Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU for not wanting to go 50-50 on bills and other costs?

130 replies

bathoils · 13/10/2023 16:52

I suspect that I will be told that I am being unreasonable but here goes.

I am in a relationship that is loving and committed and serious. The relationship is great and he makes me very happy. I hope and believe that I make him happy too and I think we are a good team.

The issue is... DP and I are from a culture where typically husbands pay for essential costs, such as food, bills, and essential clothing. It is not expected that luxuries are paid for however.

DP was raised in this culture but I was not born into it. I entered into later on in my life in my very early 20s.

Long story short, and yes as anti-feminist as it might sound, I have zero desire to split bills 50-50 or even proportionally in relation to income. It is my strong preference that DP will pay a little more than me and that we split things 70-30, or that he perhaps pays the bills and food costs and everything else we split. He doesn't want to do this and I did not realise this when I entered into the relationship as we did have a lot of conversations around how we would like a relationship and marriage to be, but this part seems to have caused confusion between us.

Essentially, there is no meeting of minds on this matter and DP says that this is not the sort of relationship he wants. The problem is that when we started dating this is exactly how things worked so I was of the understanding that they would continue on in this manner.

I am not looking to freeload off my partner, and would be very understanding of him not wanting this set-up until we are married, which is also my preference, but to not ever have it at all has caused me to feel 'less than' and down and depressed, as though somehow I am not as valuable as the women who are in this arrangement.

It is also important to state that I do not intend to give up work or to become financially reliant upon my partner once we are married, so the argument that I will be making myself vulnerable is not relevant here I don't think.

Given that it is so much more expensive to be a woman ('the pink tax'), and the gender pay gap, and the fact that at present I earn considerably less than him (although in the future that is set to change), I feel it is only fair. Not to mention the fact that I will have to make untold sacrifices to have children with him, in terms of my body, my pension, my career stagnation, my mental health, etc. For those reasons and more it feels fair to me that the split should be 70-30 or similar.

Has anyone been in a situation like this and how did you figure things out?
Breaking up is not an option. I really do love him. It is just that this has made me feel sad and confused. It has also impacted my libido as I am stressed about what the future holds.

I have put my hard hat on and I am ready to be told I am being ridiculous. This is just the way that I feel however, and I can't really change that.

Thank you in advance for any advice or musings!

OP posts:
Coffeerum · 13/10/2023 20:24

WithManyTot · 13/10/2023 20:09

OP said,
"I have zero desire to split bills 50-50 or even proportionally in relation to income.

It is my preference that DP will pay more than me {..} that he pays the bills and food costs"

Just for clarity, Is this a fair summary OP?
I edited it a bit so I could understand, but is this your position? My impression is much of the thread has misunderstood your position

In what way do you think most of the thread has misunderstood…?

RMNofTikTok · 13/10/2023 20:25

Pixiedust1234 · 13/10/2023 20:15

I am only repeating what has been studied and published across the world. It's not just the UK if the United Nations are involved. The pink tax is something that is targetted at women. It really is a thing that a lot of people are blind to.

Yep! That's why I won't pay for anything

Libertass · 13/10/2023 20:31

Hearing a woman use the so-called ‘pink tax’ as an excuse for not wanting to pay her fair share makes me want to throw up and makes me ashamed to be female. We will never be equal to men if, even in the 21st century, many women just don’t want equality. It’s pathetic.

When me & DP got together I earned significantly less than him, but I insisted on splitting everything 50-50 as a point of principle and a matter of basic self- respect. Because I am his equal, not his dependent.

RantyAnty · 13/10/2023 20:36

Ignore the handmaidens and men larping as women.

I bet he's not wanting to go 50/50 on housework, cooking, shopping, childcare is he.

Laurdo · 13/10/2023 20:42

ChamaChamaChamaChameleon · 13/10/2023 20:23

I missed out the word 'many' but my point was that a lot buy unbranded stuff.
Even when discussing the range saying that products 'aimed towards women' are more expensive makes little sense as it's an average. If there are more women's products, but more expensive/high-end ones compared to men, then of course they'll drag the average up.

DH used to use the caffeine shampoo and it's bloody expensive. Don't know about Nivea or Dove for men but Dove has both cheaper and more expensive shampoos.

The point being.. saying women are 'forced to pay more' is stupid. We can just buy cheaper stuff. The fact that 'some' more expensive products exist doesn't mean we have to buy them. If companies slap a pink label on a bottle and charge more then.... buy the men's version? Since you KNOW it's the same?

