If a man can't afford to keep me

[sunshinesparklestar]

I'm not sure how well this post will go down but AIBU to find it unattractive if a man can't financially support his wife and family? I mean to the point where the wife doesn't have to work if she doesn't want to.

I am a SAHM to my child who is now in school. I have been a SAHM since my maternity leave ended and I have no plans on going back to work. My DH runs a business and earns enough to comfortably support us all. I have things in place which mean I would be financially secure if he was to leave me/pass away and for later in life.

The main AIBU is to find a man who couldn't financially support his wife unattractive? There's a couple who live down my street and she has to work full time and I feel sorry for her leaving so early every morning and coming home way after her children have finished school.

I totally agree with women working if they want/need to but I can't help but feel sorry for them.

Why feel sorry for them? She might want to work.
I had a sahm which was fine when I was in primary school but as I got older I started to resent her as I felt she was left behind, uneducated and came out with a simple understanding about alot of things. I couldn't understand why she didn't want to be something better or more ambitious, and also....even tho our family got by on my dad's wage, 2 wages are always better than one! Extra money is never a bad thing for better holidays and treats.

Also, what if your husband becomes ill? What if he ends up with something that doesn't kill him but an illness that has an impact on his life and ability to work?

I know plenty people who are sahp but just don't have the same gold digger attitude. They at least want the beat for their families

If it works for you all well and good.
I work because
A) I need to
B) Not a chance in hell would I be 'kept' by a man
I couldn't think of anything worse than asking my partner for money or relying on him to pay the bills.
You do you though

This in spades....

No you didn’t, you said “A man should be bringing security to a woman”. We all can read it. And the point stands a woman should marry for love and bring her own security. It’s not the 1950s. And marriage isn’t cut to benefit the man. That’s up to the couple. I can assure you mine is equal as it would be if we split.

dont tar us all with the same brush.

Smug and complacent is never a good look...

Bankrolled by your family, fully dependent on your misogynistic husband.

I would feel sorry for you, if I could summon the energy.

I work full time, and still manage to run a household and look after my child, no one does it for me. So I should bloody well think you can too 🫨 looking after your child is not a job.

In the same way that you pity your neighbour having to go out and work, I pity women like you for having nothing else than being a housewife/unemployed

For what it's worth, I do think the OP is being purposely goady here. She could have just said that she finds 'provider' type men attractive. She didn't need to include the bit about feeling sorry for her neighbour or whatever.

On the other hand, endless comments about 'living off a man' and 'don't you get bored' etc etc etc are equally ridiculous.

I became a SAHM after my first child. I only did this because -

a) I wanted to
b) Why use childcare if you can do a better job yourself
c) We could easily afford it
d) My husband always worked for himself and didn't really take a fixed income as such - it was more about managing investments and he has quite a lot of freedom in that respect.
e) He wanted what is best for his kids and he knows full well that I can give them that (as opposed to a nanny)

We went in to have 3 more DC and I never returned to work. I found being around for my kids more interesting and fulfilling and that's the simple fact of it. I have never been 'bored.' No, I wasn't cleaning all the time because we had cleaners.

However, I would not have been a SAHM if it had meant my kids (or me) had to go without, in any shape or form.

I would not have been a SAHM if DH wasn't supportive of that. Or if he was manipulative or financially weird.

I would not have been a SAHM with a man who didn't respect me, or what I'm doing

I would not have been a SAHM if I'd been feeling bored or restricted by the role

I would not have been a SAHM (long term) if it meant I would have been financially vulnerable.

In short, with a different husband, I might not have been a SAHM. I might have only done it for a couple of years. Or I might have had less children.

It's all relative. I am not financially vulnerable for having been a SAHM for 20 years - it's quite the opposite, to be frank, because he has been freed up to make a lot more money than otherwise and our family wealth is in joint assets.

