AIBU to think it’s rather sensible for young women to consider earning potential/ wealth when choosing a life partner?

[OompaLumpaLabrador]

My mum always said that it doesn’t matter how wealthy or otherwise a man is, as long as you love each other. Which I guess is easy to say when, as a young nurse, you fell for a very decent and lovable surgeon ( my dad).

But I’m 43 now, and the life choices friends have made are all coming out in the wash. And the reality appears that those of us who opted to spend our lives with men and women with money have by far the better deal. There’s more freedom around healthcare, education, location, travel and work ( give up, part time, full time). The unpleasant and time consuming household chores are outsourced. There seems less stress in the partnerships because there are no money worries. The partnerships just seem easier. And if it doesn’t work out, a decent divorce settlement means women aren’t left high and dry.

Of course, love comes first. And maybe I’m getting cynical in my old age. But I’m not sure I’ll be giving my daughters quite the sake advice as my mum gave me. AIBU?

@OompaLumpaLabrador

saf1ya7 I think I agree with you. The high earning men and women I know seem no more likely to treat their partners like an ornament or skivvy than the lower earning ones. In fact, that's not really a pattern of behaviour I recognise at all. Nor do the high earning men and women seem any more likely to be arrogant, obnoxious or excessively materialistic. Their partners often have successful, interesting careers (perhaps because they met at university or in the workplace). They generally seem to enjoy happy partnerships with pleasant partners. Maybe I'm not spending enough time on superyachts or something.

I agree. But then most of the people I know are high earners - because of my profession, hobbies and interests. So they’re just people.

While a millionaire or a low earner would be the few example of their category. Is it fair for me to extrapolate what I think they are like just from these examples?

I will encourage both my son and daughter to always be financially independent, not to rely on someone else. I will also encourage them to always live within their means.

I will advise them to settle down (If they want to settle down) with someone with shared values who makes them happy.

I'd really worry if either of them were dependent on their partners financially. I'd never advise them to be a stay at home parent. If that's what they wanted I'd encourage even something one day a week so they at least had something if their relationship fails or they are unhappy and want to leave but can't.

I'd also advise caution against being the sole breadwinner and their partner being a stay at home parent. I'd hate for them to not be at least 50/50 parenting if the relationship failed because they kept the family afloat! Some parents just become a stay at home parent and it's basically tough if their partner isn't in agreement as they can't be forced to work. I'd hate for them to end up with someone like that!

Just the other day I read a poster say her marriage was very unhappy but she didn't want to risk losing her home and his money so she wasn't going to divorce him yet! What a miserable existence. Basically prostituting yourself for a house!

I 100% advise everyone to have a bit of money put away that their partner doesn't know about just in case. You never know if your partner will cheat or be abusive. And the people who say "I know mine would never do anything like that" are generally the ones it happens to!

There's an assumption in some posts that it's love and poverty vs no love and wealth.
These things are not mutually exclusive.

Unfortunately we all know that not all marriages end in the fairytale.

DM raised us to always have the skills to be able to support ourselves and our dcs, There are too many mums left with £7 a week to raise a child on.

There's an assumption in some posts that it's love and poverty vs no love and wealth.
These things are not mutually exclusive.
Yes you can have both. Equally you can have an average salary with/without love. I think we've all forgotten the people in the middle!

Zombie alert! This appear to be a thread from the 1950's

@AveryGoodlay

*There's an assumption in some posts that it's love and poverty vs no love and wealth. These things are not mutually exclusive.* Yes you can have both. Equally you can have an average salary with/without love. I think we've all forgotten the people in the middle!

Not only are the majority of people in the middle it also depends! £30K is the national median salary but judging by some threads on Mumsnet that's a high salary. Equally - early twenties without education/direction is different from someone a decade older still working a minimum wage job.

I tell my DCs to focus on their financial independence so they can have those choices through their own means.

It’s all very well having your own means, but if you are a woman who instinctively feels you will want to be at home with children for a period longer than your maternity provision will enable, then obviously, you need to find a man who is on the same page; who understands the value in you being with his kids and who is therefore happy and financially able to support this. Otherwise, it will be very a miserable and stressful life for you as a mum (if you are not comfortable using childcare for whatever reason).

Generally, I think couples gravitate on an instinctive level anyway towards like-minded individuals on these important matters. If it’s important to a man to have a wife who is happy to be with the children above her career, he will probably sense this about her, even before there is a discussion. Similarly, a woman who knows she would not want to use childcare will sense the red flags if she’s with the type of man that is one if the “separate finances - pay your way” types. These men are often quite obvious early on. As long as couples are on the same page, it’s fine.

