To think you should never cohabit with a man unless he’s paying the majority of the bills?

[ThisSereneSnail]

Split finances = split energy.

Watch out everyone - it’s a first time poster!!

So what was the point of this thread? If you don't care whether anyone agrees with you, just want people to do what works for them in their relationships and you're not suggesting anyone live how you live?

Why post saying you should never cohabit with a man unless he’s paying the majority of the bills?

So you live like this with your partner?

or are you single and trying to edumacate women who are in relationships/married how to ‘wife’ properly - based on zero personal experience?

Ha, depends on what you’re after. Masculine Provider Energy doesn’t do cashback but it does offer stability, initiative and loyalty as standard.

Bit harder to find on a comparison site but worth holding out for.

Certainly sounds like it.

I see the logic of what you are saying in your subsequent posts provided what you mean is you want to provide emotional etc leadership and “in exchange” your partner provides what you term “financial leadership”. But that’s you. Fair enough, and I think all you’re really saying is you value the different inputs equally (good luck finding a bloke who does) but to suggest that everyone should (a) do so (though I think they should do); and (b) that the male should always provide the “financial leadership”. If I had an “equal” split but each with a particular “role”, I would want the financial role. As it is I do pretty much everything and it’s infuriating. I’m working on it and if I succeed we will be splitting the roles between us for practical reasons, but no reason why one person shouldn’t take each role, but to suggest financial should always be the man isn’t even an accurate reflection of historic roles, leave alone a good template for relationships today

DH doesn’t need to provide financially for me as I can do that myself but he has always offered stability, initiative and loyalty as have I - it’s called an equal partnership.

Sounds like a contrived excuse for you to pay less Op

There’s actually a lot in your comment I actually agree with, especially about women giving too much too soon without clarity or commitment. Whether that’s cohabitation, emotional investment or domestic support, it should come with standards.

I don’t necessarily believe marriage is the only guarantee but I do believe in not moving in with someone unless he’s showing up with real intention and responsibility. Too many women treat live-in relationships like a shortcut to closeness… but end up settling for the illusion of partnership without the foundation. That’s the part I’m not here for.

So why are you on here? What made you think, I know I’ll pose this question on MN.

Are you the protect and provide poster?

I was talking about masculine energy in the context of relational dynamics - things like leadership

What does this ‘leadership’ look like? That he makes all the decisions, tells the rest of the family, including the wife, what to do? If not that, what does it look like? I’ve been married decades and we don’t have ‘leadership’ roles, but ‘teamwork’ roles so I’m intrigued.

This whole thing seems odd. Like trying to cover a lack of work ethic with a word salad to make it palatable to other people.

I would argue that your standards are extremely low and you have made a very poor choice of partner. Most women expect a partner who contributes financially, emotionally and practically and have found amazing men who deliver on all of that.

So as long as your partner pays all the bills it’s fine if he isn’t emotionally intelligent and doesn’t do any housework? Nah, that sounds shit.

That’s great your setup works for you, truly. But nothing I said implies I expect to be a “dogsbody.” Quite the opposite.

I tend to give a lot emotionally and practically because I want to, not because I’m being exploited. But I also want to feel secure and supported in return and for me, that includes financial leadership.

It’s not about expecting men to do nothing emotionally - it’s about both people contributing differently, not identically. If 50/50 works for some, that’s great. But others, like me, thrive in polarity, not perfect symmetry.

Also what happens when these rinsers lose their looks?

Will the masculine energy provider reinvest in renewal feminine energy (late 20s, still soft energy but without the wrinkle & sag)?

This type of financial dependency philosophy certainly comes with risks. I'd much rather pay my own way / live within my means.

@ThisSereneSnail , are you going to reply to this and other posters asking about your previous posts and also reply to the poster who asked how long have you been married / been with your current partner ?

Honey, this ain't the 1900s anymore. Women can now do more than be a housewife.

But I’m not? I do very little in terms of maintaining the home (I don’t cook, clean or iron - DH does all of this). He takes FAR more care of me and the relationship than I do. I earn more, and so contribute more financially.

It’d be blatantly unfair for me to expect him to pay more as well as give more emotionally.

I think you’re deeply unreasonable for assuming a man can’t do the ‘women’s work’ you’re referring to. My masculine husband does all of that just fine, and I contribute more financially to even the score.

Your attitude is a big part of the problem as to why we don’t have gender equality.

I'm all for talking about how in a society that increasingly needs a relationship to have 2 full time wage earners to survive financially, we recognise that one partner (usually female) can end up doing an unfair percentage of the domestic toil as well. I've been married twice (widowed) to men who were quite capable of doing the washing up and buying birthday presents (for eg) as well as earning a wage.

Expecting fairness and consideration from partner is one thing This twaddle about "softness" and "polarity" and "leadership" (from a man) isn't it.

Who cares? Clearly a few people do - enough to ask, challenge, and debate. That’s kind of the point of a forum like this.

And yes, I prefer a dynamic some might call “traditional,” but I also think it’s worth discussing why that still sparks so much discomfort in 2025. If it’s truly no big deal, why the heat?

Why on earth would you accept a relationship where your partner doesn't step up and do all these things, just as much as you do them?!

Do you actually understand what 50/50 means?

It doesn't mean that you do exactly 50% of everything. It means that you do 50% of the work in the relationship.

That does look different for every relationship. You don't have some magic relationship recipe here. You're just telling people that they're wrong because they're equal...

thrive in polarity. Pretentious drivel.

Surely a lot depends on salary. If one of you is earning ten times what the other is then they contribute more (based on percentage).

@ThisSereneSnail its a simple question you can’t seem to answer: are you

a single
b in a relationship
c cohabiting in a relationship
d married