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

[ThisSereneSnail]

Split finances = split energy.

So I’m a same sex relationship between 2 women the one paying (because there should be one according to you) is bringing the masculine energy?

I’ve lived that dynamic with my ex (me emotional labour, him earning very high salary) and I one hundred percent would never do it again.

Financial leadership sounds like a phrase I’d run a hundred miles from.

I was all for equality in relationships. I never cared that my partner wasn’t ambitious and would never be a big earner, I was happy enough to go work and pay my own way. Then I had a kid. I thought he would pick up more of the childcare, and to be fair, he does some. However it’s very clear that he sees me as the default parent, and our daughter does too. I had to fund my own maternity leave and most of my weekends are spent with our daughter while he does whatever he wants (whether that’s watching TV, going to the shops, sleeping in or working outside). He will tidy up after himself, but that’s where it stops. He won’t tidy up after me or our daughter, and never cleans either. Even if he feeds our daughter, it’s up to me to do the dishes afterwards. I truly believed women could have it all, but now I see it for the crap it is. There’s too many men who still want the woman to do the childcare and housework but aren’t prepared to pay for it. I now see what a complete mug I’ve been for going 50-50 for so long. I know NAMALT, but I do think OP has a point.

What is it about men bringing masculine provider energy (I.e more money to the table) that provides you with “stability, initiative and loyalty”?

My DH earnt more than me for a short while when we met (I was a teenager) and I now earn much more than him. Never have either of our salaries determined the values we have, the way we treat each other or fundamentally changed how we work as a team. In some of your responses you seem to suggest that it is team work that you are referring to but then again, reiterate that your strengths are in emotional areas so you expect any DP/DH to pick up in your weak area, finances?

I truly believe that in a relationship you have to lean into your strengths, understand your weaknesses and as a couple, work out how those look together but as a prerequisite to any relationship? No, that doesn’t sit well with me. We have one life to live, I’m not going to determine who I spend my life with by how much they can bring to the table financially.

Have boundaries and values you stick to by all means but placing any bets on a man coming in with his big man masculine energy and hoping he’ll remain “loyal” is just naive (at best).

Money does not equal loyalty! Read some of the threads on here and some of these men are the most disloyal of all, they seem to think they can buy women.

I think it's a massive mistake for women to put themselves in a position of financial subjugation to a man, which is what you are saying. Huge mistake for everyone concerned and we advise our adult sons to be wary of women who plan to have their childbearing years (and beyond) funded. Not for the sake of the money but for what it does to the balance and mutual respect. I'm old, I've worked in male dominated environments all my life and heard how they speak about their stay at home wives far too often and seen far too many divorces bring out the absolute worst in people who have allowed that imbalance to develop in the first place.

Not at all - I’ve met men who are deeply emotionally intelligent and present, and I fully believe those relationships exist. My point was never “all men are useless,” it’s that in many relationships, women carry an invisible load that’s rarely acknowledged.

Some of us choose a dynamic where that effort is balanced not by duplication of tasks but my complementarity - emotional leadership and financial leadership working in tandem. If your setup works for you, great. Mine works for me too. No need for either of us to feel sorry for the other.

So if I bring in a good wage, that means I can outsource remembering birthdays, and don't have to bother with all the 'emotional energy' stuff? What about if my partner also brings in a good wage - do we have dual Masculine Provision privileges? What if one or both of us is a woman? What's it called then? I've always considered it to be called 'contributing equally to a household', but maybe I'm just doing being a woman wrong.

I feel very sorry for you.

I hear you - financial independence is important and I completely respect women who value a 50/50 model. But different setups work for different people.

I’m not talking about being a SAHP or opting out of contribution altogether - I’m talking about relationships where emotional support, practical effort, and the often invisible labour of running a home are recognised as valuable, not secondary to a paycheque. For some of us, that value exchange includes wanting a partner who leads financially - not out of childishness or passivity but out of mutual respect and clarity about what each person brings. If that’s not your version of balance, that’s fine but it doesn’t make mine less valid.

There is no 'leadership' in a balanced relationship. Again, you've made a very poor choice of partner - were you choosing from the dregs left over after everyone else had their pick?

What is the invisible labour of running a home?

Is it me or is their an increase in these ridiculous bait-y posts at the moment?

@ThisSereneSnail why do you feel you need someone else to lead when it comes to your money?

Yes because for me, it’s not just about who earns more but who leads financially in the relationship. If I earn more but still find myself covering the majority of practical and emotional labour, I wouldn’t also want to carry the financial burden on top.

It’s about balance, not income stats. If a man wants to take on that role and values the kind of emotional presence and home life I create, then what matters most is the dynamic, not the payslip.

Of course, this won’t work for everyone. But for those of us who want polarity in our relationships, this is what it looks like.

I think your thread title should be changed to just

To think you should never cohabit with a man

I’m not giving you heat, I’m asking why you think other women should engage in your personal preference.

They’re giving you heat because you’re coming off like somewhat of a gold digger who is telling other women how they are better off feeling and thinking – and that’s never going to be a good look.

There’s not discomfort because you’re hitting a nerve, you simply come across as arrogant.

I don't honestly know what the point of your post is then. You seem to acknowledge (in your reply to me, at least) that yours isn't the only way to have a happy relationship, so why does your thread begin "AIBU to think you should never cohabit with a man ......" which does imply that the rest of us are getting it wrong. Your thinking is woolly and your replies are waffly. You're not educating anyone. And before you say it, you're not having a debate either.

There’s not discomfort because you’re hitting a nerve, you simply come across as arrogant

More someone to be pitied.

No, I think it’s sometimes the same poster. There probably isn’t even a man in the picture. If there was and they were both happy with the dynamic why would you even be making a thread about it?

Let me guess You’re long term single and appear to hate men

I don’t think valuing masculine provision requires moving continents - it just requires clarity, self-respect and alignment with someone who shares your values. The idea that only certain regions or cultures “allow” for that kind of dynamic says more about how boxed-in some people feel than it does about the actual range of relationships that exist.

The OP has never said they are happy in their relationship.

And how long has this arrangement worked for you and your DP? (You didn't answer me when I previously asked you how long you'd been together.) Do you plan to marry? Do you have DC? And if not, do you plan to?

How many posts do we see from women who have unintentionally / inadvertently (or even with express agreement) ended up in a relationship with the dynamics the OP describes?

Each and everyday we see posts from SAHM and from women who do the bulk of the household stuff as the man earns more and 9 times out of 10 the women are complaining about the lazy arse men. Bringing money to the table isn't enough.

@ThisSereneSnail I think you have laid out an eloquent and persuasive case for what you believe in, but I don't think it works in reality. It's too submissive and passive for me.

So what are they saying?