Why is a woman’s income to the household not given a lot of value ?

CheeseMonger96 · 2021-04-12T17:26:34+00:00

I just asked my partner of 4 years. He said that even though my job and finances were not what attracted him to me, he couldn't be in a LTR with someone if they were financially unstable or irresponsible.

LowCreddit · 2021-04-12T15:58:14+00:00

I guess there are two groups of men that aren't mutually exclusive at all:

"Her career/education doesn't make my dick hard". And it's a valid reasoning although put in a pretty degrading form. Not all relationships are going to end up in marriage or cohabitating, some people just date for sex and company.
"Her money is her money, his money is theirs". These dude believe that it doesn't matter how much women brings to the table financially, she always takes more. I don't agree with them and I'd be really curious to see their explanation. But considering this attitude it makes sense why they don't see any value in women's career.

ShakeNBake007 · 2021-04-12T17:44:09+00:00

I don't know what generation told you this. I exclusively date independent women. No daddy or baby daddy money allowed. How can a family even exist anymore on a single income? Worst part is. Where I'm from they're extremely rare.

rich_man_88 · 2021-04-12T15:57:33+00:00

It is given value. The thing is, it’s not one of the most important factors.

See, a woman will look for a partner who makes more money than her. But men do not care about that. They can marry a broke woman, a woman who makes a lot more , a little less or even the same.

In conclusion, it does matter, but is not one of the main factors.

Diamond-Breath · 2021-04-12T18:09:51+00:00

It’s up to the woman. As long as the male partner ALSO contributes to the other half of the household duties they could go the 50/50 route. The problem comes when men want a housewife with a career.

Barely-moral · 2021-04-12T16:30:51+00:00

A few explanation that work for me. I can't speak for anyone else.

1st: I can already afford whatever lifestyle I want and whatever lifestyle she wants. I don't need the extra money.

2nd: In most cases, her money is hers, my money is ours. The extra money we would both have would be spent on her anyways.

3rd: The lifestyle I would have for myself is dirt cheap. Because I am with her, I need to pay more to have a better lifestyle that allows for her to be comfortable. It doesn't matter if we share costs, I would still be paying way more than what I would pay if I was single.

To make the long story short, no ammount of money that she brings can increase my level of happiness. So it is not a factor.

If a woman can manage to balance her household abilities along with maintaining a decent career, is that really not a plus for the man ?

Not for me. I don't want to be second place nor share the first. No need for balance. I want my partner to put me and the relationship first. (Behind herself of course, humans always have themselves as the non mentioned number one)

cuckspace · 2021-04-12T17:55:25+00:00

A woman demands expensive things that a man would never see the need for when living alone. Also, her money is her money and his money is their money. If she has more money to spend she will simply buy the more expensive brand of everything, shoes and handbags for the price of a car etc. All in all, it’s more expensive to live with a woman no matter how much she earns herself.

JD_Bus_ · 2021-04-12T18:34:09+00:00

It matters to me. One of the standards I have for my future wife/gf is that if she’s living with me (thus using the electricity, water, etc), then it’s only fair that she pay half the utilities, and maybe some of rent depending on the circumstances. Not to mention, she should be buying her own makeup, clothing, and jewellery (besides the occasional gifts I’d get her for her birthday and Christmas).

So of course, a potential partner who has a good career/job/work ethic is not only attractive, but necessary for an LTR with me. Bonus points if she’s the entrepreneur type like I am.

SeriousMaintenance76 · 2021-04-12T20:48:26+00:00

I never wanted to be a stay at home wife. I saw the toll it took on my dad having too work himself just to provide for us and my family. I always thought if my mom just got a part-time job it would help ease his burden just a little bit.

Covid forced my dad out of work and this has honestly been the happiest I have seen him in years. In truth I think this is the first time he had a vacation in years.

I got my first job at fourteen and been working, ever since. I have always made it a goal that I would not allow my future husband to be the sole provider. In my current relationship, my bf just quit his job to start his master program as he is making a big pivot in his career. No problem, we agreed that for the first semester he should focus on school, so he will have a good chance of getting an internship the next year.

I don't think anybody should have the stress of being the sole provider for too long tbh... But that just how I feel.

My boyfriend thought this was a plus, I don't know about other men...

PoliticsIsBroken · 2021-04-12T19:39:49+00:00

It's valuable to me, but only as an indicator of character, similar to n-count. If a woman makes good money, she probably has a skilled and/or demanding job. To get and keep that job you probably need to have a good work ethic, organizational skills, good planning etc. I don't actually care about the money itself (I make more than enough).

rhomu-31 · 2021-04-12T16:42:59+00:00

Because "what's mine is mine and whats yours is ours" is the woman's creed

thetruthishere_ · 2021-04-12T17:20:58+00:00

I find it odd. One of the things that attracted my husband to me was how ambitious and dedicated I was to my career

2021-04-12T17:07:24+00:00

TODAY, I CARE. Because I already paid that bill. lol

If you can find a woman who earns the same as you, and puts the same proportion as you in the relationship ... then you're fine.
Now, if the configuration starts to change ... we have a problem. For example:
You get 100k and the woman gets 50k. Even though they both put 50k into the relationship, she has half of the other 50k left over from her earnings.
And what will probably happen is: You will put 75k. She will put 25k and at the end of the day she will also take half of what is left in the divorce.