The issue these days is that the cost of living is such that most families need two salaries to have a reasonable lifestyle. What they “want” doesn’t really come into it. They do what they have to do - which for many couples means children in full-time childcare.

It’s all very well having your own means, but if you are a woman who instinctively feels you will want to be at home with children for a period longer than your maternity provision will enable, then obviously, you need to find a man who is on the same page; who understands the value in you being with his kids and who is therefore happy and financially able to support this. Otherwise, it will be very a miserable and stressful life for you as a mum (if you are not comfortable using childcare for whatever reason).

Generally, I think couples gravitate on an instinctive level anyway towards like-minded individuals on these important matters. If it’s important to a man to have a wife who is happy to be with the children above her career, he will probably sense this about her, even before there is a discussion. Similarly, a woman who knows she would not want to use childcare will sense the red flags if she’s with the type of man that is one if the “separate finances - pay your way” types. These men are often quite obvious early on. As long as couples are on the same page, it’s fine.

The issue these days is that the cost of living is such that most families need two salaries to have a reasonable lifestyle. What they “want” doesn’t really come into it. They do what they have to do - which for many couples means children in full-time childcare.

This.

@abeanbaked

Eg your parents situation of the nurse marrying the surgeon is not as common as two doctors marrying each other. The boss doesn’t really marry the secretary anymore

Hands down one of the stupidest remarks I have read on MN

Why?

IME it's true. People tend to get together with people who are similar to them in some/ many ways. Not always obv but often.

Loads of people meet OH at work and a fair few still at it university.

It's true that those with similarities tend to get on. And that work esp in big companies or big orgs like NHS means a lot of dating and things longer term. Loads of opportunities to meet other. And similar role = lots to talk about.

Most people i know follow that pattern. Not all but most.

My parents are docs met in a hosp.
Their friends who are docs are married to docs. Like, pretty much all.
My granddad a surgeon married a nurse. He was born in 1905 though!
In my industry a ludicrous amount are married to those not just same industry but role! The women as successful or more than the men.

The people I know who are v religious with others with same beliefs, often met at religious things eg religious festivals, regular worship, volunteering etc.

Just thinking. It also seems often to be public sector people together, private sector people together, self employed together...

Why is it ridiculous to say what is... True?

Yes docs tend to marry docs. Obviously. Why is that the most ridiculous thing you've ever heard?

My friends who are PAs (v good job loads of potential) none of them have even slightly been near boss. Why would they? Bosses and PAs are often both married. Really dodgy work wise. And erm. Don't fancy each other. I mean why would they any more than other people?!

The nurses I know are married to men in the trades. And incidentally. Men in the trades can earn loads....

Weird post!

@THisbackwithavengeance

No-one is pointing out the obvious.

If you are a good looking or beautiful "high status" female with a decent personality, you will be able to attract a high status mate which invariably means someone go-getting, attractive and either a high earner or the potential of such.

If you are less attractive, low status and your personality is not great, you will be stuck with what's left.

It's no good telling all girls to aim high because it's not achievable for all women. If you are a 9 out of 10, you can aim high; if you're a 3, your options are more limited.

Of course there are outliers but generally that's the way of the world.

Sorry so many posts I am ???!!! at!

Where are women who are v attractive etc supposed to find these men?

Is it like. Go out hunting? I mean. Eh?

How do you even spot a man with 'potential' or know how much they earn when you meet them?

Due to where I work I have been to places after work where (it took me ages to realise!) young women were there to try to pull men who worked in that area.

I was always confused as to why the women in those places were so much younger and glam than the women working there... Someone had to explain

The men liked having good looking young women everywhere. But they tended to stick with workmates.

The blokes flashing the cash etc are wankers. And even if they do pull someone who likes the money. Those men are generally already married and no way splitting. Or end up married to guess what. Someone they met at work...

This thread is so weird!

It's like a cross between Victorian and pretty woman/ my fair lady

Totally agree with you.
As the quote goes…..money isn’t everything, but it’s easier to cry in a Mercedes than on a bicycle

@Bunchymcbunchface this made me snort, I've never heard this before, very funny though

@Playthetriangle

It’s all very well having your own means, but if you are a woman who instinctively feels you will want to be at home with children for a period longer than your maternity provision will enable, then obviously, you need to find a man who is on the same page; who understands the value in you being with his kids and who is therefore happy and financially able to support this. Otherwise, it will be very a miserable and stressful life for you as a mum (if you are not comfortable using childcare for whatever reason).

