Controversial marriage question

[wedding12341]

Thinking about another thread on here where someone has moved in and had children with their fiancé who has now changed his mind about getting married. Someone on the thread said it is just a small minority of women that are disadvantaged by marriage.

Eg - the woman brings more assets / money to the marriage than the man.

Based on the above

If you were one of these women in the minority (or your friend / daughter was) - Would you advise them not to get married?

So as in my situation I provided the bulk of financial support. Took on the bulk of the mental load. STBEH unilaterally decided to stop at home. He did take the kids to.and from school and provided after school care. Now having left for a younger model he takes half the savings and half my pension. Younger women building a career beware. This will happen more as time goes on.

It baffles me why some women marry men who have nothing. Second marriages children grown up two women I know still get married. Just why? One is very minted and the other now has a big mortgage that started in her fifties as he had no equity. I think these women are very naive. Just my opinion. They were both homeowners and did not need financial help. In both cases the men were renting.

Probably because ‘we’re’ told that caring about money, even though money means financial security, makes a woman a terrible, shallow gold digger of a person. It’s virtuous to not care about it, regardless of the consequences of that.

There’s also a prevailing narrative, even in this thread, that you can have love OR money, never both.

This is MN land, where -

(1) woman earns less than her partner = finances should be shared equally

(2) woman earns more than her partner = he's a cocklodger and she should protect her assets

This is MN land, where -

(1) woman earns less than her partner = finances should be shared equally

(2) woman earns more than her partner = he's a cocklodger and she should protect her assets

Massive oversimplified there.

More like:

This is Mumsnet land where -

1. Women recognise in the majority of situations women take a financial and physical hit when they have children and therefore it is right that in those situations the family unit's money is fairly allocated
2. That when one part of the family unit (male or female) is spending more time at home with the children and doing more domestic load, their contribution to the household should be recognised, often in the fair sharing of family assets.
3. Women recognise that many women end up in highly precarious situations where they end up financially precarious situations, eg their male partner expects them to stay home/go part time whilst living in his house and she's not on the deeds etc.
4. That marriage is a legal change that can affect things such as inheritance, which is why it's important if people are moving into second marriages they consider the impact on their children and any inheritance they wish to pass to their children

5.. That marriage is a legal contract, not just about soft and fluffy feelings, which is why it's important that BOTH people make an informed decision about whether to marry or not.

This whole if sexes were reversed stuff isn't the gotcha people think it is.

Are the same posters stating both of the above?

Personally I’m of the opinion that everyone should consider whether they’re financially compatible with their partner, and I would encourage anyone, male or female, to protect any assets they don’t potentially want to lose.

That's not true. I'd say the same if my partner earned more than me - especially since this is a relationship for both of us where we were married before and want to protect our own assets for our own kids.

Are the same posters stating both of the above?
No there not and I don't think I've seen a thread where a woman earning more than a man makes him a cocklodger either.

Usually the posts about being a cocklodger are where a man who doesn't work, or does the bare minimum, moves in with (or expects to) a woman who has a decent job, her own house and then expects her to bankroll him. Alternatively cocklodger suggestions also on threads where a woman is the main earner and the man seem to be out of work more than in work, is forever doing 'businesses' that don't bring in money, wants to quit his job again because he's yet again had an issue with colleague. Or they're threads where a couple are together, have children, the woman is working full time, then does everything around the house, and does everything with the children, meanwhile her partner does next to nothing around the house, contributes very little financially and seems to think that the woman is there to pay all his bills, cook all his meals, clean the house, raise the children and have sex with him.

When we got married we didn't really know what assets we would have, no idea how our future would go. He was earning slightly more at the time and brought some savings, but since then I've paid off half the mortgage with an inheritance. However his parents are very wealthy, and he is set to inherit a substantial amount one day. We've built a business together, so we do have a written agreement of assets in case of dispute. I don't actually like the idea of marriage now, so I wouldn't enter into it if I were my current self.

I'm the higher earner, always have been. We have been together 25 years and have DC together. I haven't wanted to marry. Apart from anything else I think it's a bit overated!