I'm not convinced that feminism has helped the women it should have?

[soapona]

I think on these discussion boards and on my Facebook I see women. They don't insist on marriage so they partner remains married to the ex for years and year, they live together and I wonder what will happen should the man die. I also see women with no security living with men with no intentions of marrying and having children. Women moving in with men too soon. In the days gone by women would and could have insisted on commitment. So now the position for women is worse hanging round waiting for a proposal.

I know they don't have to I'm fairly wealthy and a single parent so have choices and always have. I don't have a lot to gain from marriage.

I'm not sure things have got better for women we are expected to do a lot now two incomes are the usual for a mortgage instead of one in the olden days . So it's a given women work, do the most childcare do we honestly think these thing will change when the power imbalance is there from the beginning?

Also the women marrying "beneath themselves", that's not the correct term but a man earning less and not likely to come into a decent inheritance. What is the point in getting married there if you're a women? Perhaps if the woman is wealthy to avoid inheritance tax for her children but other than that I don't know?

So would woman not be happier marrying the same or above and insisting on marriage early on, like it was a given in days gone by?

Surely Women are now in very risky positions due to this living together in a man's property. I see much more domestic abuse these days. I believe the stats are much higher with non married couples. Surely living together unmarried has been caused by equality and feminism and the very people feminists has been trying to help they've hindered.

Beg pardon?

You mean that women are no longer being given to men who are in a position to 'keep' them but are making free choices badly, and so we should feminist better?

@CuriousaboutSamphire Good point. Although society has moved in a way where women are expected to co habit and we're are now going toward the norm of having children before marriage too. This is in my opinion driven by men.

Society is driving women in a less secure route.

I see what you are getting at. Women have no financial protection if they have children and give up work but are not married. This is sold to us as choice but in reality it screws over a lot of women. We are still in a position where, upon separation women keep the kids (and all the work and restrictions that entails) and men keep the money ( and associated freedom).

It is perfectly possible to protect yourself financially without being married.
I don’t think it is being a feminist that makes women fail to do so, or have children with men who do not make good fathers.

soapona

I know what you're saying OP. I think that feminists underestimated just how much power men have over us. There has been a total backlash that we could never have predicted. Women losing custody of their kids to fathers because "we're all equal now", whereas in the past they lost custody of their kids because children were the property of fathers.
There should've been more focus on improving the value of the work that goes into a pregnancy, labor and raising a kid in the early years. I lost out on a promotion as soon as I got pregnant, so even just conceiving a child can disadvantage you in the workplace let alone the rest that's involved.

So men always get what they want, just in a roundabout way, and men use equality laws to benefit them.

Being more free from sexist social norms of no sex before marriage for women, must marry if you have kids, must give up work and support your man etc, comes hand in hand with women needing to wise up.

It's absolutely right for a woman to cohabiting if she wants to.It's right that a woman can make whatever career/family choices she wants to. If a woman wants to cohabit to protect her DC inheritance rather than enter a marriage later with assets then that's her right.

The main thing is that they need to be informed decisions, not driven by ' DP says it makes sense for me to move into his house, pay to his mortgage but not be on the deeds, we don't need marriage as it's a piece of paper and common law spouse means I can stay in the house until DC are 18'.
Youre right, men know the value and legal status of marriage and some ensure their assets are very well protected at the expense of their partner. Women need to wise up.

I think it's an interesting question whether feminism has overall increased women's happiness or how it has affected their lives in terms of security. I think it has had some increase in security but that has tended to be strongest among more economically successful women. i am not entirely sure it has, if you compare it to the worst periods in human history it might but otherwise?

Marriage has become in some ways less protective as couples have come to be seen as essentially autonomous economic units rather than seeing the family as one unit that is interdependent. In other ways we've made it easier to get out of bad ones, and perhaps that is the trade off. But I am always suspicious when the real advantage seems to go to the capitalist employers.

Oops, above should say, I am not sure it has made women happier

Isn't feminism which is more likely to inform women that they have virtually no rights when just living together? (In England and Wales, at least - it may be different in other parts of the UK and the world.) I think the fact that many women (and men) make uninformed choices, or informed choices at a time they have nothing to lose in their view, I am not sure that's feminism's fault.

I think a lot of women put up with a stuff they definitely should not. I think the shaky economic situation is not helping.
Women don’t help themselves by having children without marriage or any other protection then being left high and dry.

Patriarchy's gonna patriarch.

It is ironic that marriage now offers more automatic protection for women with children in a relationship than the other alternatives, but that's because patriarchy will always seek to keep men on top of the pile.

What we need to do is change society so that both parents are equally economically disadvantaged by childcare, for example. And that women wise up and protect themselves financially. Goosefoot is also right wrt capitalism.

Many of these problems would vanish if we had adequate social housing, a decent state pension and weren’t going through austerity measures that have a huge impact on single mothers.

Totally agree end
If housing was cheap I know plenty of couples that would not be together.

Feminism includes giving women the freedom to make choices you disagree with. It sounds like you have a very specific world view.

I see much more domestic abuse these days.

Just because there's more awareness and visibility today, doesn't mean domestic abuse didn't happen in the past.

As for women "marrying beneath themselves", if you think the only reason to get married is because your spouse earns a lot or will come into an inheritance then I feel sorry for you.

Surely Women are now in very risky positions due to this living together in a man's property

You really need to read a bit about the history of feminism before you complain about it.

Women used to get married and all of their property, earning and rights to buy/sell anything belonged to their husband.
Millicent Fawcett was a feminist behind enabling married women to own property and earnings themselves.

