's expensive and the state gives some means tested help with that.

The issue comes after that when children are bigger and childcare costs have reduced. If the woman bore the whole brunt of doing the childcare then for many their earning ability will never recover plus assumptions are set in stone that she will do all the childcare and housework. That's where the pay gap and the wife work burden starts and is maintained.

If everyone is happy with that situation for ever then maybe it doesn't matter but if the woman wants to go back to work or if the man starts to resent having to pay and, as happens all too commonly, he blames her for not having as much earning power now, starts to resent her and disrespect her then this is where trouble starts.

In my view the solution is to share things more equally from the start. Both go part time eg 3 or 4 days a week each. Unless you truly do not want to work and are happy to do housework and child care forever AND you are confident that your husband will value that contribution for ever then you should be wary of the common trap of the woman returning to work part time and being pressured to work the equivalent of full time both at home and at work trying to please everyone with no time for herself.

Been there, done that and got the T shirt.

I will encourage my daughter to marry a man who sees her as an equal partner and is willing to make sacrifices himself for his family not a man who sees her as an accessory to prop up his successful career and life and the one to do all the sacrificing

@forinborin Yes, if my husband had left when the kids were young I would have been OK, though it would have been hard of course. We had our children late in life. I’ve always earned much more than him. Much better situation to be in than dependence on a partner and knowing you’d be in dire straits if they left.

@CovoidOfAllHumanity

Small children require a lot of care Either one or both of their parents need to provide it or it has to be paid for by one or both parents It's expensive and the state gives some means tested help with that.

The issue comes after that when children are bigger and childcare costs have reduced. If the woman bore the whole brunt of doing the childcare then for many their earning ability will never recover plus assumptions are set in stone that she will do all the childcare and housework. That's where the pay gap and the wife work burden starts and is maintained.

If everyone is happy with that situation for ever then maybe it doesn't matter but if the woman wants to go back to work or if the man starts to resent having to pay and, as happens all too commonly, he blames her for not having as much earning power now, starts to resent her and disrespect her then this is where trouble starts.

In my view the solution is to share things more equally from the start. Both go part time eg 3 or 4 days a week each. Unless you truly do not want to work and are happy to do housework and child care forever AND you are confident that your husband will value that contribution for ever then you should be wary of the common trap of the woman returning to work part time and being pressured to work the equivalent of full time both at home and at work trying to please everyone with no time for herself.

Been there, done that and got the T shirt.

I will encourage my daughter to marry a man who sees her as an equal partner and is willing to make sacrifices himself for his family not a man who sees her as an accessory to prop up his successful career and life and the one to do all the sacrificing

Spot on. I and dh both went part time and shared the childcare. It’s a shame this is so rare.

@SnackSizeRaisin - Are you seriously saying that any woman should be able to fund their own life, regardless of salary/skills? Because realistically only women in the top 20% salaries can afford to so that.

No, it’s about encouraging women to gain skills to achieve a salary that lets them fund their own lifestyle and gives them options. You don’t need to be high earning to do it, but you do need to cut your cloth to suit. I don’t earn enough to buy a house in certain areas so I don’t live there, I don’t earn enough to drive a prestige car, so I don’t drive one, I have a nice house in a good area, a good, reliable bog standard car etc etc. I don’t need to earn £60k to sustain my lifestyle, but I do need to earn more than minimum wage.

You create a life you can fund, and fund the life you have.

Thanks for your post OP, makes me feel less guilt for not being the perfect independent feminist, having children have been a complete blow on my earning potential.

OP in all your posts you are automatically factoring in that the woman is solely responsible for the children

Of course a single woman with no children can 100% support herself just the same as a single man can. Surely no-one is doubting that.

Children are a shared responsibility of their mother and their father. Nearly all children do have a mother and father it's just that their father has abdicated his responsibility in many cases and that is why it appears 'women can't support themselves'. They can but they might not be able to support themselves and 2 or 3 or 4 children with no or far from 50% support from the father.

It's actually men and boys we need to be addressing and getting it through to them that having a child is not something you walk away from. You are equally as responsible in a relationship or out of it for your child.

A large part of why SAHM earning potential is reduced in later life is because of the massive prejudice against women who have been SAHMs, not because they are actually ill equipped for work.

I was no less competent after being a SAHM than a bunch of recent graduates. I am no less financially independent at 50 on 26 grand than a 25 year old is.

@Waferbiscuit

Because it's simply not true! Women can earn enough to fund their own lifestyle

@SnackSizeRaisin - Are you seriously saying that any woman should be able to fund their own life, regardless of salary/skills? Because realistically only women in the top 20% salaries can afford to so that. I'm on 60k as a single parent living of 2 in the South East and it is hard for me to get by on that salary. How is someone on 30k or 20k supposed to do the same?

Financial independence is impossible for many women so whether they work 2 days/week, 4 days/week or not at all they are probably still going to rely on another person to pay the hhld bills therefore they really aren't independent at all.