It is very difficult for me to find a woman who earns the same as me ... and when they win they are older than me. so I lost interest in getting married again.

2021-04-12T17:08:16+00:00

Even if a guy contributes more, as long as what he would have spent had he been single is more than what he has to spend now thanks to his partner’s income, is that not a huge plus in the long run ?

That's not entirely true.

daproest1 · 2021-04-12T18:05:57+00:00

It doesn’t influence how much a man loves or is attracted to his woman. Not the same the other way around.

couldbemage · 2021-04-12T19:44:19+00:00

Very few people say women's money isn't useful. Most say it isn't attractive.

Professional_Gold_25 · 2021-04-13T01:01:51+00:00

I'm not aware of any men who devalue a woman's labor and/or income. In fact, most men I know encourage the women in their lives to contribute in a meaningful way.

After having been married to a lazy, entitled parasitic first wife, I'm blessed to have a new wife who works and works hard. She doesn't make near what I do but her contribution is considered equal as she works her ass off bringing home the bacon and I'm extremely proud of her work ethic.

I think you'd find more men are concerned about entitled, effete women who think they deserve life on a silver platter because they're attractive (or so they think).

JohnDoe9564 · 2021-04-12T15:53:32+00:00

A woman with a career is infinitely more attractive than women without one.

You can't complain about divorce rape or alimony when you're marrying a broke woman who can't hold a job.

zerofeetpersecond · 2021-04-12T16:15:15+00:00

Hmmm ugly woman who makes 100k or beautiful woman who makes 50k, decisions decisions?

LightOverWater · 2021-04-12T17:45:28+00:00

The higher the man's income, the less important is the woman's income. A man making $200k+ can afford anything he desires, materially speaking. If he desires a family then he can afford one on that income but he doesn't have the time, and often the skills, to raise the family on his own. That's why HVM value traditional women and income doesn't matter. It's most important for the woman to be attractive & take care of herself, have the skills and drive to take care of the home and family, and support her husband in being a winner.

Talking points:

The woman's income is her money, not his. So why should a man care about that? Women are not comfortable when they realize they have to pay for all of his stuff. Women are not comfortable buying men clothes, gifts, dates etc.. Women with high incomes do not step into the role and responsibility that men traditionally have by paying for everything.
The best that a guy is going to get from a woman's income is her paying a larger share of the mortgage or some basic bills. Besides that, everything else is 50/50 in her mind. So why should men give a damn about her income?
The most value a man gets from a women's income is protection from divorce rape. If she makes the same or higher income she isn't going to be able to fuck him over purely on divorce- she will over fuck him over in the family court.

Sexually speaking, men have and always will be valued as providers. Women just don't have the same sexual urge to: 1. fuck dozens of partners or fuck everyday 2. value men primarily for their attractiveness 3. pay for all of a man's expenses & lifestyle. So if a man isn't a provider, what does she need him for? Companionship? Buy a dog and get some friends.

Good-Strong · 2021-04-12T16:14:05+00:00

[permanently deleted]

aerial_coitus · 2021-04-12T17:21:50+00:00

Her income (or “professional qualifications” or whatever) does not provide any defense or comfort whatsoever when she unilaterally decides to divorce rape and destroy him because of “feelings” ......to put it nicely, it is extremely frustrating that women continue to ignore this and act like this phenomenon does not exist.

Just for an example, if she is a surgeon making $500,000, and he is an average dude making $100,000....... it sounds nice on paper, but when she destroys him in family court, and he still has to pay her child support and alimony as a portion of his $100k salary (even though her $500k income eclipses his significantly), not to mention the legal costs and attorney fees he has to pay........ so what? In that situation, her $500,000 salary means jack shit to him.

There might be some limited exceptions to this, but by and large, regardless of how you ladies want to run some hypothetical numbers on the basis of some idealized notions of how a relationship should unfold........ the cold hard truth is that, statistically speaking, it is far more likely that she will divorce rape the guy, so this claim of immense value being brought to the table by the woman with a large salary or other qualifications is little more than just a red herring or a smoke screen. Call me cynical and jaded all you want, it is the truth of the current relationship landscape in modern culture.

flapperfemmefatale · 2021-04-12T17:43:04+00:00

I think it is, for most men I know offline. Here, it seems like there's a significant number of men who would prefer that women be financially dependent on them.

