Expectations of men as a modern woman dating...is this unreasonable?

[Turtleneckjumpers]

I'm single. I have a decent job which allowed me to buy a house in my late twenties (by no means a mansion, worth circa 220 in 2015).

I care about a nice home and want to see a bit of the world. I'm not materialistic in the sense of buying designer clothes etc (I'm a Primark person mostly!). But money bothers me. It is important to me because it is a safety net in many ways. So I work hard and hope to always be able to support myself.

Here's the question. I date. So many men have either not bought a house (I do understand this isn't easy, but by age 38 I question this!!) or in an average job earning less than I am - significantly.

I've met a lovely man, 38, good fun. But in a recent conversation he voluntarily disclosed what he earns (45k) and said he has a good bonus and car and he's happy with that. I didn't say this but i was thinking really?! Are you just going to think ok I'm happy with that?!

I've been thinking about how awful this probably makes me and how it is probably why i have been single for a few years now. Also people into their jobs are often (not always i know) not the best partners. But i can't help being bothered by this. I want someone who wants to provide and is ambitious. Am I attracted to the wrong things here or is this reasonable?

Wow, this thread just keeps on giving.

I mean, I have a grudging admiration for the OP in that she still keeps coming back and replying / engaging, but it is amazing how someone living in such a tiny little bubble, who is so ignorant of life outside it, can actually exist in this day and age, with information so readily available through the internet.

You do realise, OP, that less than 10% of dc are educated privately. It really is something only the most privileged (financially) could even consider paying for out of their own income, by definition.

*I meant to say long hours.

Genuinely mean no offence, OP, you sound very, very young and naive.

Do you actually know what innate means? It seems that you do not.

This is Cambridge Dictionary definition of innate:

"An innate quality or ability is one that you were born with, not one you have learned:"

IcePurple That definition is my understanding of innate all along. Nothing controversial.

IcePurple: You said ambition is innate. If something is innate then everyone has it. I disagree. Never said that. See definition of innate above. I meant it is innate to some people. Thought that is obvious.

And if you're going to move the goalposts and say it's only innate to certain people, then unless you have monitored them since birth, you cannot possibly say that. I never moved the goalposts. See definition of innate above. I did not monitor them from birth - that is your test and it is a specious one. I work with these people. Many ambitious (and non-ambitious) people spend more time in the office than at home. I worked with many ambitious people over the years. It is just natural and understood quality and a function of why they work hard in the demanding organisation that they do.

Anyway, why are you so against ambition being innate? I am curious why that seems to get your goat, amongst other things.

I’m not sure what I thought but I’ve definitely had my eyes open to the fact that the sort of people I work with are not representative of the masses.

Your work is probably a bubble. People can have quite different values outside the bubble. I would not have thought many people would have thought to work hard just to earn more to allow their children to be debt-free or provide a downpayment for a house or even expect their dc to go to university. There is a lot of being happy is better than earning money, as if the 2 are mutually exclusive.

That is the real world. Money brings choices and less of it is a different landscape.

You are very naive. Property isn't the only place to invest money, and many people argue that it isn't the most profitable. I know a lot of people who prefer to rent so they are not locked into a house and have the freedom to move around with their lifestyle and current situation.

hundred have you ever looked after a child for more than a day? there's no "sitting back at home" about it!

@Turtleneckjumpers have you? I had three children in between a full time job and there actually is a lot of "sitting back at home". It's quite boring actually.

One of my favourite parts of this bonkers thread is where the bubble dwelling OP who believes only waiting staff and hairdressers don't earn £60k, who scoffs at the idea of general knowledge and statistics criticises the presumptive boyfriend for his lack of self awareness

when actually the majority of high paying jobs take the exact same amount of time as the lower paid ones.

I don’t know what planet you live on. I work with Presidents, Vice Presidents and Directors - the highest earners and work the longest hours.

I think some of you are being unkind to OP. It's surprising some men's lack of ambition but I suppose that's if you come from a background of aspiration and a
expectation to succeed.

Your perspectives are just different. I would choose to have more time than more money. People work for 50yrs of their lives just to have 5 weeks off a year? That doesn't appeal to me at all, as I don't want to be a slave to money.

If he ends up earning £75k that could mean 60+ hrs a work week. Once you have children I'm sure you'll be back on here asking for advice of how your partner is always working and never home or how he doesn't help with the kids or house work etc.

I think you're not weighing up all the options as there's a side to every coin.

I think some of you are being unkind to OP. It's surprising some men's lack of ambition but I suppose that's if you come from a background of aspiration and a expectation to succeed.

How so? I think you've missed the thrust of the argument.