These days, I'm 50 and discovering new interests all the time. DH is also basically retiring now. If I am perfectly honest, now, at the old age of 50, I do retrospectively respect DH more for having financially provided for us all. He has put 4 kids through independent schools and now uni and I have been free to focus on the kids, without any other demands on my time. I feel very privileged to be in this situation, especially now. I have enjoyed my life. When I was younger, in my 30s and 40s, life with 4 kids was full on and I didn't really have time to reflect on 'roles' - we just did what came naturally to both of us and got on with it. But also, I think the 'difference' in our roles is what bonded us in a way, because we freed each other up to do what we wanted. Also, in his culture, men still have a sense of pride in supporting their families. The difference is subtle, but it's there nevertheless and, to be honest, I respect that far more than the type of man that seems to be emerging in Britain today, who feels no responsibility in this sense, or who buggers off and then questions paying maintenance.

I’d pity you too op, I’d think what a boring life.

I'm a SAHM and would never judge a working woman, in fact I think I admire a woman for having a brilliant career. It's a choice isn't it, we do what we can afford, what is right for our families , what is right for us. We are all different, value different things, need different things to keep us happy, it's always the downgrading comments 'oh I would hate to stay at home all day' ' I would be soooo bored' etc , ok that's fine but what's wrong with absolutely loving it? It's like we aren't allowed to admit we might like it.
we aren't just defined by having a job, we aren't defined by just being a mum. There is so many layers to a person, we can't judge.

Also in real life and on mumsnet I find the snobbery against you as soon as you say I'm a SAHM is unbelievable. It's like people think they can look down their nose at you, again we are more than just our career. I also feel me and my husband are still a partnership but we bring different valuable things to our home and family, neither is less or more important.
we both value each other equally.

the comments on here saying it's pathetic, embarrassing etc are downright awful. I can't believe in 2024 us women can't just support each other , which ever way we choose.

I personally find men who expect to 'keep' a wife very unattractive. The ones I've met tend to consider women to be lesser to men and expect their wife to do all the less respected work of domestic duties and child rearing, whilst patting themselves on the back for being the 'breadwinner'.
Yuck.
And my husband would definitely find a woman less attractive who expected to be 'kept' and had no personal drive to have her own career and contribute financially to the family, especially once children are older.

This.

So what happens if you end up injured or or go down with a illness. Money only lasts so long, and benefits are naff all.

I think you went off on a tangent there. Look as long as you and your husband think you bring equal value that’s all that matters, no one else’s opinion of your life choices count.

Men don't tend to get their heads turned by the secretary. They tend to get their heads turned in the office by a younger dynamic version of themselves but female (so another professional) who is earlier on in their career and younger in age so is not tied down with all the children and domestics. She is ambitious and basks in the glow of an older married colleague and he drinks in her youth and admiration and promise of the second taste of freedom.

TBH … both parents earning enough to hire a full time nanny is very attractive. Much more than a needy …

Yeah the secretary trope is an old one harking back to the days when the only women in the workplace were secretaries. They’d be going for the junior associate these days.

I think you sound very smug and how you could possibly say you haven’t meant to offend anyone with your post I do not know.

"They’d be going for the junior associate these days."

You do realise that these days, very high earners tend to have flexibility to WFH. I don't know a single man who has made millions who is still going into an office every day in his 40s. So who is going to 'turn his head these days' - the cat?

People who peddle such stereotypes just show have no clue.

What about men that don't want to work? Isn't it very unattractive when a woman can't provide for a man so he can be a SAHP?

Thanks for your input 👌

I’m so happy for you. All the best.

Do whatever you want, I guess. Oh, but you can't, can you? Not if he decides whatever you want, he isn't going to pay for.

Enjoy your golden cage.

YABU. I think most people prefer a relationship on an equal footing with their partner. Being a SAHP for a few years is a very valuable role, but at some stage ylpeople will need to start widening their outlook otherwise they may become rather unattractive and too insulated.

To be fair, if a man wants to have his head turned, he will find someone to turn it regardless. If he doesn't he won't regardless of how many scheming secretaries and ambitious young women are floating around.