MGTOWManofMystery · 2021-04-12T18:35:00+00:00

You are thinking in terms of LTRs. Many interpretations of the Red Pill nowadays direct men to eschew LTRs. As such, her income is often irrelevant.

LE0TARD0 · 2021-04-13T05:29:59+00:00

Women like to marry up in status and wealth
She won't spend the money on you
Her money is her money and your money is "our" money

CHOLO_ORACLE · 2021-04-12T16:33:10+00:00

Market masculinity is one of the ways that the patriarchy keeps men who would otherwise not be categorized as falling under the hegemonic deal of masculinity from turning against it. By offering another route to romantic/sexual viability (or the perception of same) the patriarchy casts a wider net of men to support and maintain it

Women making more money threatens this. When incomes are made equal the men who previously used their market success as a means of finding romantic/sexual success no longer have as much money to do so - their success is "lessened" since now other people (women, but also subordinate men - men of color, gay men, trans men) are making money too. Their success looks less "successful", which means that they become less viable romantically/sexually.

The thing is though, that those men only become less romantically/sexually viable from the point of view of the hegemonic ideal. It is of course entirely possible for a man to be romantically/sexually viable without having much money at all, and the patriarchy acknowledges this too (a "Chad" does not necessarily need to have money to be a "Chad"). But in a world where the norm is that more money = more better, men who find such viability outside of market masculinity are relatively few. And because the patriarchy already exists, most men find themselves in a position where they are doing better, financially, than women. They become complicit men - they do not fit the hegemonic ideal, but with their money they can achieve, fleetingly, the fantasy of being so. Women or subordinate men making more money destroys their chance for them to achieve the fantasy of being a hegemonic male, so they either ignore or dismiss concerns about inequality.

So now we have a bunch of men in our society that have been lead to believe - and now helplessly believe - that them having money is the only way to find a partner. In pursuit of the idea that they can turn their money into love they say nothing about their partner's income, so as to give room to the assumption that they will be making all the money, and to give women a chance at being complicit too - they offer the promise that the woman will never have to make money, so long as she makes her love for sale. These men then often complain of not being able to find anyone "real", and liked the duped fools that they are, they cannot see that it was themselves that made this so.

Aubrey_D_Graham · 2021-04-12T17:43:26+00:00

First and foremost, a man is expected to provide for himself. Second, a man who insists that a woman contribute to the household is seen as controlling at best and abusive at worst. Not only that, providing is a very masculine trait. It is a burden of pirformance. The more a woman provides, the less she can be in her feminine. Men value femininity.

SaBahRub · 2021-04-12T16:44:59+00:00

A dependent is easier to control and dominate

Like a child, or a job subordinate

stats135 · 2021-04-12T16:22:50+00:00

What matters is spendings, not earnings. Woman that makes more money tend to spend more money. Worse, they expect you to spend at her rate. Worse still, they becomes less and less appreciative of the money you do spend on/with them. I've said it before, I much rather pay for her share of a $20 dinner and have her be grateful, than pay half of a $200 dinner and have her go "meh."

In an ideal world I would find myself a woman that makes boat loads of $$$, we save until we can retire in our 30s, and spend the rest of our days and nights fucking around. But that's not likely to happen. The reason for me to acquire money is that it enables me to work less and fuck more. The reason for women to acquire more money is usually to spend more.

Stevefr0mYellowstone · 2021-04-12T16:46:32+00:00

A woman's income is not given no value. I think you're approaching it from the wrong angle.

For example, would a low value male, who say is 25 years old, lives with his parents, is 30 pounds overweight, loves to play video games and makes $25,000 a year love to get with a 27 year old woman who is making $100,000 a year? Absolutely. And in circumstances like that, not only is the woman's income of value, it is something that is playing a big factor in that man being with the woman.

But that's not the way it typically works. That woman would never lower herself to be with that man. Typically what you see happen when this topic comes up is that a woman spends her youth, the years where she is most attractive and can most easily obtain a male not focusing on getting into a long term relationship/marriage with a guy, but rather focusing on her education and her career above anything else. So let's say the woman is now 33 years old, she has her PHD and is a business executive making $200,000 a year. That woman isn't looking for the example of the man I mentioned above. That woman is, as any woman is, looking for a man who is of higher value than herself. Because she already makes $200,000 a year, any man who makes less than that isn't worth of her. In fact, we've often seen articles or studies that show that not even a guy making a little more than her is enough, oftentimes the woman is looking for a guy making 50% more than her, if not more. So at a bare minimum the guy she wants has to make $300,000 a year.

So who is that guy? And what percentage of said men actually exist? Is that even 1% of the male population? Let's go with an age range that is attractive to her, let's say no more than 5 years younger or older than her. And that's even before we take into account what her physical appearance requirements are. Because the guy making $300,000 who is 5 feet 4, bald and 100 pounds overweight isn't someone she's looking for. When you take into consideration all those things, maybe a few dozen men in a city of a million people actually qualify for her standards.