You are really muddling the issues up

Being financially independent doesn’t mean ‘if your DH left tomorrow, you should be able to carry everything on as normal as if nothing happened’

But it does mean if you’re in a part time role for convenience, you are able to up your hours to full time and be able to survive
It means you know how mortgages work, it means you’re not in the mind boggling situation I often see posters say they are in where they ‘joint’ account is one in the man’s name but where both salaries get paid

It means in the event of a divorce, your lump sum is a tidy deposit for a house that’s a downsize but still adequate because you have the mortgage capacity to cover the rest

It means that by all means take your foot off the gas while you’ve got young kids and want an easier life while your DH earns extra but always have half an eye on how you would get yourself back up the career ladder if you needed it

‘OP in all your posts you are automatically factoring in that the woman is solely responsible for the children.’

This is fair enough though surely? The point of financial independence is that if your partner turns out to be an abusive arsehole you can do a runner and independently support you and your children. If your DH is a lovely man who would never abandon his children or abuse his family, financial independence isn’t really an issue.

No

Valley, that sounds personal to you. I don’t consider a woman who rents to lack financial independence.

it is almost impossible not to rely on someone financially.

Well that's a ridiculous statement really

I'm married with young children have a good job which I work full time but has a good work/life balance and I'm also financially independent as I earn a lot more than my husband. I don't rely on him for anything

@CovoidOfAllHumanity

OP in all your posts you are automatically factoring in that the woman is solely responsible for the children

Of course a single woman with no children can 100% support herself just the same as a single man can. Surely no-one is doubting that.

Children are a shared responsibility of their mother and their father. Nearly all children do have a mother and father it's just that their father has abdicated his responsibility in many cases and that is why it appears 'women can't support themselves'. They can but they might not be able to support themselves and 2 or 3 or 4 children with no or far from 50% support from the father.

It's actually men and boys we need to be addressing and getting it through to them that having a child is not something you walk away from. You are equally as responsible in a relationship or out of it for your child.

That is also very true. I shall be drumming all of these things into both my son and my daughter. I hope that having modelled how a woman can work full time and give them a great childhood, support them in a lovely home etc without their father will be influential in terms of their values as adults.

@andivfmakes3

it is almost impossible not to rely on someone financially.

Well that's a ridiculous statement really

I'm married with young children have a good job which I work full time but has a good work/life balance and I'm also financially independent as I earn a lot more than my husband. I don't rely on him for anything

I agree. It is utterly ridiculous. Yes, it involves planning prior to having children usually. But it is by no means impossible, given that many of us have done/ are doing it right now!

You need to replace the word woman with parent throughout for any of what you have said to make sense or be true

It is very difficult for the primary parent to be 'financially independent' once children come along

Families with children do often require 2 incomes and that is why lone parents are often eligible for state benefits

None of this is about being a woman though it's about being a parent. A single father or a father who is the resident parent after a divorce would be in the same position

What we have to ask ourselves is why is it nearly always the woman who is in that disadvantaged position when it takes 2
people to make a baby.

Why do we accept that we should be the only ones to take a career hit for childcare by going PT? Because 'that's a woman's role' because 'he earns more than me' 'Any real mother would not want to leave her baby to work' ' my husband could never do his big important job part time'

If we just said fuck off to all that patriarchal bullshit then let's see if women can support themselves

I’m teaching my daughter that she must be one of the women that can support herself.

As a child I grew up in an abusive home and I was very aware that part of the reason my mother stayed was financial. She worked, but our life would have been a struggle without my father’s much larger income.

My own family and social circles are obviously skewed, but uniformly the women in my generation have managed to achieve financially self-sufficiency.

My message for all girls is to aim for financial independence. Don’t settle for a system that tries to make you a dependent. Force the world to change. My mother’s generation paved the way for a very large portion of my generation to succeed. We are trying to build on that, but we can’t do it alone. Girls have to work hard in education. They need to think about the earning power of their potential careers. I’m not trying to victim blame. I know the societal messages are strong. I was often the only woman on my university courses in the 90s. My own daughter loves science and she still deals with being the only girl in science clubs. I know she can’t be the only girl who likes science, so why is she the only one there? Girls and their parents are still subconsciously making choices to keep women dependent.

@LibertyMole

A large part of why SAHM earning potential is reduced in later life is because of the massive prejudice against women who have been SAHMs, not because they are actually ill equipped for work.

I was no less competent after being a SAHM than a bunch of recent graduates. I am no less financially independent at 50 on 26 grand than a 25 year old is.

The reason is because they often take periods out of work whilst others are climbing the career ladder, gaining skills, pension, accrueing leave and pay increases. Do you really think someone who is a SAHM for 5 years has the same skills starting a new career as someone who has been training in it for 5 years? Really unrealistic and not prejudice at all !

I also wanted to add that women who have strong careers in place when they have children may step out or step back when having children. I did. I focused on our very high-needs child and let my DH earn money. When I decided I was ready to work again, I was back to my high-earning salary in days because my skills are in high demand.

This is what terrifies me about women who have no skills. If their partner becomes abusive, they need to be able to get a job ASAP. A good CV is your best insurance.

OP, your post makes me think of Homer Simpson’s infamous advice for Lisa & Bart.

‘Kids, you tried and you failed. The lesson is; never try’ 😐