To wonder why women accept financial inequality?

[OtterlyAstounding]

I see so many posts on here from intelligent women, working full or part time, who have (or had) no idea what their husband of a decade or more earns, had no clue he was a high earner, and who don't have access to his bank account while he does have access to hers.

Women who earn a quarter of what their husband does who pay half the expenses, or pay for everything for their shared children, or run out of money and watch their husband treat himself while she struggles. And not only that, but many of them seem to think that's reasonable and not completely fucked up.

Women should make sure they know their partner's income before they move in together – entirely reasonable, to plan budgeting. If or when joint accounts come up, then he should provide access to his accounts first/at the same time. She should always have a personal savings account (just as he can). And if a couple has children, then he should be paying for at least half of everything (although personally I think expenses should be divided equitably, not equally).

Why in this day and age, is financial control/abuse still so common amongst educated, employed women, and also so passively accepted as normal?

Disclaimer: I'm not talking about relationships where the husband is also abusive in other ways, although I do understand the different types of abuse frequently intersect. I'm more thinking of relationships where he's a selfish twat who doesn't pay for things/share his money, but isn't otherwise abusive. Although perhaps financial abuse is always a sign of other abuse...?

would agree with that, but there’s a difference between waking up more easily/being more attuned to small noises when baby is newborn and you’re breastfeeding and procreating with someone who has the parenting instincts of a grizzly bear.

Totally agree.

it’s always surprised me that in an age when girls outperform boys at pretty much every level of education, when women left university/ entered the workplace with just as many opportunities as men, that fast forward a few years to marriage and children and for many couples it seems to change.

So often on MN you see women posting that it’s ’not worth them working’ or ‘I can only work part time’ once they have children. And ridiculously few women transfer some of their year long maternity leave to the child’s father, which would help to balance the earning/ caring responsibilities. And of course then it becomes a vicious circle: once a women falls behind with earning and pension contributions, and her experience in the workplace becomes more and more outdated, it’s nigh on impossible to catch up. There will always seem to be a reason for just accepting that the man is financially more secure.

So while I agree that in a healthy relationship, each partner would know what the other earns, the far more important thing is to have financial independence. Personally I feel it’s very good for children to be raised by parents who take equal responsibility for caring and earning. Women are just as capable as men of earning; men are just as capable as women at household responsibilities and looking after their own children!

I agree that having the ability to be financially independent is always ideal. But of course, some people will always be lower earners, and some women will want to take some years off to be a sahm (which children do benefit from) that will negatively impact their career.

So total financial equality isn't always possible - which is where finances being equitable should apply.

Judging by what we read in the press many people get more money in benefits than by working.

(Dons tin hat)

When I got married very young, I was full of trust that we'd last forever. My family never thought that I should be advised on this as they didn't think a woman with children needed to work. As a result, I was in a very vulnerable position financially (though my DH wasn't ever anything other than fair with his income). Since then I've become a bit more aware of how things can be for women with more life experience. I've told all my children, daughters included, that they need to be able to support themselves if they need to, and why.

We have lasted the distance and I have no regrets that I was so available to care for my children, I loved those years with them. I'm just now aware it could have gone a very different way.

I think it's because frequently, women want to be at home with their children while they're very small, and they shouldn't have to force themselves not to be, in pursuit of some perfect equality.

Instead it makes more sense for the husband to pick up the financial slack during that time, and contribute to his wife's pension pot to minimise the impact it has on her, etc.

@thedogmademessagain I've told all my children, daughters included, that they need to be able to support themselves if they need to, and why.

I agree 100%

I have also told any young female that will listen not to even think about having a child unless they are financially, emotionally, physically and psychologically prepared to raise that child alone.

I agree. And even the most stable relationship isn't immune from widowhood or disability that affects parents capacities. Life is unpredictable.

I think this is not common these days, but you always get the extremes on MN. There are no financial secrets in our house and my Mother was the one who had the comparatively secret post office account for emergencies that my Dad only knew about vaguely.