And here's what's really important, the man she wants doesn't need a woman making $200,000 a year because he's already making so much money. That isn't to say he won't encounter her, as they very well could be in the same social circles/industry, etc... But why is he going with her when he is in that top 1% (even less than 1%) that ALL women want? It's not just the woman making $200,000 with a PHD who wants him. It's the woman making $30,000 a year with just a high school diploma who also wants him. Because every woman wants him, that man can focus his commitment on the woman who qualifies for what he finds most important. And I don't think anyone would disagree that when a man makes enough money to not need a bail out from someone else, he isn't focusing on the woman's income. He is focusing on her looks. He is focusing on how feminine she is and whether they are a good personality match. Not to mention a woman who would actually be available for him. Why is that man going to get into a long term relationship with a high powered business executive who is likely putting in 50 - 60 hours of work per week minimum when he can find someone who is happy to be a stay at home mother instead? It's not that the man wouldn't be fine with a woman who brings in a lot of income when she is meeting everything else he is looking for. But often for that woman to be making that income, it is at odds with what he is really looking for. Such as her spending her youth not being available to him so she can work on her career, or never being available to see him because she's too busy with work.

Bandit174 · 2021-04-12T16:31:57+00:00

Its not that guys don't care at all, it's just that we don't care as much as women do. Men are far more willing to date someone who earns less but that doesn't mean guys are jumping at the chance to marry a woman who has no career prospects.

GridReXX · 2021-04-12T17:39:48+00:00

I think they mean it doesn’t give them a boner.

Though some men may become more in love with a woman if he sincerely admires her competency at what she does. I’ve 100% observed and experienced this.

A life long partnership can’t sustain on feelings. Life costs. So it benefits men and women to consider factors outside of “arousal and love triggers” when vetting for a long term relationship.

wtknight · 2021-04-12T17:19:36+00:00

I think all most men say is that a woman’s income is not sexually attractive to them or makes him more likely to consider her for sex. I think that most guys who do want to settle down do want to do so with a woman with some income, although it might be a net minus for some of them if she is constantly working.

On the other hand, women usually consider ambition to be attractive in a man.

ChrysippusOfSoli · 2021-04-12T18:03:36+00:00

It doesn't matter because I like to be financially independent. I don't want to use a woman's money, nor do I want her to use mine. Therefore, whether she's poor or rich is irrelevant.

SwinginPastMyKnees_ · 2021-04-13T01:12:46+00:00

I wouldn't say it's not given a lot of value. No one wants to end up with a leech for a romantic partner. Especially in today's age where a family cannot thrive on a single income.

However, I doubt any man would want to get into a serious relationship with a woman he is not sexually attracted to. It doesn't matter if she has Bezos levels of money, if she doesn't meet the minimum level of attractiveness for a given man, then he won't want to pursue anything with her. So in that case, her income does not matter at all until she meets the minimum physical attractiveness measure.

On top of that, many modern women are given the advice to pocket their own money in the event that her and her partner split up. So in that case, her income does not make any noticeable difference to the household structure.

Lastly, some women come with loads of debt that they cannot pay off themselves, even if they have a higher than average paying job. In that case, not only is she not contributing significantly to the household structure, she's adding debt to the man's life.

i_have_a_semicolon · 2021-04-13T22:09:33+00:00

It is given value, just trad cons don't "care". The sub attracts a lot of trad cons that skew the perception of things here. Many men would love a wife to contribute to the income of the household, I'd argue even most.

2021-04-12T16:20:27+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Strongest_son · 2021-04-12T16:43:53+00:00

Men care about fertility and beauty, her "carreer" and her "titles" come second when choosing a woman. Women can't comprehend this because they always aim higher, they search a partner that is better than them or at least the "same", they can't understand how men marry down, the thing is, we don't search for money from women, we search for femininity, fertility, and that she is family oriented. She having an income or not is not a deal breaker as long as she's excellent on the other areas I mentioned.

bowserfire73 · 2021-04-12T16:09:19+00:00

Men can't have many standards because women's are so high. We just take what we can get .

1Here4Bach · 2021-04-12T16:18:13+00:00

It is given value. The men in this sub aren’t a good representation of what a good man finds attractive.

superlurkage · 2021-04-12T16:01:26+00:00

Because all that is irrelevant if they can’t smash. It’s also a negative because she isn’t dependent on you and has her own value outside of sex

synosphrene · 2021-04-12T17:18:52+00:00

Because one of the few ways a Man can demonstrate value to a Woman is through resources.

If a Woman has the same or more then it eradicates that particular Man's ability to bring value to that (potential) relationship.

gofigure62 · 2021-04-12T18:31:46+00:00

A significant amount of men can't afford to date someone who can't financially contribute half or more.

