When a friend of the family announced her engagement, my mom remarked that the bride was marrying well. “Was she marrying for money?” I asked my mom.
“I don’t think so,” my mom said. “She just happens to be marrying a guy that makes a lot of money.”
Marrying for Money
As my mom and I talked about the engagement, I wondered how many women still strive to marry for money. In this day and age, a woman can make just as much, if not more than, her partner. So how important is it for that partner to come from an affluent family or earn a high salary?
Women Who Marry for Money
My mom’s female friends earn much less than their husbands. Her friend’s children also earn far less than their spouses.
“To form a successful partnership, both spouses must share the same ideas about money,” my mom said. “They have to agree how to spend the money they earn.”
Financial Ground Rules
My mom didn’t marry for money, but she did want to stay home after her kids were born. My dad provided the means for my mom to quit her job, and together they set ground rules for that decision.
My mom and dad settled on two ideas:
- Purchase a modest home they could quickly pay off.
- Never live beyond their means.
If my mom wanted to stay home, she would have to watch over the family budget. My mom was more than happy to forgo shopping trips and other expenses for the pleasure of being a full-time stay-at-home mom.
Of course, I think things are a little different now. My mom and dad were married in the early 70s. These days women can make more than their partners, less than their partners or stay-at-home, and not make any money at all.
Marry for Love or Money
There are so many options available to women these days, but I wonder if marrying for money remains one of the goals. While women may not strive to marry a wealthy partner, do they seek to marry a partner that makes more than they do? Especially when that partner is a man?
Are the stereotypical, bread-winning roles of men important to women? If women want children, do they want a man who makes enough money to provide them the option of staying-at-home?
In the 90s, I believe it was, a study found that marriages lasted longer when the man made more than the woman. I don't recall the exact year but it was definitely after a time when people "shouldn't care about such things."
As for marrying a man that makes more, I think it depends on the woman. The female who wants to stay home and raise children is more likely to care about that than the woman who would rather not.
Many Women in your Mum,s age bracket and that includes me have lived through some tough times financially and although we all married for love, we can all see the benefits of marrying someone who is reasonably well off. The younger generation and that includes my own children are still looking at marriage through rose tinted glasses, and putting love first. Remember the saying you can,t live on love alone.
I don't think that marrying for money is how I'd put it, but I think that people very much still follow the traditions of the man being the bread-winner for the family. In my premarriage counseling just over a year ago, we were actually told that we needed to be able to live off of my husband's salary alone, and that mine (my husband and I make the exact same amount) should be for 'fun' stuff and extras. While some might be appalled by that advice, I've come to see the reasoning behind it.
Even if you aren't planning on having kids, not having sex is the only infallible way to avoid the little rugrats. I know quite a few people who learned what 99.9% effective actually meant, and there are enough "oops" babies out there to know that they happen sometimes regardless of your plans.
So what if you weren't planning on having kids until you saved up X amount of money or until you used both of your salaries to pay off all the debt so that you could live on his salary alone, but halfway through (you can't pay all of your payments on one salary alone) you get pregnant? Sure, you get maternity leave (which last I checked was 6 weeks?) and then you have an EXTRA payment (not even including the extra costs for kids – diapers, wipes, furniture, bedding, toys, clothes, bottles since you'll be working, formula, health care costs) for daycare. When will you be able to stop working? Not for much longer.
Also, what if after you have your baby you really don't want to go back to work? You can cut some costs that way (breast feed, no day care costs) but if you weren't already able to live on one salary, you aren't going to be able to do it with an extra mouth to feed.
That was rather long-winded, and I apologize for that, but I think that considering those possibilities makes the idea of marrying someone more well off (or who makes more) a lot more appealing.
Also, one other thing – sometimes it's for the guy's sake that he makes more. It sounds sexist, but a lot of guys are taught from a young age that the man is the provider and that the man is the one who should be working. If he's been taught that, your needing to work can make him feel like less of a man. If he's been 'indoctrinated' with that belief, your making more than him will only nag him at the back of his head and tell him that he's less of a man and that he is failing in his duties. Regardless of whether you believe it, most guys feel that way deep down.
I married for love and I make significantly more than my husband does at this time. Even though money is not a factor, it would be nice to have the option to stay at home or work part time when we have kids. Instead it is my husband who has these options, but he does not want them. So our kids will end up in day care. But you never know, this is a snapshot of our finances now.
Within a few years and a few more promotions, it might change. One thing a friend taught me about marriage is that the role of the breadwinner can change many times in a marriage.
Maureen – That's a bit of a cynical way of putting things I feel. Yes, it's important to consider financial stability (i.e. be careful about marrying someone with a mountain of debt and no job), but for it to be more important than love in a marriage strikes me as a bit sad.
To say someone is "looking at marriage through rose tinted glasses" because they put love first seems condescending and honestly unfortunate. If practicality and financial stability are priorities ahead of love in getting married, it seems like like maybe those people are getting married for the wrong reasons
For what it's worth, I earned more than my ex husband throughout our 12yr relationship, and while that isn't why we split up (he cheated on me), it's been a bit of an adjustment to be in a two-income relationship with my current partner, let alone one where he earns more than me.
I can't imagine staying home and not having my own work, and my own income, but at least I'm not the _only_ one contributing to the bills this time.
Mind you, he's been burned in the past by partners more interested in what he could buy than in him, so his 'wishlist' when he met me included 'financially literate' and 'employed'.
I earned more than my husband for a few years after we were married. I didn't care then about the difference until after my son was born. By then, we had bought a house and had a mortgage.
When my son was 2 1/2, and I was pregnant eith another baby, I was laid off from the high income cushy job. Unfortunately, I had to find another job after my daughter was born. (I wanted to be a stay at home mother at that point).
Now I have 2 kids in school and have an unfulfilling job that pays half the salary of the job I had when I got married. The husband is still employed but I am an extremely unhappy working mother (and the hubby knows it!)
My husband should earn twice as much as he earns now and I should earn zero or at least work part time. So, I agree that it's important to take finances into account when looking for a potential husband.
Even if you don't care about staying home now, everything changes when you have a baby or when you have a good job, a baby, and then lose the good job and want to stay home. It's nice to have choices in life.
Wow. Both my husband and I make close amounts – sometimes I've made more, sometimes he's made more.
Our goal is that each of us gets to stay home with the kids a bit, and neither of us has to give up work.
I didn't go looking for a man with money. I did go looking for a man that was intelligent, motivated, generous, and responsible. My husband was a broke college student when we got married, but I knew he had the potential to earn a good income and amass a decent level of wealth over time.
Kids are not a factor for my husband and I, and I'm not sure "there's an offchance that I'll want to be a stay-at-home-mom someday" is really the biggest factor when it comes to choosing a moneyed mate.
For me, the fact that my husband could stand on his own two feet, work hard, pay his bills, and generally live like a real adult all on his own was vastly more important. It's awesome to have a husband who is able to support himself. It's a sign of maturity and it's very desirable. Also he can do his own laundry. Who wouldn't want that? I can support myself too, so we both win.
After college, I was much more interested in a grown-up partner than a "Knocked-Up" slacker dude stereotype.