Posters are not being "unkind to the OP" in pointing out the shallowness of thought that equates ambition/aspiration to salary and that measuring a person's worth as a human-being is primarily based on their desire to chase after the next pay rise. That's a thoroughly depressing and dehumanising frame of mind that many people on here - including me - reject. That isn't being "unkind",

The OP deserves to be told they're clueless because they fail to recognise how offensive they come across. I've never even considered my DH as lacking ambition based on the criteria they've given, actually I pity them because they'll end up very lonely with their attitude.

I really wish people would stop talking about this man as though he's a failure and living on the breadline! In no way could he be classed as a failure or poor.

Career progression, career development and ambition are complex and multi-faceted. They are heavily influenced by your upbringing, the community you live in, your values, experience of education etc. While I wouldn't say ambition is innate it is linked to your personality so you may have a tendency to be more driven and focussed but it's is mainly due to external factors.

And then there's luck and chance - these can have a huge influence on career progression.

Ambition means different things to different people. For some it's earning lots of money and progressing up the career ladder for others it's achieving a good work/life balance. Neither is wrong and it's fine to have a preference and be attracted to a certain type......but to insinuate the man in question has failed at life is a bit much!

Turtle many of your preferences are based on incorrect assumptions... primarily the idea that anyone can earn 60k + if they're ambitious enough. Obviously that's not true.

For years my DH earned 55k....he was offered jobs paying much more but he turned them down because it would have meant relocating and he wasn't interested in doing that. To an outsider he may have looked unambitious....far from it. He was fantastic at his job loved it and love the organisation he worked for. He built a reputation of being one of the most influential people in his sector. He recently moved into a role paying much more but it was at an organisation he can still commute to and a job he really wanted. It took 11 years for that role to come up. If it hadn't, he'd definitely still be in his old one and would still be happy. Not everyone is driven by a huge salary.

There were paragraphs there I promise!

Personally, (As the token man), I think that the OP is not necessarily being unreasonable. After all, we're all entitled to our list of requirements not just in partners, but in life in general.

However, she has no right to criticise him because he has a different outlook to like.

Ambitious people know what they are capable of and strive to take the next step up and challenge themselves to go out of their comfort zone. Self improvement, confidence and the willingness to learn and work hard is a very attractive quality.

Unfortunately, as much as these are indeed attractive qualities, none of them necessarily lead to higher wages. As for hard work, don't get me started. The binmen (bin persons?) round here work f**king hard, but I doubt that they are on six figure salaries and driving Jaguars. Indeed, the last time I did what I would describe as "real" work was a year ago, and I am paid around 35k for the privilege of sitting behind a desk .

Let's talk about that 35k a moment. I am an engineer, I design control systems for ships, and I bloody love what I do! Yes, there is well paid overtime on site work, but this is long hours on dirty, smelly, hot ship builds.

(And I am fully aware that many people are working in far worse conditions for much less money. That is the irony of the system in developed countries.)

There's not much further financially I can go really. The only way that I am going to "Improve" myself as described by some posters is to give up the job I love, and to move into management.

Instead of making things work and solving problems, I will be sat behind a desk and carrying out staff appraisals.

Or do I train as an accountant? Or in pharmacy sales to really "Better" myself. Even if as the OP leads us to believe this wouldn't involve extra hours I would detest my job instead of loving it! No offence to the people who do these, but personally I cannot think of much worse.

The money I do earn is enough to keep a roof over my head, food on my plate and beer in my glass. Could I support a partner on my money? Yes, if the brown stuff hit the fan, plenty of people do it on less than me. I'm not looking for a kept woman though.

Am I unambitious? I want to learn absolutely everything about my job. I want to be the best damned engineer that I can be. I want to design bigger and bigger systems, I want to teach people what I have learned, I want to help people solve their own problems, I want to be the go-to person for advice, I want to be known as a friendly, helpful colleague.

Does more money come into these wants? No it doesn't, I am doing this job to learn, develop and challenge myself, but above all to survive.

It would seem that I am not ambitious, and I certainly won't be having children with the OP anytime soon. And personally I am grateful for it.

I'm a single mum earning £23k a year and we are comfortable on that. That will likely be the highest I can ever earn in my line of work. Where I live £45k would be a fortune!

I'm happier than most people I know with more money than me because I'm comfortable with what I've got. I have no interest in a big house, big car, private education for DS or anything like that. The people I know who are high earners often have a "keeping up with the Joneses" lifestyle where they constantly need to earn more, have bigger and better things.

Money really doesn't buy happiness OP.

"Those who earn more typically have less stress as that’s passed down the ranks!"

TNJ, that doesn't sound like ambition to me. Getting to a level where you sound as though you can take your foot off the gas and simply direct your shit on all those below you sounds quite the opposite. Quite ruthless in fact.