Someone who doesn't value a woman's income can financially care for himself, a partner, or a family without additional financial support from a partner.

Many men aren't financially capable of doing that.

When a woman's finances come up here, men automatically discuss women at the 40k and up income bracket. They never mention low or no income women as viable dating options.

2021-04-12T16:01:26+00:00

It just doesn't matter. Why would a job make her more physically attractive? It doesn't.

Yeah not having a career at all and having a lot of debt would be a red flag for starting a relationship. But as long as she is somewhat stable career wise it really doesn't matter what she does or how much she makes. And those unemployed girls could still get the D if they're hot, over some fugly career woman who's good with money.

Grand_Duty · 2021-04-12T16:39:13+00:00

Her money is her money. His money is their money. Women don't share!

Novadina · 2021-04-12T16:36:45+00:00

Because if they valued a woman’s earning capabilities and picked a woman to marry who would be able to contribute a worthwhile amount to the household, they couldn’t complain about “divorce rape”.

Also then they wouldn’t be able to have someone financially dependent on them.

Flightlessbirbz · 2021-04-13T01:39:23+00:00

Men should care if they’re really concerned about “divorce rape” and “gold diggers” taking their money. But usually, they’re really concerned about control. It’s harder to control a woman who has her own income. Their ideal is a woman with no income who doesn’t ever ask for anything and will be left homeless should she want a divorce. Fortunately, modern society prevents this, but a certain type of man is still majorly pissed about that fact. A lot of guys can’t see anything past looks anyway and don’t even see women as whole people, so in that case it’s just irrelevant.

Of course, plenty of men do care. Just talking about the ones who don’t.

flamingoinghome · 2021-04-12T16:24:18+00:00

Because it's considered supplemental.

Because if she leaves, she will take all of it with her. Her husband has no access to it.

Because she considers her income to be "hers" as mad money to do with what she wants. She does not consider that she is required to use that money to contribute to the household's bottom line.

michael1962-01 · 2021-04-12T16:52:39+00:00

I'm rich. I can allways rebuild wealth as knowledge and networks do not disapear.

I am with a (little) wealthy woman.

We both have passive income.

Why would i go for a working woman.

Can't eat 4 t-bone a day.

Counter_Proposition · 2021-04-12T18:20:35+00:00

"Oh wow, look at the career on her."

- No man ever

illicitforcemaejure · 2021-04-12T20:23:35+00:00

I think in a lot of heteronormative relationships, intelligence and being self sufficient is not seen as valuable because it is associated with a lack of ability to control a woman. If she does not need him physically it is seen as a threat, rather than an asset to him, because he does not have absolute ownership.

AutoModerator · 2021-04-12T15:50:02+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Goodthingstartssmall · 2021-04-12T17:33:32+00:00

I don't care about anything besides looks for sex. I do care about the whole package for a ltr.

ad240pCharlie · 2021-04-12T17:52:31+00:00

It all depends on what it's in relation to. When you're asking why a womans income "doesn't matter" to us, I'm assuming that you're referring to why it doesn't change any attraction we may already have towards her? That's simply the case. If a woman we like makes a lot of money, then great, but if she doesn't then it won't minimize any of the feelings we have. The only scenario in which it would make a difference would be if I had two completely identical clones of the same woman, equal in everything from physical appearance to personality traits, except that one of them made more money.

There is another problem with it, though, and that is the fact that if someone is successful in their field and is career-oriented, then odds are they are able to put much less effort into the relationship. Being financially successful requires a LOT of time and effort, and you don't have an infinite supply of that, so if we could pick between a woman working a minimum wage job and a woman who spends 90 % of her energy on her career, most of us would go for the first option. If I'm in a relationship, I'd rather not feel like we just meet up once in a while to fuck. What's even the point of a romantic relationship if all we really are in practice is friends with benefits? Of course, the same problem is going to be the case for a man as well but I'm only talking from my own perspective here and why I personally might choose to go for a woman who's less financially successful.

Then, of course, there's the fact that men like to feel needed, and a woman who has everything figured out and can do everything on her own is much more likely to make us feel useless. But that is not necessarily going to be a problem if it's simply the case that she makes a lot of money. Just have us kill a spider once in a while then.

xFallacyx69 · 2021-04-12T18:13:41+00:00

Women are less attracted to men who make less than them.
Men place more attraction on looks instead of career.
Working more makes women regret being with someone who can’t provide for them.
I personally like a woman who works, but that’s anecdotal so last.

DownvoteMe2021 · 2021-04-12T18:14:30+00:00

If a woman can manage to balance her household abilities along with maintaining a decent career, is that really not a plus for the man ?