Edited
Show quote history

Exactly. The worse example of pink tax was Anadin period pain. Exactly the same ingredients as normal anadin but more expensive. I'd never even buy Anadin when own brand paracetamol is available never mind pay an extra £1 for a pink stripe on a box.

Being a man or being a woman is as expensive as you want it to be. I've heard the argument "woman have more expenses because they get their nails done and buy makeup". Like those are essential things that all women must pay for.

RMNofTikTok · 13/10/2023 20:51

Libertass · 13/10/2023 20:31

Hearing a woman use the so-called ‘pink tax’ as an excuse for not wanting to pay her fair share makes me want to throw up and makes me ashamed to be female. We will never be equal to men if, even in the 21st century, many women just don’t want equality. It’s pathetic.

When me & DP got together I earned significantly less than him, but I insisted on splitting everything 50-50 as a point of principle and a matter of basic self- respect. Because I am his equal, not his dependent.

Did he split pregnancy, childbirth and child raising 50/50 too?

WithManyTot · 13/10/2023 20:53

Coffeerum said,
"In what way do you think most of the thread has misunderstood…?"

Because the majority of posts seem advise OP to demand some variation on contribution in proportion to ability to pay, which is what DP seems to be asking for. Whereas OP seems to ask if,
"I have zero desire to split bills in relation to income... he pays the bills", IBU which is a very different question

Jk987 · 13/10/2023 20:56

It should be an equal % of your respective wages not necessarily an equal amount in £.

Cultures are generally stuck in the past and many traditions are completely irrelevant nowadays. Take the good things from it and leave the outdated ones well alone. It's not all or nothing.

ChamaChamaChamaChameleon · 13/10/2023 22:22

WithManyTot · 13/10/2023 20:53

Coffeerum said,
"In what way do you think most of the thread has misunderstood…?"

Because the majority of posts seem advise OP to demand some variation on contribution in proportion to ability to pay, which is what DP seems to be asking for. Whereas OP seems to ask if,
"I have zero desire to split bills in relation to income... he pays the bills", IBU which is a very different question

Having re-read the thread, I agree.
OP isn't stuck on NMW while he's a higher rate tax payer. While she now earns less that is set to change.
I can understand her wanting the 'traditional' (eurgh) set-up if she stuck to a small job with pin money. But therein lies the contradiction...

OP will never give up work or make herself 'financially vulnerable' at the same time she wants to be compensated for a perceived loss of career and pension. She can't have it both ways.

Either she keeps her career and earning power, in which case why should her husband pay - it's both their salaries going out for bills and childcare. Even working part-time 3 days a week I'd say you can still have a 'career'.

OR she doesn't, gets a little part-time job, and accepts being supported by her husband.

What she can't do is earn a good wage (even if it's not 'as much', as her husband) and keep all of it for herself.

The other thing is - what's OP going to do with the money? Buy handbags? Squirrel it away as a divorce fund?

All very strange.

sunflowerdaisyrose · 13/10/2023 22:51

My attitude was everything 50:50 until engaged (sometimes either boyfriends or me would decide to treat the other - meals/holidays etc but loving costs and bills 50:50 regardless of income). Once engaged everything in one pot.

Mydogmybestfriend · 13/10/2023 23:00

Nothing anti feminist about this. He earns more than you, he can pay more.

Passepartoute · 13/10/2023 23:48

Mydogmybestfriend · 13/10/2023 23:00

Nothing anti feminist about this. He earns more than you, he can pay more.

You haven't read OP's posts properly. She wants him to pay more than her permanently, no matter how much she earns. She doesn't even want to pay something proportionate to her earnings now. Essentially she wants a man to keep her, even if she earns more than him. It's the absolute reverse of feminism.

Coffeerum · 14/10/2023 07:08

WithManyTot · 13/10/2023 20:53

Coffeerum said,
"In what way do you think most of the thread has misunderstood…?"

Because the majority of posts seem advise OP to demand some variation on contribution in proportion to ability to pay, which is what DP seems to be asking for. Whereas OP seems to ask if,
"I have zero desire to split bills in relation to income... he pays the bills", IBU which is a very different question

I don’t think people are misunderstanding at all though. They are simply pointing out that they agree with the partner and that proportional is the fairest way. So OP would pay less now because she earns less but she doesn’t plan to always be the low earner.
It’s clear most posters think the OP is being unreasonable for the latter statement.

