To think a lot of women only preach independence until a high-earning man comes along?

[BluntOliveViewer]

Feminism until financial comfort is on the table.

I have been married twice over a period of 28 years. I have never ever depended on a man for money, always earnt my own. I have installed the same value in my 22 year old DD too. YABU

What I see on here time and again is women being royally fucked over by not maintaining their financial independence and career.

Its all great in a divorce when you think about getting a split of assets but you have to earn enough to pay the bills etc.

Any woman who gives up their financial independence and career needs their head looking at. Money = Choice

DH earns more than me and is a "high earner". I've given him 2 children and I do 80% of the work raising them so I don't see why I should have to be independent tbh! We weren't meant to raise children without support- it's hugely labour intensive!

If something awful happened I could manage on my own.

They’re pretty deluded if they do, look at all the threads where high earners either nag about how money spent on day to day basics are spent, unfairly split money talking about how the other can’t afford something etc etc. Saw someone saying the other day ‘if they’re well off there’s a reason’ and they were hopped on,but it’s very likely true, the most well off people I know watch every penny to an insane degree

I am very committed to staying financially independent. I've worked full time since I was 16 and progressed in my career. However - I have a better standard of living as part of a pair than I would on my own. So many bills are halved if you are in a partnership so the life I'd lead on my own would be less fun than the one I lead as a couple - for my husband as well.

So our lifestyle does rely on both of us working - in that sense I am not 'independent' as if he disappeared tomorrow I'd have to change something. But I would have options and I wouldn't struggle to feed my children. I'd think about downsizing or dropping some of my daughter's ballet classes, or maybe getting rid of the car... not whether or not we would eat. It's very, very important to me to maintain that and it's important to my husband as well so he's not the only one with the pressure to pay the bills.

Another no.

I continued to work and build my own career regardless of who was in my life.

I was married once for a short while but I didn't enjoy it. I have a partner now but we earn similarly. I have no desire to marry again.

I wouldn't want the sort of man who wanted me to become dependent on him. Financial independence is the most important attribute woman can possess and my daughter has been brought up similarly.

Men who encourages financial dependence often have many other traits that would make us incompatible.

You are being silly and goady.

Absolutely not. I love being independent, in charge of my household, free to do and go where and what I like, choosing where my income goes, and I'd never want to financially partner with a man. I'm not well off, but working on some ways to increase my income, and wouldn't want a man anywhere near it, rich or not.

So yes, there’s nuance. But it’s still worth asking are all those ‘independence first’ declarations rooted in principle or just placeholder positions until something more materially comfortable comes along?

Are you a man? Becuase this has a bit of a twinge of bitternest to it that I don't understand and it certainly isn't anything I've seen in real life. I know plenty of women who believe strongly in needing financial security and quite a few who had good jobs and who, subsequently to realising their careers etc would take a backseat have insisted on that security through marriage, financial equivalence even while being the lower earner or non worker etc. And I'd say all of those things are good and healthy and are, frankly, the biggest advantage of marriage (in my case, DH is hugely protected by the fact that we're married. Which is good becuase if we ever divorced, ther eality is that I wouldn't be where I am now if he hadn't stepped up over all those years).

Get better friends! I don't know anyone like this as I surround myself with people who are not entitled, shameless spongers.

You again? Yawn. You do seem to know some dreadful people. Maybe get out more.

Who is making these "declarations" OP? And what do they say when they change their minds and "embrace a traditional dynamic"? Is it actual friends of yours and have they really all met men rich enough to completely support them even before children are considered or come along? It's kind of hard to know what you are critiquing without evidence of it.

On the face of it, it reads like you have been watching all those manosphere short videos with both men and women talking about how relationships should be... if that's the case then bear in mind dating coaches etc are all grifters and not sharing wisdom!!

I don’t know anyone who preached independence in the first place, perhaps we are just hopeless romantics

i do admit my second marriage did have inheritance tax laws in mind just a little bit

I’m a woman and not bitter, just observant. Of course many women value financial security and make thoughtful, principled choices around career and family. That’s not in dispute. My point is simply that sometimes the public rhetoric around independence doesn’t always align with private choices, and that’s okay to acknowledge. It doesn’t mean those women are wrong or bad but it’s fair to ask whether all empowerment messaging is consistently lived.

You’ve made a really valid case for the strengths of equitable partnership and I completely agree that marriage can and should be mutually protective. That’s actually part of what makes these conversations worth having… not to judge but to explore the gap between ideals and outcomes.

