Something else women can't do ... :-(

[Meow75isknittinglikemad]

So glad to see an article with such a modern attitude NOT

Mine is the first comment ... If it's gone up. I'll post it here in a sec too.

No, mine isn't the first comment, but as I'm on my pad, I'm struggling to c&p what I wrote.

Be right back with that.

It's true in my house.

This is what I tried to post.

Why is it not stated that a) the salaries of women still tend to be less than men, mostly due to the fact so many women have part time salaries to go to their part time jobs, to try to minimise child are costs in most cases and b) not in my case, but a heck of a lot of my friends, their partners or husbands consider any purchases related to THEIR children to be the responsibility of their female partner, so not only does he earn more, but his pay goes to less "obligatory" spending in order that their children can be clothed, shoed, etc.

But yeah, the most important thing to report is how poor women are at managing their finances, almost making it a necessity that their male partners have control of the money and give the women an allowance, right. This is not the 1950's any more. When earning power is balanced, I imagine that debt management, etc is SO MUCH EASIER!! Level playing field anyone - not yet, by any means!!!

It's more just cheap and lazy journalism than anything inherently sexist, I think. The article could easily have been written with the genders reversed based on the highly scientific sample of 2000 people on Quidco. Hardly a 'study' as the headline suggests.

Maybe not out and out sexism, but I definitely think there was an implied "silly girls, spending rent money on shoes" kind of attitude.

Oh I wouldn't bother taking anything seriously in the Express. It is a paper with no journalists owned by a pornographer. God knows who even reads that shite.

It is crap though isn't it.

What a lot of nonsense.

It's in the express, otherwise known as the idiots version of the Daily Fail!! Loved your comments by the way OP :)

DH did our budget to start. Both of us had equal access to our money, but he set up the DDs, SOs, and monitored it. We didn't really have a tight rein on any of it, and when one account got too low, he'd just move money about, so it looked like we never ran out, but we never saved anything.

I went on mat leave and took over the budget as part of the house admin as I was home more. We now have a much clearer budget, allocated spending money and savings. We've managed to get enough together to make a big dent in the house repairs and we're even going on holiday next year!

It's not that DH is bad with money, far from it, but he never really bothered to budget, whereas I did, and we're better off for it.

I'm a bloke and I am absolutely terrible at budgeting! What an absolutely ridiculous article. If you'll indulge me I am going to rip that article to absolute pieces.

1. First off whoever wrote that article did not have their name attributed to it (unless I missed it, blinded by the red mist as I was!). That speaks volumes, you write an article you don't put your name to you are being a coward and don't want your journalistic career tainted by something you know is bullshit.

1. 2000 people no matter which demographic they drew from is anywhere near large enough to chart trends and the fact they do not lay out divisions (how many are men, how many are women, what sort of incomes these people are on). The fact that it is not included in what is quite a brief article (it wasn't merely to save word count) tells me it's a deliberate obfuscation as they know it won't stand up to scrutiny.

1. The assertion of the headline and the statement "MODERN men are better at dealing with money issues than women, says a study." Whilst factually correct (in as much as they report that a study reports X, not that the assertion has any validity whatsoever). I may as well print an article saying "drunk male mysoginist shouts out all women are bitches, whilst marinating in his own vomit and urine" underneath the headline Women are bitches. Lets be frank about as much good sense and scientific research went into that study as could be found in our fictional drunk's thought process.

That article has royally pissed me off...

Sorry to double post even if I WAS to give that study one iota of credit (which I don't). I could just as easily have written an article outlining this headline. "Study shows that income discrimination against women needs to stop", and then point at payscale disparity, and economic disadvantage compromises women's choices in life and how they suffer from financial abuse at the hands of society itself. Sorry I'll shut up now before I start frothing at the mouth.

Um ... all that article tells me is that men have more disposable money than women.

And there may not be that big a gap between "40%" and "almost half" anyway. Does that mean that more than half of men have to "resort to using a credit card to survive until payday"? Despite having bigger pay packets? Excellent money management there, chaps!

wordsmithery. 44% of women and almost half of men....hmmmm

I'm getting deja vu. This exact same thing has happened before, a few years ago.
There was a survey that showed women have more credit card debt than men and it was presented in the press as 'women are crap with money and buy frivolous things like clothes' rather than recognising that women are generally poorer so more likely to be forced to get into debt for day-to-day essentials.

I only needed to see the title and I was annoyed. What utter bollocks.

And yes, Tallyra you're right it could even be 44%.

the survey uses self reporting not objective measuring and society encourages men to overestimate their abilities and women to underestimate their abilities.

making this type of PR 'survey' pretty meaningless.

You made me click on the express :(

Great to see a great excuse for some men to persist in financial abuse (which is now illegal)