[quote thepeopleversuswork]@ancientgran
I just think it is so hypocritical to say a lower earning woman should make sure she's married but not tell men the same because they have as much risk of losing what is their's
In theory that's true..
But in practice, in a scenario with a lower earning man and unless the lower-earning man is a SAHP, marriage just skews the financial odds further in the man's favour.
The point of marriage is to protect whichever partner is taking on the bulk of the childcare (with the assumption that its negatively impacting their lifetime's earnings, which it usually does).
In the majority of marriages where both parents work outside the home the woman is still doing the lion's share of the childcare, domestic work, mental load and all the rest of it. And therefore likely damaging her own career potential even if she is out-earning her partner.
So on the point of divorce a man who earns less than his wife but does little or nothing in terms of childcare or domestic labour can easily walk off with half of the assets most of which were generated by a woman who had to do two full jobs (a job and then all the domestic jobs).
I've seen this happen in at least half a dozen situations: a woman is run ragged trying to hold onto a high-flying job, a bloke is doing a "creative" or part time job which he enjoys but which brings in very little money, doing minimal childcare and no housework. The woman gets pissed off with the imbalance and kicks him out. They divorce and he gets half the assets.
In the vanishingly rare scenarios where a man stops work altogether to be a full time parent and is in the home its more than fair for him to take half of the assets in the case of a divorce. In the case of the vast majority of marriages where two parents are working, its a lose lose for the woman.[/quote]
Ah. It would appear you know my 'creative' ex husband.
There seems to be a lot of him about! 
.