Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Feminism sold a lie - Women, today, are worse off than ever

888 replies

ConservativeC2 · 28/10/2025 20:58

Listening to the women I work with, it's been interesting to hear their views about feminism and they are not happy. We are all millennial age so not too young, not too old and I keep hearing that it's the millennial generation of women that have absolutely lost out the most.

I think feminism initially promoted some idea of independence, equality and choice. Phrases like 'men hold all the money and power' at the time were very emotive whilst not entirely true. The correct statement then (and still now) is some men hold all the money and power. Most men back in the 50s-70s worked very long hours and spent pretty much all their money on their family. It was hard for everyone, but I think women were more empowered then than now.

In contrast to today, most of the women my age have to work. Whilst feminism promotes choice, most of them do not actually have a choice today. Most men today do not earn enough to run a household which means most women have to work. The worst part is they still do a larger share of the domestic work and childcare. So I think women now have it worse than ever - it's not just me, my female colleagues feel the same way. They've come to point in life where they want to start a family but they know they will have to come back to work.

Now it's all to do with feminism. There are other factors which has driven up the cost of living (inflation, property prices, profit extraction from multinational corporates etc).

OP posts:
PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:03

TheignT · 30/10/2025 19:50

Salaries were higher? Are you joking.

relative to house prices at the time!!!

shuggles · 30/10/2025 20:07

Hohumdedum · 29/10/2025 23:24

It doesn't matter. The point stands either way that it is possible to raise a family without two salaries or marrying a man in the top 1% of earners however you want to define sahm. It may not be easy, or offer a lifestyle you are happy with, but it's possible as I've seen it done.

I'm saying that it's not possible for one person in the relationship to be a SAHP for a long time (decades) unless the other person is a top 1% earner (i.e. wealthy).

Trying to do it with an average or above-average salary would require a lot of frugality, and simply would not be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of people. I would not accept it.

I always find it difficult to ensure I'm saving enough money. So how would it be possible for me to tolerate giving half of my income to another person?

If you were on an average salary (about £37k), would you be OK with a hypothetical husband or boyfriend being a SAHP?

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:07

What the boomer generation fail to understand is that cost of house to salary now is disproportionately larger compared to back then… 🤦🏽‍♀️ It.is.not.the.same.

14% mortgage on a lower house price cost is not the same as what most of us face now. It is widely known how unaffordable houses are now. Salaries have NOT caught up.

Goldenbear · 30/10/2025 20:10

shuggles · 30/10/2025 20:07

I'm saying that it's not possible for one person in the relationship to be a SAHP for a long time (decades) unless the other person is a top 1% earner (i.e. wealthy).

Trying to do it with an average or above-average salary would require a lot of frugality, and simply would not be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of people. I would not accept it.

I always find it difficult to ensure I'm saving enough money. So how would it be possible for me to tolerate giving half of my income to another person?

If you were on an average salary (about £37k), would you be OK with a hypothetical husband or boyfriend being a SAHP?

Married or boyfriend and girlfriend a bit different when it comes to sharing income?

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 30/10/2025 20:12

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:07

What the boomer generation fail to understand is that cost of house to salary now is disproportionately larger compared to back then… 🤦🏽‍♀️ It.is.not.the.same.

14% mortgage on a lower house price cost is not the same as what most of us face now. It is widely known how unaffordable houses are now. Salaries have NOT caught up.

Well I’m a Xoomer. End of Babyboom/ beginning Gen X

We’ve had to help our dc buy houses due to this gap that we don’t know anything about according to you.

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:14

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 30/10/2025 20:12

Well I’m a Xoomer. End of Babyboom/ beginning Gen X

We’ve had to help our dc buy houses due to this gap that we don’t know anything about according to you.

Edited

So what are you saying?

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 30/10/2025 20:16

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:14

So what are you saying?

That l fully aware of the hideous gap between house prices and wages. Even though we ‘fail to understand it’ according to you.

How do you know we don’t understand it? What do you base this on?

shuggles · 30/10/2025 20:17

Goldenbear · 30/10/2025 20:10

Married or boyfriend and girlfriend a bit different when it comes to sharing income?