ApiratesaysYarrr · 14/10/2023 07:15

Burnamer · 13/10/2023 16:56

It might also be worth considering whether your culture has expectations regarding who does house work and childcare and then whether you both want to follow tradition there too.

This.

PickledPurplePickle · 14/10/2023 07:34

Is this a reverse?

YABU and should pay your way

If similar salaries then 50:50 otherwise proportional to your salaries

Why should you pay less?

Climbingthehillfast · 14/10/2023 07:39

Are you on the mortgage/deeds?

LolaSmiles · 14/10/2023 07:56

It sounds like you've assumed that because he was born into a particular culture that he will have a certain outlook on money, but not discussed it before the relationship got more serious.

You're not unreasonable for wanting things arranged so that any time taken with having a baby, maternity leave, part time or SAHP periods are valued as part of the unit. You have been unreasonable though in going into a relationship assuming that a man will pay most of your life expenses simply for being a man.

Fairymother · 14/10/2023 08:05

Heatherbell1978 · 13/10/2023 17:06

Another ridiculously confusing approach to joint finances. Both salaries go into a joint account. All essential bills debit this account. What is left can be moved to joint savings and discretionary spending for each person. Ideally in a partnership or marriage each should have the same discretionary spend. Done.

This.
Everything else wouldnt feel like a marriage to me. Youre a team, one.

grayhairdontcare · 14/10/2023 08:13

I couldn't imagine not paying my share and living off another person.
But if that's your goal in life then good luck

Crazyworldwelivein · 14/10/2023 08:14

What works for us, we don't have any joint accounts, we split the bills 50 / 50, smallish sinking fund for potential house repairs etc, then whatever is left over, we spend how we like... Never any debates on how we spend our spare money.

newYear10 · 14/10/2023 08:23

amiold · 13/10/2023 17:16

You do want to freeload though and it seems he is aware of it.

You should pay proportionately to your income. Lower now and more in future when you earn more.

You say that it's a cultural thing... I bet there is other cultural norms you won't want to uphold because they don't suit you. Pink tax is also reaching a bit (buy men's toiletries etc if you're that fussed?) and the gender pay gap ... well lots of women earn more than men. where I work it's all role graded so I'm paid the same as a male peer for doing the same role and there are lots of women in higher management and lots who have had kids.

Just pay your way. "Love many, trust a few.. always paddle your own canoe"

This. It's embarrassing that you have this mentality in this day and age. You absolutely want to freeload of him.

newYear10 · 14/10/2023 08:26

MCOut · 13/10/2023 17:16

YANBU about splitting 50/50 because you earn a lot less, however, you cannot expect home to pay a massively disproportionate amount on essential expenses just because he’s male. You should suggest splitting proportionate to your income. This is a common and fair arrangement.

I completely agree with you re the financial impact marriage and children often have on women. It’s madness to me that we pay housekeepers and nannies 40k+ because we value their labour but everyday women do this for free and end up at a disadvantage. It should be acknowledged when planning family finances but you should cross that bridge nearer the time. Regarding how you’re feeling, I think you’re going to have to sit down with your partner and come up with different ways for you to feel more valued that don’t involve money.

Having children is a choice, you could easily not have that child and go work for that 40k. You simply cannot equate that two. One is a choice and the other is a job like any. I'm a sahm, who is expected to pay me for making that choice?

FrodisCapering · 14/10/2023 08:31

I am married with two children. Everything we earn goes into the one account. All bills etc come from there and we buy what we want. Out of courtesy, we would discuss large purchases.
My husband earns more than double what I earn and I took four years off when the children were tiny. We had this arrangement when I was earning nothing as well because we are a family. Now I work full-time.
It works best for us. There's no quibbling over cash.

MCOut · 14/10/2023 08:34

newYear10 · 14/10/2023 08:26

Having children is a choice, you could easily not have that child and go work for that 40k. You simply cannot equate that two. One is a choice and the other is a job like any. I'm a sahm, who is expected to pay me for making that choice?

Show quote history

My point is obviously not that sahm should be paid exactly what a nanny housekeeper would be but that it is labour, so sahm should have access to family money, money paid into a pension ect agreed with their partner.

MissTrip82 · 14/10/2023 08:44

I’m interested in which culture has this sort of old-fashioned tradition but is fine with living together before marriage. I