Money and finding a husband. Did you marry someone less well off?

[user20000019]

I really want to get married have kids etc but I’ve never found the right man and I’m wondering if it’s because I am valuing the wrong things? Or maybe not? I don’t know.

I have a good job with good prospects (not earning loads but have spare money). I am attracted to men with ambition, men who are financially secure and most importantly have put down roots, have a house, savings... it is less about the money I suppose and more about the security than money can bring. For instance, a small house is just as ok as a large house but no house at all is a problem.

The issue I seem to have is that although I have dated men with a nice home and roots laid down, they often don’t have a decent job or at least a job that matches mine. Then the men who match my sort of job tend not to have properly settled down or invested in a home.

Obviously I am sure there are men out there who do fit this criteria but it isn’t common and I feel that if I was to go off on maternity for instance, or take longer than maternity periods allow, then my standard of living would drop if I relied on the income of some of these men I have dated. I find that really unattractive in a man. Is that awful? Is this being too picky? Has anyone married someone earning less or generally less well off? Am I being a dick?!

But protein that seems very shortsighted...men and women are different. Woman are forced to be out of work to have a child, whether that be for health reasons as the pregnancy develops or simply for a day during labour. They have no choice.

I am all for a partnership but to my mind, that means understanding the different needs of each partner. I also think it is fair that a women be entitled to time off following birth which can be traumatic. This isn’t the case for everyone and I accept and understand that. But suggesting that things are entirely equally between men and woman is actually doing a disservice to women, particularly where work and money is concerned and where those topics relate to having children.

How about a guy who has a less demanding job who does most of the night feeds? If you chose to go back to work at 6 or 9 months you might be grateful for this?
Or a guy who would do all the housework when you are pregnant? Both are practical, non-financial ways of contributing that are very valuable. You can’t easily pay for someone to hunt for something you crave at midnight or someone who will comfort you in the throes of morning sickness.

OP - widen your options as I think your criteria are a bit restrictive and there might be a number who tick all the boxes who are not v nice people!

nameric definitely good points which I hadn’t even considered. I am going to be a bit more open minded...

Do you have any amazing qualities yourself? I’m not saying you don’t by the way. But attractive men with good personalities and who are wealthy can afford to be picky themselves. You’re entitled to want what you want but as you come across as me me me, equally they can do too and ask what’s in it for them

Butproteinthat seems very shortsighted...men and women are different. Woman are forced to be out of work to have a child, whether that be for health reasons as the pregnancy develops or simply for a day during labour. They have no choice.

And many many women are not. Of course, if you got PG and had to go on MAT leave early, he would need to step up financially more. But that's not a given. I had 2 complicated pregnancies and births. My second nearly died at birth. However I went back to work after 6 months, because I wanted to keep my career on track. It was fine.

Looking for a man to finance MAT leave, just incase the worst happens and you can still maintain your lifestyle is short sighted. Having a baby is a joint venture. There is no rule that says a man has to finance it alone. You make a decision that's based on what's best for the family as a whole.

I also think it is fair that a women be entitled to time off following birth which can be traumatic. This isn’t the case for everyone and I accept and understand that. But suggesting that things are entirely equally between men and woman is actually doing a disservice to women, particularly where work and money is concerned and where those topics relate to having children

And more often its not traumatic. Women have to take a certain amount of MAT leave post birth to recover. After that everything can be equal. Both could work part time, one part time. Both full time.

A female has no more rights to be at home long term than a man. That's not how life works.

The advances in equality, allow you to have a well paid job and options. But you cant then just ignore the fact that a father is an equal parent and there are options to for them too.

Equal rights have a long way to go. But fathers should be an equal parent. You have no more right to extended MAT leave or reduced hours than a potential husband.

As pps have said, what happens if your future husband has an accident while you are pg and cant work? Will you ditch him?

Or gets made redundant and becomes depressed?

Someone isnt obliged to keep you to your standard of living, just because they are a man.

Spousal patience is very rare these days. Unless you bag a very high earner, you could find yourself divorced, career been damaged with just CMS from your ex husband.

Meeting and marrying a rich man doesnt mean life will be happy, solvent or sorted.

Not meaning to be unkind here ,but 35 is a tricky age really.Many of the men you prefer will be married off by now, or even divorced!.I get where you are at ,but dating is different to buying a new car with a wish list to be fulfilled!.Surely if you met a man of similar status to yourself, then lived together or got married, your pooled resources would be put together to buy a home!Similarly if you meet someone with their own house ,you would work and pay some bills, if you were together!.You cant really expect someone to fit all this criteria.They may look at you and think the same !.Its very different these days when choosing a partner .Maybe in the 50s and 60s women would have views like this but not today!.

Op, you sound like me when I was 18. I understood nothing about relationships and having babies. I was an idealist. That was a long time ago. I'm now married to a man who earns 10% of what I earn, but I love him very much and we've been together 25 years. Life is much better op when you don't put artificial barriers up around yourself.

I did..but he was solvent and a lovely person
So it didn’t matter.

Yes OP you’re being a dick. If you want to be provided for financially there is one person you should look to for that - YOURSELF! You do sound like a gold digger. Society has a long way to go before things are truly equal - such as the culture around workplace flexibility, it needs to extend to all parents, including dads. Shared parental leave needs to be encouraged and marketed better so people understand the benefits. women may physically carry and birth the baby but don’t you want to be more than a walking womb? Childcare, house chores and financial upkeep are the responsibility of both parents. You don’t get to opt out of financially providing just like the father doesn’t get to opt out of parenting (which is the model some people seem to live by but is, as I have argued at length on another thread, inherently misogynist imo). If you’ve already got savings and would want to pool money with a partner, why wouldn’t they go towards your mat leave? With him contributing as well of course.