So, first thing I'd note there is that you specifically stated balance her household abilities ; as in she is still expected in some capacity to perform in a domestic fashion. As a lot of people see / narrate, there is a significant portion of the "working single" population that tend to live in less "ideal" cleanliness standards; this is often a functional representation of the relationship between resource collection, spare time and priorities. The often cited anecdotes of male bachelordom often focus around a sloppy bachelor always goofing off with friends. This suggests that if a full time worker produces substantial income at substantial time cost, they prefer to spend their free time in pursuit of more leisurely activities, and not "work all day, then come home and clean" when they operate solo.

As traditionally men had more "time intense" jobs (educational requirements, risk requirements, hourly requirements), this made sense that those with "less intense" jobs (secretaries, waitresses, etc), were essentially able to commit less of themselves to work, and had more energy and desire to clean. Thus traditionally, men were messy, and women cleaned. This isn't really much different going back to a hunter/gatherer model, where the physically dangerous and stressful job of hunting the buffalo was then handed over to the women to prep/cook, while the men when and goofed off some more, so we can see this model has been around a long time.

A common complaint amongst the workers today is that no one has the time to work and clean and play anymore, and where traditional values (Work&Play) continue to work for men, the non-traditional value of Work for women isn't replacing their traditional Household duties values, so Men are Work&Play and women are Work&DomesticWork. A lot of women are citing burn out as a result of this. They're also now judging men who don't clean more caustically than historically, because they feel men aren't sharing the load appropriately. Also of note, and I've witnessed myself, is that it's not very uncommon to find high earning women who live in relative squalid cleanliness standards, no different then men, because they're placing their values on Work&Play instead of Work&DomesticWork.

So why are women's income not valued? Well, the model above explains that Men are expecting Work&Play . When they have a partner who offers Work&DomesticWork; the work is redundant, so it has less value. This also explains the oft narrative of the less attractive women who will have relationships with broke "house men". The Work&DomesticWork of the woman is compatible with a NoWork&Play partner. While there are often sideways looks at this seemingly dysfunctional model, it is a functionally compatible relationship. When the broke guy does get a job, it is often menial, and of no financial consequence to the house. This isn't a lot different than the job a trophy wife might get, and is a functional representation that a financially disadvantaged partner will de-prioritize physical attraction in exchange for financial advantage.

Kevin Samuels, while I don't want to cite him as an expert, does make an excellent point on this. Men get to pick what attributes a desirable woman has, and women get to pick for men. While women want higher earning partners, the very nature of that statement means men are fine with lower earning partners. While those is functional poverty might appreciate the income increase, and thus share domestic duties and play time, the higher up the male-earnings bracket you climb, the less value the extra income will have, and the more the domestic and sexual value will be desirable, because you don't need more resources, you need a stable home and reproduction. So women are upset that Men aren't picking Women for their income/education, and this is effectively complaining Men aren't doing their fair share of the birthing.

edit: And important to note, is that women's overall preference for a male who prefers Work illustrates that she is not willing to take a domestic husband, which would be the functional model with genders reversed. While there are examples of this (and successful examples), there will always be statistically odd but functional results, that is how a normal distribution model works

MajesticMaple · 2021-04-12T18:16:03+00:00

Most dudes are quite minimalist, I'd be content with not having much. I have in my mind a minimum lifestyle that I would be content living and so long as our combined income gets me that lifestyle I don't care. The more I earn the less I care what she earns, as a result I don't care that much what she earns. I'd much rather her be a desirable partner than for her to just be wealthy, and I look for partners accordingly. I've dated girls who work at Walmart and would've been happy with her because she was a great person and beautiful, just a little derpy lol. It was cute though. I should add though that she was young and trying to get her shit together. I think it's important to find work that you are proud doing for everyone. If she was 30 and working at Walmart i would deff find that unnattractive but not because of the money.

Counter_Proposition · 2021-04-12T18:20:08+00:00

Because if it's more than the man makes she'll leave him, and that's if she even gives him a chance to begin with (which is unlikely).

Teflon08191 · 2021-04-12T18:32:08+00:00

Because her income would not serve to enhance our lives appreciably the way focusing on giving our children the best shot at success in life (for example) would.

The irony being that I could never subject myself to the risks of marrying a woman who would be financially dependent on me in this day and age. Way too much incentive and external encouragement for her to just walk away instead of taking her vows seriously.

It's not something you can "vet" for because it's ultimately a cultural problem. Put a woman who doesn't hate men in a room full of women who do and sooner or later...

Hoopy223 · 2021-04-12T18:35:16+00:00

They are relevant its just that most Men aren’t going to think a girl is sexier because she is a heart surgeon or a lawyer vs say a schoolteacher.

Also most families today cannot survive w/o two incomes so yes it definitely matters.

analt223 · 2021-04-12T18:46:34+00:00

because women spend money on themselves and the kids, men spend money on women and kids with a very little amount for themselves.

