More women freezing eggs due to "unreliable men"
- Thread starter Narj
- Start date
Same here. I took a massive pay cut going to a new site to save 3 hours a day commute. Now I earn significantly less than the wife, but nobody cares. I can now keep a small business going in the time I saved and can get my running/cycling done before work.
All very sweet.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,647
He has a PhD in clinical psychology and he's basically a 7ft chad with washboard abs swimming in vagina...... in his dreams.
I'm not sure what people think when they make posts that just reek of a sense of superiority. Are people on the internet forum supposed to be like "wow wee ur such a bad azz m8!!! how do i become a 40 year old dad bod keyboard warrior?!".
Last edited:
I think if you earn 6 fig you are probably in no money limitations anyway!
It often seems men are happier with a lower earning partner. Not so much the other way around.
I don't really like eating out too much, nor do I drink, which saves so much money.
I genuinely don't know what I'd do with 100k a year.
I'd probably want to work 3-4 days a week
I earn 32 and my gf earns 24 (was 18 until a week ago)
At this band it's noticeable. I'm pretty happy on 31.not enough for a family but enough to save for house and buy things and have a fun car and holidays. But I couldn't handle it being the other way around as I'd have no money to keep up.
As said before, I don't think the same is applicable at 100k plus
Find it rare at higher wages that people aren't changed by money. Especially if girl earns more. Very few people on high wages are people I'd date. Simply because money means so much. It makes sense as it often comes with a more responsible job
It often seems men are happier with a lower earning partner. Not so much the other way around.
I don't really like eating out too much, nor do I drink, which saves so much money.
I genuinely don't know what I'd do with 100k a year.
I'd probably want to work 3-4 days a week
I earn 32 and my gf earns 24 (was 18 until a week ago)
At this band it's noticeable. I'm pretty happy on 31.not enough for a family but enough to save for house and buy things and have a fun car and holidays. But I couldn't handle it being the other way around as I'd have no money to keep up.
As said before, I don't think the same is applicable at 100k plus
Find it rare at higher wages that people aren't changed by money. Especially if girl earns more. Very few people on high wages are people I'd date. Simply because money means so much. It makes sense as it often comes with a more responsible job
Last edited:
Pretty much the same here, I earn over 6 figures so don;t give 2 hoots that my wife earns 40% more than me. That just means we have much more money in the household, can buy a bigger house, newer cars, better holidays, dine at better restaurants and not worry so much about cash flow. It is hilarious the neanderthals thinking that somehow this it is an issue if your wife earns more than you. Why would you want to have less money as a family?
Very different to a guy earning 20k and a girl earning 40k
In fact is quite interesting as a lot of the 'ok to be out earned by gf' posts in here are in this week paid category.
I'd be more interested hearing from sub 50k chief earner examples like above. Where I've person can and one person can't eat at fancy restaurants. Or the hotel can't go on holidays to Thailand because her partner can't.
That is a big generalization. The only noticeable change for most people earning more is they worry less about paying bills and they buy things whenever they want rather than saving up or buying on credit. The changes are subtle. As a student I would go on vacaytion for longer, usually camping, youth hostels and the cheapest possible hotel, and would put up with poor flights with long layovers or long transfers. Now tend to use moderate hotels, nothing fancy but clean beds etc, and will pay for better flights, although even then I'm happy to spend 6 hours having a few beers on a layover rather than paying $600 for a direct flight etc. I used to buy 10 year old second hand cars, now I buy 2-4 year old second hand cars (and will keep them until the repair bills outweigh buying a new 2nd hand car).
I now several people who are millionaires after a sucessful IPO of their startups. You would barely know anything has changed. Instead of renting a tiny apartment they purchased a small house
And why would it be any better for the couple if the girl had a salary cut to 17k? How shallow or sexist do you have to be if you think that is actually a problem?
If a couple is 1 high and 1 low earner, why coudln't they go to Thailand on vacation or eat at a better restaurant? Any mature couple will share financial costs based on their ability, not on their absolute income.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 18,314
- Location
- RG8 9
I think the point is that at that level of income, there will no doubt be financial difficulties faced sometimes and at those times, the wage gap 'could' become an issue. It is a totally different set of circumstances rather than just affording a better holiday.
I don't really know anyone who sits in the 100k bracket, but of the people I know well the guy earns more than the girl.. Not saying it can't work other way around. Just it is unusual.
It doesn't seem to play out like that though (from my personal experience).
This. Not saying it has to be. But there must be reasons why at the average end of the wage spectrum every single couple I know the guy out earns the girl where the are significant pay gaps. When its close it
much less of a problem. Also for high salaries.
It's not always the case. But thete is still very much a sense that the guy is the winner. It shouldn't be this way. Doesn't need to. But the majority of the time it is.
Last edited:
But that is not by choice, but simply different career paths , opportunities, interests of the women, combined with known sexual discrimination in the work place.
Can you give 1 particular reason why it would be an issue if a man earned significantly less than their partner while at a lower income levels? Something beyond just plain sexism?
Yes I work full time 9-4:30pm, I see my kids while they are awake (I drop my eldest son off at school before I start work) and I train in the evenings when they are asleep, at the weekends before they wake up or during my lunch break at work. My MTB hobby is just a hobby, I do it for fun rather than competition but yes manage to get out once a week.
Absolutely not.
It's sexism for sure.
There's no reason for it to be different between sexes.
That is what I thought, which is why no rational person should have an issue with it at all.
We kinda do similar, but just plonk 66% of our individual net pays in to the joint account (she earns about 10% more than me) and can use the remaining 33% for whatever we see fit.
I think that is missing the point a bit, I don't think anyone has argued it would be better for the girl to have a salary cut.
It shouldn't be too hard to envisage why there might be more issues lower down the pay scale when a guy earns significantly less.
