To find this entitled?

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaahh]

This doesn't apply to people with childcare or caring responsibilities, any sort of illness or disability which means they cannot work full time.
But I've seen a few people on here or social media basically saying 'I can do supply/care work/0 hours work and sometimes only get a shift or two a week, because my husband earns well.'

So they're pretty much choosing to swan about and avoid full-time work, because they assume their husband or partner will carry on in their high-earning, full time role.

What happens if this husband loses their job, becomes sick, or just decides they're sick of having to be the breadwinner?

I see it all the time on supply teacher pages,'Oh I've only had 1 day of work in 2 months but it's fine because my husband is the breadwinner!!'

There are other jobs where you could make a living, you just don't want to do them, yet you still want your dream forever house and luxury lifestyle. If it were the wife full-time and the husband taking the piss there would be uproar.

This thread proves, over 12 pages of responses, why supporting higher taxes or making high earners pay more is a terrible idea. You can't be in support of a benefit system unless you contribute to it yourself in my opinion.

Tax those worth over £10m and leave those on £250k to support their wives staying at home eh?

OP I get where you're coming from. I think allowing your husband to support you is fine if it's a mutual decision. However if he did earn less for any reason and you left him because of that, you should walk away with nothing bar 50% of the house. Big fan of the old pre - nup (unenforceable but definitely taken into consideration by the misogynistic judges I know)

I think the OP expressed herself poorly here, but the general point she’s getting at (I think) is that choice is significantly shaped by social convention and in many relationships where one partner works part time, it’s the woman who does less and picks up housework etc, and this reflects something (not positive) about society. I will caveat this, as the OP has repeatedly, by saying it makes physical sense for the woman to stay at home more during very early childhood if possible owing to breastfeeding. I don’t mean in those years, but as time goes on.

I think there are two separate points here, but the OP isn’t always separating them that well (though some others are also being obtuse in their responses). One point is that it’s fine for equal partners to set up personal arrangements that suit them. The second (actually valid) point is that there’s a reason that some men feel a need to be in the breadwinner/provider role while some women are more likely to be the ones to stay at home. We don’t make our choices in a social vacuum.

This reflect the traditional and to an extent the socially sexist structuring of society.

That’s not to blame or judge any individual but it’s a fact that, at a societal level, tells us something about how we view and value the roles of men and women. Ultimately, these views hurt women, and are reflected through things like insufficient maternity provision, the undervaluing of paid caring roles etc. Again, this is no judgement of any single person’s choices, but that doesn’t mean we can ignore the impact of this reality.

so did we.

This is basically the trad wife life that up until the 90s was much more of a genuine choice for many more people (and quite normal). There will always be people who knew two parents working before that, and they did, but it was much more common for a woman to be at home or work very PT hours.

It's also interesting with it being supply teaching or caring/nursing bank hours. These are jobs with high expectations of unpaid overtime, often inflexible and predominantly female. If you have any caring responsibilities at all, even if they are teens, it's not always easy if you don't have a partner/family available to pick up the slack. Often when a partner earns a very high wage there is a lot of travel or long hours etc so you can see how these things become incompatible. Could just get another job, but why, if they can just pick up bits and bobs in their chosen profession and hoc

Absolutely no one is having a good time juggling home, kids (of any age), hobbies, friendships, exercise around full time work, it is near impossible.

As a note, whenever they role out female senior leaders on international women's day as inspirtation, I've seen a few reference having a SAHD or a nanny (honestly, a man would never have even been asked). I know that it's rarer, but that is because being a woman in a very senior position is rarer.

I have always worked full time apart from 18 maternity leave. I am a single parent and very independent. But in the current climate I don't see the point in suggesting that someone takes on a minimum wage job just to earn their own money while their spouse earns 600k+ That's just bonkers.

but none of what you say means that a person who does it is entitled.

Precisely!

Urrgh. What about people like me who do lots and lots of unpaid voluntary work & have done the whole time I've been a SAHP? am I entitled and lazy? 🙄 the UK would grind to a halt if everyone who volunteers their time gave it up and headed back to paid work. I drive an old car, live in a modest ex-council semi & don't have a luxury lifestyle. OP has no clue what goes on in other people's lives that could lead to one person working FT and one person not doing a (paid) role.

id reflect on why this triggers an emotional response in you. In years gone by many women with working husbands have worked very little as you could afford to live on one persons wage. Perhaps they have financial plans in place for these circumstances and if not, they’ll find out the hard way unfortunately. What is it about this that pisses you off? Would you like that level for flexibility and freedom? Do you deep down feel jealous that they have that option and you feel hard done by becuase you’ve always been taught that hard work is the only way to live?