Most men have to live the cuck life, shes more desirable than you so you have to take what you can get.

BioStu · 2021-04-12T18:50:49+00:00

It's not given alot of value because the man's money is what's relied upon as the majority of women say they won't even date a man who doesn't earn as least as much as she does. Say for example a couple gets married at 25 after both graduate from college. Well I'm pretty sure baby or babies are on the way. Most women would like to take at least a couple years if not several years off in order to bond with the baby. So right off the bat, her income becomes non-existent, and the man's money is solely relied upon. Plus, you are still paying for student loans. Also, men and women are different. A woman's career accomplishments don't make her more attractive to a man. Men judge women mainly on her physical appearance as men get judged mainly on their ability to provide. Women with high incomes often exceed their SMV.

2021-04-12T20:17:47+00:00

Because she’s not going to spend much on him or bills. He’s likely paying rent/mortgage, utilities, internet,food, and all of the insurance if they’re on the same plan. She’ll pay her car note, insurance if necessary, and phone bill. All the rest goes to clothes, makeup, stuff for the kids, and useless shit.

This is fine if she actually likes her job but many women don’t and resent the fact that their husband is too poor for her to be a upper middle class SAHM. On the flip side if he can afford that but she wants to still work it’s even worse, especially if she’s making way less than him. He has to hear about how her boss is a dick, her coworkers are cunts, and the customers are idiots. In many cases he’d be better off with a SAHM and a household income of 100k instead of a woman who actually hates her job but won’t admit.

Aimeereddit123 · 2021-04-12T20:26:11+00:00

Different values and priorities. The men in my family along with my husband value the nurturing aspect of women. Will she be a soft place to fall? Will she be a loving mother to our children? Half the women in my circle stay home with their children and the other half just have part-time jobs during school hours to be home with them. So I think 2 things at play, what the men value more than money, and does the man make enough money that extra money is not needed. I’ve worked and not worked, and my husband couldn’t care less which I choose. My mom and aunt never worked a day outside the home, and they’ve got the happiest marriages of 50 plus years. Just different priorities for some. If I had a career that could buy my husband a mansion, but I was stressed, never home, kids in daycare, he would absolutely be miserable.

2021-04-12T23:28:21+00:00

Depends on the financial situation of the guy...

But i think you're missing the point, for an avg guy its not that its NOT important or considered...its that it doesnt make up for other things. Personally speaking, if fat or ugly or older than me at this point in my life (im 35, and want a family) i wouldnt consider her (hypothetical woman) no matter how much she made.

Also studies have shown whenever women make more than men there are more relationship problems

TLorrai · 2021-04-13T00:25:08+00:00

A lot of people are giving very detailed answers when it's a simple one for me. I can't fall in love with a woman's money. To me the main things I look for in a partner are looks and personality. Do I like how they look and do I like to be around them. That's it. Her income doesn't affect my attraction levels at all. If I like/love a person, the money they make is irrelevant. I'd rather be poor with someone I love than rich with someone I don't. I personally like someone who's smart, and that may lead to a good career. But, the career isn't why I like them. It's just them. If I have to be the breadwinner then so be it. We figure that out a long the way.

Ok_Swim_2691 · 2021-04-13T02:25:37+00:00

What motivates men to say that they aren’t concerned about a woman’s earning capabilities and income ?

Because a woman's earning capabilities and income are subject to sudden evaporation the moment she decides being SAHM is more fun.

Also, women vet by income, if the guy makes the same money as the woman, what's in it for her(saw it on FDS)?

So the man has to ALWAYS make more money than the woman. Thus, vetting by income is pointless.

-Ivar-TheBoneless · 2021-04-13T04:23:39+00:00

Because a woman's money just goes to buy hand bags for herself and not really into the household budget. Then if she does have to seriously contribute she throws it in your face and becomes un-submissive. So it's usually better to not use her money.

abaxeron · 2021-04-13T09:41:04+00:00

An average man wants income to spend on woman and children.

An average woman wants income to use as divorce blackmail and eventually spend on divorce attorney.

This factor compensates whatever "pluses" a woman's income might have for the family (if any).

pubgmisc · 2021-04-13T13:23:41+00:00

Money is alright.

IF you find a real man, this is what he wants:

He isn't attracted to anything that you find attractive in men (except looks and personality, but willing to compromise based on everything else below). He doesn't really care about your degree level, or whatever.

A man primarily seeks a woman who is: Nurturing, caring, skills with offspring (kids, cooking), feminine, lowest body count possible, structure in life, reason, logic, accountability, responsibility, consistency, always be direct (not speaking in: ‘what is he trying to say), don’t nag (but yes express concern) look up to him for guidance, trust him to make the right choices (let him be a man / his nature), tell him that he makes you feel protected and safe (primitive things like that), be 23, and be supportive because the man is tested when the couple has everything and the woman is tested when the couple has nothing. Men care about your past the way you care about his future, act accordingly and you can ask to receive. Never ask for anything you wouldn’t give yourself. Have all the good qualities, don’t have any bad qualities (as of how humans label them). A man would in fact pay to avoid a woman who is 'a founder' etc. of something and have what I listed.