Well I did say "or," so that allowed the question to be answered without dodging it.

If you were on an average salary (approximately £37k), would you accept splitting half of your post tax income with a stay-at-home husband?

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:22

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 30/10/2025 20:16

That l fully aware of the hideous gap between house prices and wages. Even though we ‘fail to understand it’ according to you.

How do you know we don’t understand it? What do you base this on?

I am obviously not aiming this at you specifically, however a very very large amount of elder generations fail to understand the economic disadvantage that younger generations face. And unless you have children and/or grandchildren, you’re not really exposed to it or understand.

I hear it time and time again - that old chestnut - well our interest rates were higher. Yes, but the average house prices were a lot lower in relation to average income.

Many of the boomer generation now have gained a lot of equity and made money on their houses in a short amount of time so they are in a position to help younger generations. My generation I think is the first, maybe x included, where we are worse off than our parents.

Sorry I feel I’m trailing off into economics again, but this isn’t separate to feminism I don’t think. They’re both linked.

Mrsnothingthanks · 30/10/2025 20:24

I wouldn't expect to be a SAHM and then for my husband to share half of his salary so likewise, I wouldn't be happy with him being a SAHD and sharing half of mine. We are both perfectly capable of working and providing for our daughter financially together. Just as we share everything else.

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:32

The sense I am getting from OP is that of burn out. Speaking of which, is OP returning to us here?

Midnights68 · 30/10/2025 20:36

I know this has been said already, but where oh where did this historically inaccurate and incredibly misleading idea that women never worked before ‘feminism’ come from and how did it become so pervasive?!

CarterBeatsTheDevil · 30/10/2025 20:41

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:07

What the boomer generation fail to understand is that cost of house to salary now is disproportionately larger compared to back then… 🤦🏽‍♀️ It.is.not.the.same.

14% mortgage on a lower house price cost is not the same as what most of us face now. It is widely known how unaffordable houses are now. Salaries have NOT caught up.

(a) given that all of them with money are having to help their kids get on the property ladder I suspect they are well aware

(b) this is not because of feminism

Midnights68 · 30/10/2025 20:54

JudgeBread · 28/10/2025 21:12

I had this conversation with my husband, having a moan before another 12 hour shift about how feminism failed women and I want it to be like the olden days where I could stay home. He gave me some bombastic side eye and said "you'd prefer it if I essentially owned you and you had absolutely no say about anything in your life?"

...and I went to work because he's right. Ok being forced into the choice of work or be skint kind of sucks, but at least I do actually have a choice, unlike my female ancestors.

Absolutely. It may be nice to imagine keeping house for a man who cherishes you and handles all the finances.

But the reality for many women for much for the 20th century was slaving away at work, being paid less than male colleagues (which was perfectly lawful) whilst being sexually harassed (which was perfectly lawful). Then coming home and handing over all your earnings (because you couldn’t open your own bank account) to a man who beat you (because you couldn’t get a court order to protect yourself from him) and raped you (which wasn’t illegal if you were married). Then pulling yourself together after all that to do all the cooking and housework, with no labour-saving devices like dishwashers or washing machines.

And let’s face it, even for those women who did live the 1950s stereotype, it certainly wasn’t a bed of roses for a lot of them - if you actually bother to seek out their stories.

Anyway, OP was saying how we have it worse in 2025?

Goldenbear · 30/10/2025 20:55

shuggles · 30/10/2025 20:17

Well I did say "or," so that allowed the question to be answered without dodging it.

If you were on an average salary (approximately £37k), would you accept splitting half of your post tax income with a stay-at-home husband?

I think a husband I would as it's in the vows, not a boyfriend but I associate that with something more transient.

DH did do this, we are mid 40s but despite earning half of what I did his was the only income. He was still training to be an Architect so he needed to be in work for part three which you have to complete in a practice.

pointythings · 30/10/2025 21:00

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 20:07

What the boomer generation fail to understand is that cost of house to salary now is disproportionately larger compared to back then… 🤦🏽‍♀️ It.is.not.the.same.