Nope

Absolute bollocks. I dont know anyone like this. Especially these days as a lot of couples keep separate finances.

I think it shifts when kids come along, not the man.

In my social group, a lot of financially independent women either didn’t return to work after having DC or quit to be a SAHM not long after returning. The pull of your children (especially when little) is strong. It takes a huge amount of will power to drag yourself back to the office if you don’t have the financial need.

I went back and maintained my career and now my kids are independent (and expensive!) teens, I’m very grateful that I stuck with it. At the time though, I was constantly doubting my decisions with everyone around me asking why I’m bothering to return to work when my DH has a very successful career and money was no problem.

What I have seen, quite a few times, is that a woman with a career and a job and independence marries a man who earns more than her. And then they have children. And very quickly, it becomes clear that becuase he earns more, and because he's a man and has been socialised this way, the expectation is that he will work and she will do everything else. And then, before you know it, she's working part time, or has taken a sideways or downward career shift, or become a SAHM when that wasn't her original plan.

Yep. In my case though, I decided to continue to work FT and still got to do everything else, whereas DH just....works (and earns more than me in doing so).

Not here. DH earns many multiples of what I earn working full time. We could easily afford to live on his salary. I have no intention of giving up work/dropping my hours because a) I think being the sole breadwinner is an unfair responsibility if it's not necessary b) who knows what could happen in the future (divorce/redundancy etc) c) I've seen too many relationships where the busy, high-earning husband loses respect for his financially dependent spouse and d) I like my job, I'm good at it, I make a difference and feel I'm contributing to society.

It’s not about manosphere content - I avoid that nonsense. It’s more from personal observations, conversations, and even what people post online. I’ve seen a pattern where independence is strongly emphasised… until the prospect of full financial support from a partner enters the picture. Then the tone often shifts. I’m not judging the choice itself - just highlighting how quickly principle can become preference when comfort is on offer.

But again, what "public rhetoric"? Two things can be true- it's both important to work to maintain choices for yourself and not be trapped, and it's desirable for many of us to be in partnership with others.

when you're 22, or when you're 49 and divorced, choices might look like earning all your own money and refusing to give up that independence to be supported by a man.
When you're 27 or 32 and having kids, choices look different. It isn’t a gotcha - just the way people live changes.

I think people are complex and fall into different buckets

Women who want to have successful careers and marry successful men
Women who want to marry rich and be SAHMS
Women who have successful careers and are not bothered by their husband's success
Women who are not bothered about careers and are not bothered by their husband's career

In my experience, most successful women fall under #1.

I have always worked, as has my DP. Sometimes I was the higher earner and sometimes he was.
We are pretty equal money wise / power in the relationship wise.

However, when covid hit and I was made redundant and he was the only earner I suddenly felt like a trad-wife-type. Like I needed to be more submissive, do more without complaint, be less feminist and more feminine almost!

I wasn't keen on the dynamics shift. But if he did suddenly earn loads of money I would quit my job and get my hair done more...

I like a higher earner and that has served me well since my ex and I separated. In the meantime I have and always maintained my own income, because I don't have the attitude necessary for relying entirely on a man.
That being said - if a high earner wants to find me - treat me well and maintain a respectful relationship, I'm not going to say no.

I’m a woman and not bitter, just observant. Of course many women value financial security and make thoughtful, principled choices around career and family. That’s not in dispute. My point is simply that sometimes the public rhetoric around independence doesn’t always align with private choices, and that’s okay to acknowledge. It doesn’t mean those women are wrong or bad but it’s fair to ask whether all empowerment messaging is consistently lived.

People are different. They want, prioritise and aspire to different things.

Could you really not work that out for yourself?

My point is simply that sometimes the public rhetoric around independence doesn’t always align with private choices, and that’s okay to acknowledge. It doesn’t mean those women are wrong or bad but it’s fair to ask whether all empowerment messaging is consistently lived.

I don't think that a woman who chooses to work less / not at all and rely financially on a man's work, or who accepts that to live a certain lifestyle requires relying on the man's income is "only preaching independence until a high earning man comes along".

I think such women are usually make slightly different choices that, if they are doing it right, do not reduce their financial independence.

What I see far more often is that women think they are retaining financial security becuase their partner is paying and meeting all the bills and they assume he is a good person who will always treat them fairly and then they are completely blindsided when they've given up careers and taken on the childcare to discover he is financiall controlling and, when they do subsequently divorce, he does everything in his power to retain all of the financial benefits acrued as a result of her emotional, practical and physical labour.