Also MN is mind boggling sometimes. High earning women are urged not to marry and to keep all their money separate so they don’t have to give low earning exes a big divorce settlement but men who take that attitude to low earning women are financially abusive. Oooooohkaaayyy then...

@dodgeballchamp hear, hear!

Also MN is mind boggling sometimes. High earning women are urged not to marry and to keep all their money separate so they don’t have to give low earning exes a big divorce settlement but men who take that attitude to low earning women are financially abusive. Oooooohkaaayyy then...

Totally agree with this. When a woman posts about thinking about their dh being a sahd, lots of people start saying 'oh but if you split then he will get the kids and you will have to pay maintenance and he might get the house.

But no one bats an eyelid when it's a woman staying at home, who would get the kids the majority of the time plus maintenance plus possibility of living in the house. Apparantly the woman deserves at least that and a good chuck of his pension too, because she facilitated his career. On mn, men in that position are viewed very differently .

@protein
I agree with you and I don’t think either scenario is fair. I think both should contribute financially and otherwise to the family. I also think there can be gol diggers on both sides.
The way I understood original post was more around having someone equal that one relying on the other but I could be wrong.
Like you I agree that a partner who never worked or had the same level of stress in their career should reap all the rewards on separation especially not when it comes to pension pot. I think the children’s welfare counts not the exes regardles of gender. It’s only my opinion.

Don't worry OP, like i said up thread. I get you entirley.

I do believe some posters on MN cam be willfully ignorant at times for no reason. On one thread you have posters saying their DH should be paying more or its financial abuse, when they are on MAT as most people only get smp yet are still expected to pay half.
Then on this thread a poster has said 'pay your own mat' and 'support yourself'.

The OP clearly isnt stating she wants a man to pay for everything so she can have a baby and keep her money to herself. Shes saying she wants a financially stable partner who earns similar or more so she doesn't have to be the one to be the main source of income supporting her family, cutting her mat short, as well as being pregnant and going through childbirth.

Having the opinion of women should be able to support themselves and be happy with token payments from their DH does do a disservice to women.

Men should also be thinking/knowledgeable about SMP and financial hits women take. Then maybe they wouldn't act so shocked when suddenly their dp goes from earning 2k a month to £400 a month and needs him to take the load for a while as its just as much his responsibility as it is his wife, despite how much she earns. Not just her job to save or have to drag herself back to work asap to ensure the mortgage is paid.

Although one thing i will agree with other posters about, is your age OP. At 35 you may have to widen your criteria and lool realistically at alternative qualities. Maybe accepting that you either need to date much older who may already have kids/divorced. Or date a similar age but wont be financially on your level but can give practical help to lighten the load e.g work part time/night feeds. So long as they are good with money management amd have no debts.

Its a shame high earning women must consider this much more than lower earning women. It does sometimes feel like being pragmatic as a woman in dating is seen as a stigma in society. Sigh.

@LifeGoesOn01
Thank you for the breathe of common sense

You're 35, a really high earner that thinks about relationships the way you have stated them will want a younger woman.
You aren't interested in people or their personalities and the kind of man you're after would probably be the same, and won't want you.
You need to be realistic.
You don't care about personality, you obviously care about money, if you don't care about looks, go for an older man that's isn't so attractive but has money.

I know littlewing.

OP even put in her post:

it is less about the money I suppose and more about the security than money can bring. For instance, a small house is just as ok as a large house but no house at all is a problem.

So shes not asking for a millionaire!! Shes not demanding they have a big house and new car and earns 6 figures!! I think shes being sensible in wanting to start a family with a man who is secure as opposed to a bloke still living with his parents on a 0 hour contract. Plus its not like she herself is on minimum wage living in a house share, wanting a man to sponge off. She wants another adult who lives as an adult and has equal views/ambitions as herself. Nothing wrong with that.

Having the opinion of women should be able to support themselves and be happy with token payments from their DH does do a disservice to women.

I don’t think anyone’s saying that though. They’re saying both parents should contribute equally. Also if she already owns a house why does a potential partner need to own one as well? Unless they’re going to live separately?

I married someone I loved, how much he earned or was worth was neither here nor there.

OP then goes on that she expects him to finance her MAT leave and and extra leave she wishes to take, because after she is having a baby for him.

Imo it should be a joint effort. Just like parenting should. And no, men are not obliged to finance additional mat leave just cause the woman wants it. It's a joint family decision.

OP could find herself a great well earning man. They could be equals and then he could tell her there is no way he is willing to be the only earner. If the man is looking for someone who earns equal so they can maintain a certain lifestyle, he may not want a wife who is sahp.

Because as soon as one person gives up work you have less money. But the OP thinks the obligation is the mans to finance the leave she wants.

If you are quite an "alpha" female then it may not be a good match to marry an alpha type man.

Your choice of husband is the most important financial decision you will make. It will determine your future prosperity.

Of course everyone wants a rich, good looking, charming, funny, intelligent man. You have to decide which of those are a priority and how desirable you are.

At 35, you are on the downhill in terms of attractiveness to men. If you want a good earner, you may have to go older. Otherwise, go for potential and hope they increase their earnings with time.

I think rather than looking at the earnings side of things, you should look at attitudes towards money. You sound independent and someone who has their head screwed on financially, so maybe look for someone with similar values. Just because someone is a high earner doesnt mean that they're responsible with money, in fact the largest percentage of people in debt are high earners ( I work in the financial sector ). I also have an ex who was completely hopeless, but was on 4 times my salary..
Having mutual respect, kindness, getting on together and fancying the pants off each other is on my list of must haves.

Your choice of husband is the most important financial decision you will make. It will determine your future prosperity.

If you live in a Jane Austen novel, sure.

I've found it's amazing how often you find people that think home ownership is a decent substitute for a personality

Very true!