Ask yourself this, and be honest. How much are you getting? And how much are you paying for it?

There are two ways your man can cost you: directly and indirectly.

The direct costs are easy to calculate: how much do you spend on him, for food, bills, etc? If he's not working, it could easily be hundreds a month. What do you think your return on that investment will be?

Here's a scenario: you are putting your man through school. He's working enough to clothe himself and pay his tuition, but not enough to contribute to any bills. So you're paying all the rent, all the utilities, all the food, any outings. Sure, you'd have some of those costs anyway, but you're undoubtedly spending more, because there are two of you. Your apartment is bigger and you're spending more on food. To make it simple, let's say you're spending an extra $500/month on top of what you would normally have to spend if you were on your own.

The historical average return on the stock market has been between 6% and 7% after inflation. If you invested $500/month for the four years he'd be in school, at 6.5% growth you'd have $27,211 by the end.

What do you get if you spend that money on him instead? Maybe you get a partner with an increased earning potential who works hard to invest in you, your family and your future. Or maybe he dumps you and you get nothing.

Of course, those are just the direct costs. The indirect costs are harder to calculate and can be much more insidious.

I know entirely too many women (and have been that woman myself) putting up with men who provide NOTHING in their lives, even if he does split the bills. He doesn't provide emotionally, he doesn't provide domestically, he doesn't provide sexually: he takes everything you do for him, and gives back less than half. You've signed up for 75% of the work of life, with only a 50% discount on bills. Why?

I don't care how much you love him; if he's a net-negative in your life, don't keep him around. He's literally costing you time, money, and energy that you need for yourself.

I don't care how much time you've invested in him. That's the sunk-cost fallacy and it will ruin you. Who cares if you've spent (wasted) five years with him? Why waste five more? That won't magically make it all worth while. You can't recoup the costs by spending more.

I don't care about his excuses (which are now yours). I don't care if he comes from hard circumstances, if he's depressed, if he dropped out of school because of anxiety. You can have sympathy for him (if you insist) and still recognize that he brings nothing to you. Let him go. It is not your job to fix him.

It might sound cruel and heartless to look at your relationship this way and do an objective accounting of your partner's value, but you owe it to yourself.

Consider this: what do you make per hour? And how many hours per day, per week, do you spend working on him or for him? That's an opportunity cost: time you can never recover.

If you make $20 and hour and you spend an average of two hours a day on labour (emotional or otherwise) that benefits him more than you, you've spent the equivalent of $14,560 per year on this man. And for what?

You can split bills with a roommate. But would you be nagging a roommate to go see the dentist? Would you be washing your roommates dirty laundry or cooking them dinner every night? Would you be buying their Christmas present for THEIR mom? Editing their assignments? No, of fucking course you wouldn't.

So why are you working twice as hard for a "partner" who is actually less valuable than a roommate?

He's too expensive. He's a luxury item and his value is rapidly depreciating. Kick him out.