It's only because of feminists women are actually able to own property.

Even within marriage there is a view that a woman should be working and not 'living off her husband'. So we still get lumbered with the disadvantages of being female (doing the majority of domestic work/child rearing while also still bring discriminated against in the workplace) and when the relationship goes tits up we are told that spousal support is not necessary if we (as a couple) made a choice for the wife to be a sahp. Nevermind that this suited the husband very well and that he has gained from home support.
Have seen do many friends screwed over by the financial settlement of their divorces. They still have majority care of the DC, so less freedom to move or work without that consideration. Meanwhile the ex h pays minimum he can get away with and has total freedom to live and work wherever it suits.

'Also the women marrying "beneath themselves", that's not the correct term but a man earning less and not likely to come into a decent inheritance. What is the point in getting married there if you're a women?'

??????

Can you not think of any reason a woman may marry other than for money? Why a woman might marry a man who has less earning potential than her?

What you have said sounds like it's trying to sound reasonable and there are some points that have been discussed on these boards / mumsnet a fair bit, but there's a few comments in there which are pretty out there.

Women were owned by their husbands in years gone by. DV was essentially legal. Marital rape was only made illegal in, I think it was 1992. Women had to give up work when they got married, later years after she got pregnant with first child. Pregnancy outside marriage meant shame destitution, often. Etc etc. Which golden years for women are you thinking of, can you specify?

What we need to do is change society so that both parents are equally economically disadvantaged by childcare, for example. And that women wise up and protect themselves financially. Goosefoot is also right wrt capitalism.

I think this was the aim. But what has happened is that men who might chip in a bit at home are now claiming they've carried out 50% of the childcare when that's not even physically possible considering the baby is inside the woman for 9 months and she loses out on work and promotions because of that

And I agree with Endofthedays about better state support for single mothers m

I did things the proper way, sold out feminism by getting married, and got shafted anyway. My husband hid his money. Lawyer told me this was very common, especially if the husband has his own business. Also, paternity rights (the whole purpose of marriage for men) are strengthened often leaving a wife at a disadvantage

I think you need to keep some perspective here!

We have won the right to vote, own property (you wouldn’t have even been allowed a mortgage in the past), access to birth control and abortion, the right to a bank account, the right to put a patient in our names, the right to education, the right to not be sacked once married, pregnant or restricted from certain roles just because men say so. We have the right (although I’d argue it’s most lip service to be honest) to not be raped or beaten by our husbands, the right to same sex relationships...

Individual women making bad choices is not feminists fault. Men acting like assholes and treating women shit, is not feminists fault. The fact that the patriarchy is still out there swinging it’s balls around, is not feminists fault.

@EBearhug I do think it's feminisms fault. It's driven the "were equal" and women don't need looked after when in reality where children and cohabiting are involved we are not. If there was no feminism would women be cohabiting to the same extent?

I see much more domestic abuse these days. I believe the stats are much higher with non married couples. Surely living together unmarried has been caused by equality and feminism and the very people feminists has been trying to help they've hindered

You may see more domestic abuse these days but I very much doubt that's because there is more rather than it being more hidden in the past.

And I sincerely hope there is less abuse amongst married couples. I'd like to think that couples try living together before making life long commitments and have the ability to walk away if it turns out their partner is abusive.

I'm also pretty unconvinced that living together without marriage was caused by feminism. I seem to recall it was pretty common amongst the working classes in the Victorian era, though I'd have to go back and check on that. Your world view seems pretty far removed from the working class couples I know where inheritance and deciding whether to live in his or her house really aren't issues.

I probably don't gain much favour in some circles when I say it's important that women learn to make informed choices. Freedom to make your own choices also comes with the risk that you will have to bear the burden of any mistakes you make.
It's not victim blaming and it doesn't mean that women cannot push for better legislation or arrangements that give them better financial security.

It was the same lesson I had to learn when I discarded the security blanket of religion for the freedom of atheism. It's not for everyone, but when you do decide that you don't want to live your life governed by religious rules, you also have to learn to take responsibilities for your decisions and that god isn't there to magically help you out with everything. For better or worse, you are on your own and you have to hone you internal ethical compass to guide you through life instead of looking up a religious book that tells you how to eat, sleep, dress and treat others.

The goal of every individual, imo, is to aim for financial independence and long-term security. How this is achieved is up to the individual, but the more of it you can shoulder by yourself, the more 'power' you bring into a relationship.
I think young girls should be encouraged to pursue worthwhile careers and be savvy with their finances - invest in property or other long term funds, build up a healthy pension. They need to understand that having children will severely curtail their financial security, and therefore they should proceed carefully - pick good partners, insist on marriage or ensure the equivalent legal structures are in place etc. Always set aside money into an account that is just for yourself and no one else.

Women need to learn these vital life skills, whether they feel aligned with feminism or not.
I have seen websites and blogs that explain financial concepts like stocks, shares, investments and so on to women. Maybe there can be initiatives to take such messages to a wider female audience for women who aren't university educated or middle class etc.
The underlying message is that they are responsible for their long-term security and their decisions in life should be based with that in mind.

I have no desire to have children and I earn fairly well. I don't have a problem with my male partner earning less than me because I am still building up my own healthy pension and considering buying my own home over the next year or two. If we were to split up, I still have my income and savings so I'm less likely to find myself stuck in an unpleasant relationship with nowhere to go. I think all young people should be brought up with these sort of values.