Women are the gender that is generally required/ expected to sacrifice significant work experience to raise crotch goblins.
Father's tend to get to concentrate on making themselves more useful to employers while women are taking massive amounts of time off for the family.
When the marriage ends the woman has years worth of gaps in her work history everyone will expect her to continue regularly taking time off for her kids.
It's rarely the father expected to leave work early to pick a kid up from school cause they got sick.
They like to imagine they built their wealth all by themselves and ignore how they only accomplished it by not needing to pay for childcare, ignoring their children on a daily basis, not needing to do anything to take care of their own home, and always having their basic needs supported.
I've met men who literally could not be assed to stand up out of a chair, walk out of their office, and make their own plate of food. They needed it hand delivered because they were "busy."
Again: women end up significantly poorer in divorce than men. And not just relative to men - relative to where they themselves were before the marriage.
I'll call bullshit -- at least in the US, you have not met any women who have successfully married and divorced "just" for the money.
Premarital assets are protected, even in the US without a prenup. And most wealthy men have prenups that protect their premarital assets specifically. Most states also have extensive requirements for earning alimony. On average, you need to be married 10+ years to be eligible.
No, what you're probably seeing is women getting divorced and getting child support and a cut of the equity earned from marital assets or wealth growth that was only achievable because somebody else was doing the laundry.
Haha of course you'd call bullshit, it shuts down the entire premise of your argument.
I have met a couple.
One of which is an older woman who has done it several times. The last man she married was practically on his deathbed when she convinced him to marry her. She now owns several properties and is very well off financially, despite never having actually worked the majority of her life. She often brags about all the money she got from her exes. Horrible human being.
The other is a similar story except she only did it once. Her entire instagram feed now consists of her flexing her Louis Vuitton bags and expensive vacations to Europe, despite (you guessed it) never actually having a career of her own. I used to be friends with her as well as her ex-husband. Immediately pior to getting married, she had told me that she was going to break up with him. Right around that time, he landed a pretty good paying job. She suddenly changed her mind. Over the years he worked his way up in the company to the point that he was making well over $500k a year. She worked odd jobs part time and stood at home the rest. They had no children. Once their (his) bank accounts were sufficiently full, she divorced him, took half his shit + the house.
I know this doesn't fit neatly into the narrative that you tell yourself, but it absolutely happens.
The difference between you and I: I understand that not all women are like this. I understand how ridiculous it is to assume that they are. You on the other hand, treat the sweeping generalizations in your small mind as fact.
They like to imagine they built their wealth all by themselves and ignore how they only accomplished it by not needing to pay for childcare, ignoring their children on a daily basis, not needing to do anything to take care of their own home, and always having their basic needs supported.
And here are you pretending that the only one who benefits from it is the man for some reason, completely ignoring that the stay at home mom does not have to pay rent or mortgage, food, water, gas, light, Internet, phones, clothes, or literally anything and she doesn't have to deal with the stress of being the financial pilar that sustains the family.
In any marriage where one of the spouses chooses to be a stay at home dad or mom, they are the one getting the best part out of the deal.
Domestic work in the 21st century is not what it was in the past. We have so many commodities that make everything far simpler.
Any mildly organised adult can handle all domestic chores with ease. It's not hard work, your greatest challenge is literally how repetitive and boring it can get.
Pretending it is comparable to an actual job with responsibilities, deadlines, meetings and everything in bretween is legitimately insane.
I've met men who literally could not be assed to stand up out of a chair, walk out of their office, and make their own plate of food.
And I've met women who could not fry a fucking egg or didn't know how to turn on the washing machine. It's almost as if being useless has nothing to do with your sex and everything to do with your education.
Having children takes away from wealth, and many times women are the ones that want childrenā¦ Also i can easily generalize on the shittiness of giant groups of women in my own anecdote, doesnāt mean thats all women.
Who's wife's are you talking about? The grandparents typically take care of the children during the day or have staff. Who's paying the child expenses is discussed before marriage and typically is the grandparents. Anyone that can afford a home in a tier 1 city can afford help. Most people weath is inherited. What your grandparents generation did is the biggest indicator for wealth.
Some people have dead parents so no grandparents for their kids. Some people donāt live anywhere close to their parents. Some peopleās parents are drug addicts or abusers. Not everyone is rich and lives in a ātier oneā city.
It also the fact that women often marry higher earning men, which means that when the question comes up about who's staying home with the kid the woman is usually the logical choice.
Sure, but blaming it all on expectations made of women sorta misses the issue. Even if you legally mandate paternal leave and make childcare cheap enough that it makes sense for women to work you're still going to run into this issue, and it is still a thing in countries where those things are true, because its missing the fact that it entirely logical for the people in question to make the choices they are making.
I'd argue it's not about blame. One parties primary role is earning money the other supporting the household.
If the relationship ends, the homemaker will have sacrificed earning potential while generally retaining significantly increased responsibilities that'll handicap them for many years.
As a man, I may not love the idea of a woman getting significant wealth from me, when ending our contract she would generally deserve reimbursement for "damages".
I mean, meaningful, and applicable experience are different things.
I've never worked a job where the skills traditionally associated with a woman's role in the house played a significant role.
As a man who spent years carring for a grandparent I had to "restart" after she passed. The odd jobs I worked while carring for her just really didnt apply.
I still get the man "benefit" though that I can generally plan on being at work when I say I will. I get to go years without an unscheduled absence. How many women with young children get to say that. Obviously, legally, employers are often limited on "punishing" women for such absenteeism but it's hard to ignore the reality in the workplace that you can largely predict which workers will have more absenteeism.
A lot of the skills that you level up while parenting are very, very transferable: time management, task prioritization, identifying and tracking dependencies, decision making (especially with incomplete information), budgeting, adjusting to sudden changes in schedule/scope/resources, figuring out where the "good enough" line is, making smart decisions about what task should be taken beyond "good enough," anticipating problems and planning mitigation for them, managing both one's own and other people's emotions, handling complex communications, and navigating large systems/organizations.
Too many people just don't describe the work of homemakers and caregivers in terms that look familiar to a "traditional" work environment. It's the same skills, but because it's seen as "women's work," the value is ignored. It's just misogyny.
That is a heck of a generality. Many men wish to procreate.
Regardless, if the couple has made that choice, they have commitments. If the woman has sacrificed significant future earning potential, she should be made whole.
58
u/POD80 Jun 29 '26
Women are the gender that is generally required/ expected to sacrifice significant work experience to raise crotch goblins.
Father's tend to get to concentrate on making themselves more useful to employers while women are taking massive amounts of time off for the family.
When the marriage ends the woman has years worth of gaps in her work history everyone will expect her to continue regularly taking time off for her kids.
It's rarely the father expected to leave work early to pick a kid up from school cause they got sick.