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.

Personally I find it entitled to have that much of an opinion on how others choose to live their lives 🤷‍♀️

Can you really not see the difference?

First of all nobody on this thread is saying women should be entitled to all the time they like to clean. People are saying that families can make their own decisions about how much each partner works in paid employment. The only people who have to be happy with their decision is them. Your opinion is irrelevant because you're not one of the people involved in the situation, you don't have to see it as fair because it's nothing to do with you. You seeing it as unfair doesn't mean that couple are behaving unreasonably or that one of them is "entitled". It's just your opinion on a subject that doesn't concern you. I can see how you might feel "injustice" in general concerns us all, but where two people have come to an agreement that both are happy with then there is no injustice, so nothing for you to be concerned about.

The first example you give here is of someone who isn't happy with the division of housework and since they're not happy we can presume their partner hasn't discussed it with them and come to a mutual agreement about it. Instead he's just selfishly going out as often as he likes whilst giving no thought to his own partner's opinion and happiness. That's what's unreasonable, because the person who isn't happy is his own partner. So yes in that scenario the woman will get posts of support that the situation isn't fair.

If your question was really "aibu to think that one half of a couple shouldn't unilaterally decide to opt out of earning enough money to live on?" then the answer would be no, you are not being unreasonable. It's fine for couples to make whatever decision they want. I work part time (4 days) because that's what we decided. It would be unfair of me to either reduce or add a day without discussion.

Just to let you know that not all people in marriages are this way. I had a zero hour contract teaching role because that’s all there was. My husband works but sadly I am financially independent so got a full time teaching contract! Guess what, he’s a breadwinner but can’t provide because he’s shit at managing his finances. I bought my own home outright & I still earn less than him but he’s not still not responsible. Can I also mention that teaching jobs are very competitive and difficult to come by.

Or it's actually the husband saying he doesn't want the wife to work because he knows he then has the upper hand?

I'm with the OP - not because I think the wife is taking advantage of the husband, but the opposite! A lot of men are threatened by women who work (and earn well) not the other way round. So they want their wives to work part-time or sporadically - or not at all.

I firmly believe women should work/earn their own money and not be beholden to a man (or the benefits system come to that, which can change according to the whim of the government then in charge).

Lucky them I say, I , like many other have had to slog my guts out for all of my adult life. As a single parent whose ex husband managed to evade child support every expense fell to me as well as the child rearing. Good luck to anyone who has an easier life

It isn’t exactly entitled. It’s a bit of a silly decision because, as you rightly say, the husband could die suddenly or leave her for a younger woman. I can’t see how it’s entitled though- entitled to the husband’s money you mean? It’s probably a joint decision to avoid childcare costs.

This…⬆️

You sound jealous to be honest, OP. It is absolutely none of your business what other couples do with regard to their work and living situation. Nobody is asking you to pay their bills, are they?
So what if one works and the other doesn’t, or they both work?
My DP earns well, and I’m about to retire. He said that I don’t have to work if I don’t want to, he’s happy to take over that part, so I shall be gardening and painting, decorating the house, and giving our rescue Ddog all the fuss she deserves in her new life with us.
Does this bother you particularly? Are you put out by my presumed “swanning around?” Will you be paying my gas bill? No?
What I do, how we sort out our life and finances together as a couple is nobody else’s concern.
Posts like this are usually made by Noseybonks who are too concerned with other people’s lives.

You’re entitled to your opinion. I disagree: you don’t know what’s going on in somebody else’s life. You might think you do. As long as it was a considered and joint decision. There are many ways to contribute to society and it is nice if people didn’t tie everything to a £ value. I’m not my wage.

If you have this type of arrangement you tend to look at all the consequences. If dh had suddenly died I would have received 4 times his salary as a lump sump and virtually all savings were in my name so financially no immediate issues.
We also took our term assurance on me until the children were 18 so that would cover the cost of outsourcing my role.
If he left me for a younger woman - virtually all money was in my name so also no immediate concerns.

sure why not....is it not a partnership?

this for definite

My DH and I are a team. At the beginning I earned more than him,but who cares, it all went in the pot. After children I went 4 days, but it was ‘our money’ and, as he travelled a lot, it gave me breathing space.

After the children left, I stayed four days because I wanted to, we could afford it and I could pick up the house admin and the bigger share of the housework.

I wasn’t sponging off him in the same way when he was made redundant, we used my savings and picked up more hours to help out.

There are lots of reasons to work part time and it doesn’t make anyone a villain to make different choices that suit their own set up. It does have to be a conversation though and everyone needs to agree.

I love my life, I haven’t worked for well over a decade and then some. If my dh left tomorrow we would have enough for us both to live a happy work free life in the same comfort forever. I’m in my thirties and have so much I want to do beyond the daily 9-5 hamster wheel.

I could understand some of the calls from women to “fear abandonment” but once you accumulate a certain net wealth that no longer becomes a problem.

Why go out to work when I can travel the world and spend time with my family.

oh well said

But if there are no caring responsibilities and it's just the two of them then she's contributed zero to the finances, so it's a bit much to consider it a joint purchase.

Possibly because this is MN where every man’s place is in the wrong. I’d say if it suited both of you it was none of my business.

I’m not sponging off my husband. We are a team, a unit. There have been times I’ve earned more and now he earns a lot and I’m at home with our children. It’s none of anyone’s business really?

Because doing the washing, ironing, cleaning and cooking for two adults isn't going to be comparable to going to work every day - especially for a job that earns enough for one person to be the 'breadwinner' (cringe).

People are usually very vocal about parity when it comes to SAHMs being taken advantage of and never getting a break, when their 'DH' buggers off cycling or whatever every weekend. Is this something that's been 'agreed' also?

Are there many housewives any more? Ie no kids just not working coz they can’t be arsed? Feels very old fashioned, unless the man is massively wealthy. A man without a job, even with family wealth, is seen as a loser, so not sure why a women shouldn’t be held to the same standards. We’re supposed to equal after all.

There are women with kids who choose this as a lifestyle, including when their children are in school full time and even when they become adults. I’d say it’s less common nowadays but does happen. It wouldn’t be for me at all but feminism means women should have options and if this works for them then whatever.

their life

Fair enough. I get the same if my DH dies but still work FT because self respect.

their lack of pension tbh

i chose to work fewer hours but will pay for this with less of a works pension.

I don’t think a man of independent means (sounds a bit Jane Austen!) who doesn’t have a job is seen as a loser.
Not having a paid role does not mean you are lazy either. Dh had quite a few unpaid roles in addition to his sahd role.