Just some advice:

Now, if you’re going to have a family, and do these things (be a real woman, you need a real man (not a boy). I understand the things you want in a man, and I hope you find a real man (take a look at one’s actions, nothing else). One thing though, there is definitely not one for everyone, so think ahead, don’t do things that aren’t on this list, consider ‘the bottom 80% of guys’ who barely date, and don’t be afraid to nudge him that you like him if you find one. Perhaps give him a sincere genuine compliment (he’ll never forget you due to this, he only hears one once in a decade). If you secure a real man and do the things I listed (men love them after coming home from 'hunting and battle'), he will consistently improve over time and will love to take care of you (which meets his mental needs too). Trust me, no guy will disagree with me on this post, ever. Women generally give advice to men based on assumptions conditions (eg. Women will say ‘be nice etc’ assuming already underlying attractiveness, not how to become attractive in the first place). Team up with your partner, ignore everyone else’s opinion (they will try to bring you down to their misery), don't read self-help books or seminars because they only wanna make money off you for creating a short term better feeling, make choices together on how to navigate your life because if you don’t, life just might pass you by. I wish you all the best!

Robotemist · 2021-04-13T18:09:43+00:00

Men and women have different standards when it pertain to income. Men's first priority is fitness and cooperation. Income is the icing on the cake. If a woman makes less money but makes us happy, we'd easily adjusts out lifestyles down if necessary.

Guitarologist · 2021-04-13T20:53:42+00:00

Because any money she earns wouldn’t overcome the value she COULD bring if she was to put those hours into her man or HIS business ventures.

2021-04-14T00:07:12+00:00

Personal perspective only: I choose a career knowing how much it paid, knowing that that salary was sufficient for me, I'm happy with it, it gives me plenty of money to do the things I want, even enough to raise kids on without a second income.

If I marry a woman who doesn't work outside of the home at all, brings in no money whatsoever: my expenses go up by- 2x groceries 2x clothing spending. Negligible on the big scale.

If I marry a woman who makes as much as I do: we could split the house payments and I'd have a little more spending money each month. Buuut, now I also have to worry about her getting a promotion and making more than me, at which point:

If I marry a woman who makes more than me, there's a big drawback in that she's going to start considering me lazy and unambitious for not wanting to rat-race with her. Additionally, I can't spend her money on anything. Wives can ask their husbands for a new car, husbands can't ask their wives for the same. At best, we could use her additional salary to send our kids to private school and buy a bigger house.

SouthernGrass3 · 2021-04-14T01:45:45+00:00

I have read this often on Reddit, but it hasnt been my experience in real life. However I think people care more about job prestige (however they view it) and being of a similar “class” with a similar level of educational attainment, than they do about income itself, so long as there is enough money to live in reasonable comfort. The guys I know with white collar jobs all tend to date or marry women with white collar jobs, and/or women with similar educational attainment to them. You will see doctors who marry teachers (big income discrepancy, but both require college and are regarded as fairly intellectual jobs), but usually not bartenders or waitresses, even if they make decent money.

Workaholiconew · 2021-04-14T23:51:59+00:00

What motivates men to say that they aren’t concerned about a woman’s earning capabilities and income ?

We aren't hypergamous. Aka. We aren't women.

From a lot of men's perspective, resources mostly have just 2 major reasons to be. Sex (maintaining or creating) and survival (maintaining or creating, aka kids). If you have enough of both both, very few would see any reason to look for more.

Men do not need much wealth to be happy, contrary to women, we usually do not care that much about how society thinks we should behave. If it is enough for a bit of gaming, alcohol, sex and friends, that is pretty much everything we need. We lack such large greed as women.

Or in TRP terms, we aren't hypergamous, we are polygynous. We would rather have a series of low cost interests., small trickets and novelty for a cheap price, over any high luxury dinner or some other such purchases.

Yes, today it is hard to live on a single income. But for the few of us who can pay for both and have a simple and happy life. It is more preferable than to earn more money and not have much to spend on it. (and no, vacations, gaming consoles, expensive cars, bigger houses and the like are not as attractive to us as it is to you. They are just waste of money to whom have nothing better to do with money.)

Title	Why is a woman’s income to the household not given a lot of value ?
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	22
Comments	311
Date	April 12, 2021 3:50 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/mpgoad/why_is_a_womans_income_to_the_household_not_given/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/why-is-a-womans-income-to-the-household-not-given.1188773 https://theredarchive.com/post/1188773

Comments