That's great, but your son cannot do 50% of pregnancy, childbirth (and any injuries that come with it) and breastfeeding. He must also be prepared to fund 50% of the maternity leave and consider whether taking (from the mother) 50% of the leave is really fair, considering the birth, breastfeeding and whether it is the easy half of the period. The mother may need that easy half to recover, if she has done a hard first half.

He will have to be prepared to put himself 2nd or 3rd at times and make decisions to the detriment of financial advancement if he is serious.

I hope you will be reminding him when it comes to children's sick days and nursery/school pick ups (not drop offs only). If it is 'easier' for the mum to do it, he will need to change job etc.

The reverse is true for your daughter.

I don't think some women want to give up their mat leave to their partner because they want to look after the baby themselves. Also as much as the dad might ok at feeding/changing etc the baby, they sometimes have an inability to not put themselves first, so baby is better off with mum who will do this.

Make any blood boil! DH and I pro rata our finances, he earns significantly more than me so he’s pays 2 thirds and I pay a third. It’s one of the discussions we had very early on in our relationship along with whether to have children!

People learn what is ‘normal’ in a relationship through role models. If their mum and dad had that sort of relationship, then you are being naive to think years of conditioning are going to be waived away when the child (of either sex) grows up

Agree, and the son will also have to be prepared to be flexible. He may marry someone with the best intentions to work and then something happens. She becomes sick or disabled, they have a child who becomes sick or is disabled and really needs a parent at home for a short or long time. Independence is important but so is partnership. The best laid plans and all that. Same for the DD.

No, obviously men don’t ’do’ pregnancy or give birth or breastfeed. But the good ones are pretty damn capable of everything else! Whether the woman ‘lets’ them is another matter…..

What about in a second marriage where there are children on both sides? We are married in our late 50’s and a 20 yr relationship. Dh is a very high earner and I don’t work anymore. Thoughts?

I mean, I breastfed each of mine until they were 3 because I wanted to...my DH would've done a great job with them, but he couldn't have done that 😂 And I definitely didn't want to give up staying at home with my babies to go back to my lower-paying job - and frankly it wouldn't have made financial sense.

If my DH (first marriage) dies, I'll do well financially. We've made sure of that. I am sure I will not enter into another relationship just so I can protect the children's future. If I did, it would only be with a strong eye to protecting my children's future. I wouldn't want it all to go to the new husband if I died first, then have him leave it all to his kids with mine missing out.

I feel irritated when I read of women who have to save to cover their 'share' during maternity leave. It's his baby too, he should make sure he's stepping up financially at this time by covering things differently, at least for a time. He better pay at least half the childcare if she goes back to work afterwards too.

Especially the first year babies are more oriented towards their mother. My husband and I have split everything mostly equally, we both work part-time and have a day off with the baby each (I went back to work at 5 months post partum).

He says around 4pm she has just had enough of him and wants me. That's not because he's incapable of caring for her, it's because she needs me still.

That's really great and I'm so happy for you that due to your exemplary parenting your children won't have disabled children, become disabled themselves, or be a victim of abuse
Why does every time someone post about a subject matter, it's inevitable someone has to bring in the disability card? Disabilities, thankfully, affect a minority of people. Of course, it is going to be different for them. It still leaves a vast majority of people for whom the response is appropriate.

Childcare surely is a bill that is treated like any other household bill!

It's more common than you might think.

You'd think so. Unfortunately the evidence from some posts on this site suggest otherwise.

I think it's because frequently, women want to be at home with their children while they're very small, and they shouldn't have to force themselves not to be, in pursuit of some perfect equality
That's a choice that comes with risks. Like many, I would have love to spend years at home with my children. I wasn't prepared to make myself vulnerable, and as a result, them too, for that choice.

Women need to stop thinking their wishes and comforts trump everything. Many men would love to spend more time with their children, if only in the mornings and evenings. Why should their wishes be ignored?