Generally, I think couples gravitate on an instinctive level anyway towards like-minded individuals on these important matters. If it’s important to a man to have a wife who is happy to be with the children above her career, he will probably sense this about her, even before there is a discussion. Similarly, a woman who knows she would not want to use childcare will sense the red flags if she’s with the type of man that is one if the “separate finances - pay your way” types. These men are often quite obvious early on. As long as couples are on the same page, it’s fine.

The issue these days is that the cost of living is such that most families need two salaries to have a reasonable lifestyle. What they “want” doesn’t really come into it. They do what they have to do - which for many couples means children in full-time childcare.

This.

But many women don't know - there's another thread on here about a woman who wants to be a SAHM all taken care of by a rich man (shouted at by her DP buying a £12 lamp) and she was all career driven and ambitious before the baby came along. I agree that couples should do their research, figure out how much a baby costs etc but people either wing it or change their minds later.

How can you know what you want before you have a baby?

It's such a massive change. How you feel afterwards is unpredictable.

I want to know given loads on the thread say yep get a man with plenty money/ potential and drive to earn lots of money.

What is the method for actually going about that in real life?

I know loads of men who are ambitious, v well paid, driven etc.

IME a lot of them are complete twats.

I also know lots of men who are clever interesting earn great money. Who you would never guess by looking at them. Who don't hang out in fancy places. Who are nice unassuming etc.

So are both types ones to hunt?

How do you spot the second type?

@NiceGerbil

I know loads of men who are ambitious, v well paid, driven etc.

IME a lot of them are complete twats.

I also know lots of men who are clever interesting earn great money. Who you would never guess by looking at them. Who don't hang out in fancy places. Who are nice unassuming etc.

So are both types ones to hunt?

How do you spot the second type?

Don't know how you find the first type but I met a lot of decent earning men in singles hiking groups, martial arts, things like that ;)

Everyone saying that women should earn their own money. It’s like you all have never given birth and experienced pregnancy discrimination, birth injuries that bench you for months/years on end, motherhood penalty at work, being left to handle childcare because the father won’t step down from his career, and all of the other shit that happens to mothers and takes away their ability to earn. Do you really not grasp that “earning your own money” means fuck all when you can’t earn because you’ve been left holding the baby? I was left holding the baby when I became pregnant by the man who raped me many times. I received a fair bit of government help financially. When I went back to work I got a high percentage of my childcare costs paid and 15hrs free childcare when my son was 2 increasing to 30 when he was 3. I built my career as a single parent, all whilst learning to live with the pain and trauma. Some days I woke and wondered how the hell I was going to even get out of bed. But I did it all for my son.

Also, many women choose to go part time or become a stay at home parent. Of all of my friends from closest friends to hardly friends at all, I was the only one to share parental leave with my partner when our daughter was born. All of the others said they/their partner didn't want to give up even a few weeks maternity leave.

I realise some women have it forced on them, but leaving is an option many refuse to consider as they don't want to give up the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

Tractor- were you hunting or was it accident?

You can find both types in city of London.

Canary wharf the first type are more prevalent but still plenty of the second!

Good luck to anyone who is bedazzled by cash and fancy watches etc and settles down with type a...

That’s are twats working in Tesco.

They are everywhere!

A job description is not a personality Nor is a salary a personality,

I live in an area where every other man probably earns well over 100- 200k and many are self-made multi-millionaires. All very personable, decent people who put their families first. The arrogant ones are in the minority. Very few divorces - in fact I can only think of one or two in 20 years. The wives are educated, confident women. Yes many are SAHMs, but they do loads and have busy, active lives,

I don’t recognise this weird stereotyping of ‘high earner’ = ‘wanker.’ Does this rule apply to women as well - or only men? It’s as ridiculous as saying low earning men are all frustrated and take it out in their wives - i.e. untrue.

This whole thread is so depressing. Maybe there are women out there who want to be a SAHP and in order to get that will seek out high earning men - and men out there who want a wife at home doing the cooking so will seek those women out to be their partners.

I just do not see the world like this and nor will my children.

Saf you are reacting to something that is not what I said!

But yes. There are a lot of tossers working in those locations.

Also lots of lovely men too.

As I mentioned earlier...

They don’t want wives at home to “Do the cooking.” It’s not about that. Not everyone wants a family life where both parents are working and juggling kids. They just don’t want the stress and they don’t want to involve other unnecessary people in their lives - ie childminders it nannies. It’s hardly compulsory!

So it’s totally reasonable women would want this too? Why it is always about women making ‘good’ decisions about who to marry?

Based on your reply are you teaching your sons that if they don’t want nannies and childminders they should seek out a high earning woman?

Because if you’re not then it kind of is a bit about a woman at home to do the cooking.

P.s not directed at you personally, just the assumptions that underpin most of society!