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What do you care?! You do you, let other people worry about themselves.

Fact of the matter that lots of people who NEED jobs are out of work because of the way the jobs market is at the moment so expecting people who don't need to work go get jobs, whilst completely none of your business also would put extra pressure on everyone that DOES need a job.

Also it's about priorities. I took a long time off to have children and we managed fine on one wage, because I put the effort in to actually save where we could and did a lot of things myself from cutting everyone's hair to fixing clothes and making anything that needed ... Now I'm working full time, I don't have time to do a lot of what I used to and I find myself, even if I do have time, calculating how long jobs take and comparing to my wage and thinking "pfft.... I'll just buy new/pay for that service" ect.

You think they are doing nothing but living on one wage also takes extra work to make it work, takes time to shop around to get best prices, effort to keep things running without extra money.

I'm more than happy now I'm working tho.... It's easier on me, more sociable and I enjoy being about to buy what I want without guilt.

You are just jealous.

Well the people who can afford it are fine not working. It leaves a job for someone who does need it. And its no one elses business

except that the OP's whole rant is about entitlement!

OP is trying to justify something she disapproved of by painting it as a moral failing. She was unwise to choose a sense of entitlement as the sin, as she clearly doesn't actually know what that means. She would have been better off pretending that she's just incredibly concerned for these women in case they get dumped or widowed or their partner gets ill or something. That, after all, can potentially happen, and it also would have meant she could virtue signal more easily.

Alternatively, she could have just been honest about it and said she disapproves because she thinks it's lazy, and not tried to dress it up any further. People would probably have respected the honesty.

oh you are so right and we need that laugh emoji back

This is literally how life used to be for most people. Husband worked, wife looked after the rest of life and the money was shared. So it isn't culturally what you are used to any more but is completely normal behaviour. I didnt work for 18 years of our marriage. Now I do. No biggy.

Its lovely that you enjoy volunteering but I don't think that ANYBODY needs to justify their life choices provided they don't injure others. provided that you (and your partner) are happy with the way that you live, its no business of anyone else's whether you volunteer or lie on the sofa and read Black Lace novels all day.

If they both agree to it and don’t have kids (so them breaking up won’t mean she’s trying to support kids on whatever she can find), I don’t see the problem if he’s ok with it. Dh will never not work, he’ll never not be all in on everything he does. If I chose the life you described (can’t because of kids and job lol!!) and he was happy to go with it I don’t see the problem- I’d say we’d both be content and have a nice life

Sounds great to me.
Id imagine most women do more around the house but even if they didnt, good for these women

I would swan about IN A HEARTBEAT if my husband was a high earner.
Oh the swanning I would do. 😍

Why does it bother you so much what others do? @Aaaaaaaaaaaaahh

Do what suits your situation.

So you're jealous?

I must admit I've never ever heard anyone say anything close to what you're saying.

I agree that none of what I said was about entitlement, and that that is the OP’s title.

I was responding to the specific point about the husband not having a ‘choice’ though, rather than all of the OP’s points on the thread.

Ultimately, I think this is a confused thread with some points that are too goady or aren’t valid. Many not in formal employment will do many useful and necessary things either their time and I think the thread title is ill-advised.

Nonetheless, in these types of thread I think there are often some underlying valid ideas driving the less valid or more confused ones. For example, without wanting to repeat myself, the point about men not having a ‘choice’ in these situations is a significant oversimplification yet may contain a kernel of unconscious truth about societal expectations and attitudes. It was some of these ideas that I was teasing out.

There will be people, not me, who say that men have more choice than women!

I’ve been that wife - we were going through fertility treatment which I didn’t broadcast and then stayed at home with the resulting children until they were at school. I loved it and we could afford it. I am now the main breadwinner and my DH is semi-retired. I love that he is now in charge of most of the housework and food shopping! You never know what is going on in other people’s lives. I have known a few men who were stay at home dads too.