Maybe that's the sort of like minded partner you're looking for. Good luck with that. I'm sure he'll be a right catch.

FaceForRadio1973
Great post.
I know quite a few people like that in STEM based roles. They get to a certain point in a job they love and then have to make a decision whether to keep improving and be the best whatever they do they can be, keep learning, keep refining techniques and so on or they leave the very job they love and are good at to move into management and sit in an office for 40 hours a week.
Many of them choose to remain where they are and work on being the best they can be as they have no desire to be a pencil pusher in an office, otherwise they'd have done a grad scheme in office careers. They're not lacking ambition. They're just not wanting to fundamentally change their job chasing the next pay rise if it means sacrificing the job they love and are good at.

I know teachers who feel similar, me included. There's a certain point where the next step up involves teaching even less (or almost never). For people who are ambitious and driven and want to be tobest teacher they can be that's a challenge as they're not interested in rarely teaching, but there is a lack of classroom based promotions beyond a certain point.

The OP (and others who seem to wildly miss the point) would say all those people are lacking ambition. They're not. They have the drive and integrity to know what they excel at and won't sell out for the sake of moving upwards when they already have a comfortable lifestyle.

I think some of you are being unkind to OP. It's surprising some men's lack of ambition but I suppose that's if you come from a background of aspiration and a expectation to succeed
Some men are unambitious and don't want to succeed. This man (and others like him who OP would rule out), have already worked hard and got themselves more than comfortable.
It's not that people on this thread aren't from backgrounds who don't with to succeed. It's that people on this thread are clued up to know the difference between lazy, apathetic and disinterested in doing well Vs working hard, good salary and at a place of contentment where he can still develop professionally and personally without chasing the next promotion.

They are not the same thing

My view of that IS being comfortable. Not every parent with their child at a private school is wealthy!!!!!

There is nothing wrong with privilege

My favourite quotes from op so far

Op I'm glad your eyes have been opened a little but wow, you really need to get out into the world more and meet people outside of your bubble. £45k is a HUGE amount of money (considering the average uk wage) and if you can send your kids to private school you are incredibly wealthy compared to the average person in the world.

Privilege is a problem when it surrounds you (and your future kids) with this warped kind of view of the world and wealth. It leads to extreme lack of empathy and understanding or willingness to help those a lot less privileged than you (I'm not saying that's true in your personal case, I'm speaking v generally). Again, generally speaking, the world's a massive fucking mess because people don't think they're rich enough and want more, more, more. If you're a millionaire there's billionaires to compare yourself to etc.

I don’t think someone is unambitious because they are paid less. I’m saying at 38 with no commitments and no home that this person lacks ambition. Yes there may be a reason - I get it with teaching where if you love teaching you want to be j a classroom. That’s admirable.

But a man in a role that he’s sticking to just to keep the pressure off...at 38 with no family, that’s a strange approach.

It's not a strange approach. That's what people are saying! Did you ask him why?

When I met my DH he was earning 55k and had just turned down a job paying 80k because he didn't want to relocate. He had family and friends and enjoyed his life - he would have lost that if he moved. Family is important to him.

Instead of thinking he was lazy and unambitious I admired his outlook and values. Those are the values that make him a good husband and dad.

My ex on the other hand chased to money and worked away all the time. That played a huge part in why we didn't have children and why we split.

But a man in a role that he’s sticking to just to keep the pressure off...at 38 with no family, that’s a strange approach.

To be fair, it's no stranger than you wanting to be a stay at home mum while super ambitious and driven women pay for childcare and continue progressing in their careers. We all value and prioritise different things.

I’m saying at 38 with no commitments and no home that this person lacks ambition. Yes there may be a reason - I get it with teaching where if you love teaching you want to be j a classroom. That’s admirable.
There are many similar jobs where the next step up means being removed from what you enjoy. As a driven person it's irritating but it's a trade off that has to be made. I know many people in different sectors who feel that way. They're happy to apply for promotion if the right thing comes up and it doesn't affect their work-life balance but otherwise they're comfortable and content.

But a man in a role that he’s sticking to just to keep the pressure off...at 38 with no family, that’s a strange approach.
Why is it strange?
That's what I don't understand.
People can be ambitious and want to better themselves without wanting to add additional pressure to their working lives.

Maybe they know they want to start a family and don't want to be trapped in a higher pressure job because they want to see their wife and children? I know some men who've kept working up, and their wives have said they don't see them on evenings and there working some weekends or thinking about work. They're earning good money, but it affects the home balance. It works for those men and their families.

I don't get how a man not wanting to add pressure to his life by taking promotion after promotion is a negative thing, unless you're a woman seeking a man to fund you.

Exactly banagna complete double standards.....not to mention sexist.