To be amazed how much women benefit financially from marriage

[Singleparent78]

I've been single most of my adult life, worked FT and built up a good career but despite this... I'm always struck how much better off women who are married are than me.

It's not just about the merging together of two salaries, but about how much easier financial life is when you have the benefit of a man's higher average income, giving many women a lifestyle they could never afford on their own salaries.

Consider:

• the many women I work with on low salaries or working part-time who are living much nicer lifestyles than I as they have a man significantly supplementing them.

• the married women I know at 45+ who have moved to part-time or stopped working as they have accrued significant savings with their dh but, critically, their dh is now a high earner who can pay for both of them.

• the girls from school who didn't go onto further education, got married soon out of school and haven't worked at all or a bit of p-time - they mostly live in nice houses and cars, have enjoyed nice holidays etc. There hasn't been much 'penalty' for not being independent or not having a career.

All in all these women, by way of marriage, seem to have an easier go than solo me slogging it out for 30 years working FT and trying my best to be independent.... like the teachers at school told us girls to be!

I understand: all the constraints on women to generate their own income esp the gender pay gap and the impact of childrearing; that the above scenarios don't apply to all couples; that I'm assuming a heterosexual set up; that women contribute within marriages in other way than bringing in income; and that assets in a marriage are shared as is any income that comes into a marriage. I know people might think I'm being anti-women for challenging women's choices or women's rights or just plain bitter...

Still, AIBU to wonder:.......Is it not depressing that the best or most common way for women to be financially comfortable or create wealth is still through marriage and the merging of assets with a man?

@Singleparent78 So women just can’t be arsed?

It would just be nice to be able to have a shower and ask the father to mind the baby while I do so.

A good marriage will generally always make life easier but it’s luck of the draw. I don’t know who was being told being single and independent was easier, just that it was easier than a bad marriage. Being single and independent without kids will inevitably be much easier married or not, being in a bad relationship will be the hardest floored by being a single parent. I’m fascinated to know more about the message women felt they were being pedalled and how they felt it’s failed them, would someone really expect to be better off single?

That wasn't what. But that it still remains true that for quality of life and financial security, an easy default is marriage.

followed by not floored by!

Of course it would be, for both men and women generally, who told you otherwise?

Just for women?

It is nuanced in reality and the contributions of both partners in a marriage should be acknowledged. That’s why generally there should be a 50/50 split with assets accrued during the marriage and anything less isn’t really fair. At the end of the day the decision has been made by both parties as to the division of labour. It’s not fair the unpaid work isn’t acknowledged but at the same time the woman hasn’t been forced to sacrifice her career. I do raise my eyebrows at women who expect them and their children to be maintained to the same standard of living as when they were married. Yes they shouldn’t live in destitution while their ex lives it up but at same time they shouldn’t expect their ex to live to a lesser standard of living than themselves and generally of course both going to have a lower standard of living once separated. That was always an accepted fact, think a lot of animosity caused by any other expectation

"But men don't make more than women until they're in their 30s"

We've covered this before. That's a recent thing. For a middle aged man know, he would have made more than the average women even when he was younger. For those of us older than that age group, the wage gap isn't just down to having children.

Coming to this very late but the answer to the question “is marriage beneficial to women?” very much depends on their financial status. As the breadwinner and the one who brought assets to my marriage the answer was decidedly no.

my divorce wasn’t ruinous for me but it left me significantly poorer because I arbitrarily had to pay him about one third of my assets even though he pays no maintenance.

The OP appears to take as read that the man will always be better off than the woman and while this is still true in the majority of marriages it’s less automatically true.

For financially independent women marriage is generally a very bad idea. I would never risk it again unless I was marrying someone very wealthy.

For which you need to own a house that is underoccuppied, or at least just own a house/flat, and for that you quite often need more than one wage.

Of course it would be, no one should of ever pedalled the myth that single parenthood easier than being in a good marriage. Obviously if your in a bad marriage and your husband drinks away all the money as well as not watching the baby then your better off single

Men do alright out of it too, I get dinner cooked and the occasional blow job...

But, seriously, don't compare and contrast as many women will be married to arseholes, and have a worse life. And having children can bugger up a lifestyle as well..

A woman capable of earning their own good salary can usually manage perfectly well. Its relying on a partners higher income permanently that is risky. IMHO.

Interesting points

I think age and property prices are the driving factor

I don't know any PT women from uni or current neighbourhood / school / work who are either under 45 or who live in London. Some work compressed 4 days.

Think the old cushty 'marry and chill' of the boomers will never be seen again - unless you live in deprived parts of the U.K., marry a local entrepreneur or have hidden depression / neurological conditions (ie can't work). It's not affordable.

I work Ft on £110k a year have 3 kids. DH earns £130k but has 2y more experience due to me taking 9m maternity leave 3 times. We're 39. Have same skills / background

I would never ever give up financial independence. My mother and 3 aunts who did and initiated divorces aged 48-50 after being SAHMs are all very bitter and much much poorer.

A gamble for a few years of more time as young kids (what, 8-10y of a lifetime if you have 2 kids 3y apart) isn't worth being potentially poorer from 45/50 if ditched until you die aged 80+

DH wfh 3 days a week and me 2 so other than after school club they like going to 3 days, everything is 50/50. He walks them to school each day.

Talk to people under 45 to get the true picture of what is happening next

Btw my workplace (large bank) has 45% senior managers on £90k + .. times have moved on

Sorry meant 45% female senior managers

She's just said she didn't have a choice, yet alone a different choice.

I definitely won't be joining in for the bashing of SAHMs but equally people should understand that having a choice in whether to put your children in childcare or not is a privilege not all women have.

Btw my workplace (large bank) has 45% senior managers on £90k + .. times have moved on.

The data shows that women are underrepresented in senior posteriors despite being over represented in professional occupations.

It is improving but we don't have equality and the pandemic has set women back .

I do understand that - that was my point. That often the choice is giving up a career for childcare (which the OP is judging) or work but put your very young kids in full time, wraparound childcare.

Also, the implication that childcare at 6 months is somehow inferior is not pleasant and not true.

Full time wraparound childcare at six months is definitely not in the best interests of the six month old. That’s not judgemental, that’s fact.

I married for looks, not income. I've earned more than dh my entire life. And I don't earn the mythical mn 6 figure sum; I'm a teacher.

Next time, I think I'll marry for money.

It's not a fact, it's your opinion. It's in the best interests of the child to have a home, and food, and clothes. If the parent or parents need to work full time to provide that, then the childcare is very much in the best interests of the child.

@Mumwantingtogetitright

Good for you. Sounds like you're a great mum and you're daughter will do well.

Did you put yours in full time wraparound childcare from six months when you had another option?