14% mortgage on a lower house price cost is not the same as what most of us face now. It is widely known how unaffordable houses are now. Salaries have NOT caught up.

We're all aware of that. We're also aware that it hasn't happened because of feminism though.

PeonyPatch · 30/10/2025 21:02

pointythings · 30/10/2025 21:00

We're all aware of that. We're also aware that it hasn't happened because of feminism though.

Not sure how we got onto this now.

shuggles · 30/10/2025 21:12

Goldenbear · 30/10/2025 20:55

I think a husband I would as it's in the vows, not a boyfriend but I associate that with something more transient.

DH did do this, we are mid 40s but despite earning half of what I did his was the only income. He was still training to be an Architect so he needed to be in work for part three which you have to complete in a practice.

A temporary situation then while he was training to advance his career...?

If DH wanted to be a SAHP for 20 years, and you earned an average salary, would you agree to that?

Goldenbear · 30/10/2025 21:20

shuggles · 30/10/2025 21:12

A temporary situation then while he was training to advance his career...?

If DH wanted to be a SAHP for 20 years, and you earned an average salary, would you agree to that?

No, not for 20 years but yes for when children are young.

Hohumdedum · 30/10/2025 21:31

shuggles · 30/10/2025 20:07

I'm saying that it's not possible for one person in the relationship to be a SAHP for a long time (decades) unless the other person is a top 1% earner (i.e. wealthy).

Trying to do it with an average or above-average salary would require a lot of frugality, and simply would not be acceptable to the overwhelming majority of people. I would not accept it.

I always find it difficult to ensure I'm saving enough money. So how would it be possible for me to tolerate giving half of my income to another person?

If you were on an average salary (about £37k), would you be OK with a hypothetical husband or boyfriend being a SAHP?

No, because I'd want to be the one at home with the kids! But if it was a choice between DH being a sahd vs both working and sending the kids to nursery, I'd rather he was a sahd yes, at least until they started school. And it can be done on that salary because I know multiple couples who have managed it.

We are living very comfortably and DH is not in the top 1% of earners. There's a huge difference between £37k and top 1%.

And if I "gave" a sahd half my income to look after our children, I'd rather give it to him than to a nursery.

I don't think many people define sahm like you though. After decades your kids would have left home. Maybe you'd be a housewife, but not a sahm.

GagMeWithASpoon · 30/10/2025 21:35

shuggles · 30/10/2025 21:12

A temporary situation then while he was training to advance his career...?

If DH wanted to be a SAHP for 20 years, and you earned an average salary, would you agree to that?

You keep saying decades. That becomes a housewife , rather than a SAHM.

shuggles · 30/10/2025 21:45

@Hohumdedum No, because I'd want to be the one at home with the kids!

Obviously. Most people would choose to be a SAHP over their job.

We are living very comfortably and DH is not in the top 1% of earners. There's a huge difference between £37k and top 1%.

Yes, I know there is a huge difference between £37k and the top 1%. That was my point.

The vast majority of people earn something in the ball park of £37k. Hence why most people would not be willing to live with a SAHP.

I don't think many people define sahm like you though. After decades your kids would have left home. Maybe you'd be a housewife, but not a sahm.

I don't see how you can consider someone to be a SAHP in a temporary situation.

I think it's safe to say that most people would support their partner when needed.

By "SAHP," I mean a homemaker. Someone who focuses solely on domestic labour rather than trying to advance a job or career outside of the home. That's how the term is normally understood.

shuggles · 30/10/2025 21:46

GagMeWithASpoon · 30/10/2025 21:35

You keep saying decades. That becomes a housewife , rather than a SAHM.

... a SAHM is a housewife...

Hohumdedum · 30/10/2025 21:54

shuggles · 30/10/2025 21:46

... a SAHM is a housewife...

It isn't. You can be a housewife without children. You cannot be a sahm without children.

I'm a sahm. I view my job as looking after the kids 9-5 and outside of those times DH and I share the childcare and housework.

Mrsnothingthanks · 30/10/2025 22:20

@Goldenbear What's in the vows?