>>33842908
How about you pay your half of the bills and shut the fuck up about it.

>>33842915
I don't get this though. A couple is meant to be a team.

If I imagine in the future in a situation where he's earning e.g. $250k and I'm earning $50k, surely it's better to split proportionately, as otherwise I'll be drowning in debt to keep up with him.

I'd understand a 50-50 split if we were flatmates, but I'm struggling to convince him to do things proportionately because it just seems obvious to me to do things proportionately.

>>33842954
>he should pay me for having sex with him
Prostitute

>>33842908
Salary per hours worked:

42k with 37.5 weekly hours is just over 1k per hour.
105k with 75 to 90 weekly hours (includes on-call weekends/holidays) is also just over 1k per hour.

You are both being paid roughly the same rate.
But he works **double** the amount of time that you do, in a given week.

>>33842979
Not 1k per hour of course... this is the ratio of salary and weekly hours. You could calculate hourly rate if you wanted, but it will be the same result.

>>33842954
>A couple is meant to be a team.
True, but there are many different ways to cooperate other than proportional splitting of expenses, and you're not married, so it's not the same kind of "team".

For one thing, you shouldn't be living together yet (contrary to popular belief, cohabitation has, at best, no intrinsic benefit to marital success, while it's frequently associated with higher chances of divorce). There are plenty of reasons for that, but it all boils down to the fact that neither of you has actually committed to the relationship, and living together is an added complication to any decision about commitment (i.e. staying with a guy you otherwise wouldn't because you're just used to it, or because you don't want to lose cheap rent).
Sure, you presumably want it to work out, but hope is no substitute for actually committing. And you want to be as clear-eyed about that serious commitment as possible.

That aside, the bit about commitment is also a good argument against changing the bills--if your living situation hasn't changed, he is investing exactly as much in the relationship as you are, no more and no less. You are two individuals, and you are each responsible for yourselves at this stage. Subsidizing a woman who isn't his wife through a windfall he got is a pure negative if you ever split up. You're basically asking for an upgrade to your own living conditions through no effort of your own, and with no future guarantees for him.

Now, if he insisted on moving into an expensive apartment, then you'd have a point about him making up the difference. But otherwise, you shouldn't be surprised that a guy who isn't your life partner isn't treating you like his.

>>33842908
>Works a low stress job
>Refuses to look for higher paying roles
>Husband works a stressful job with long work days
>He works twice as many hours as you
>He is paid roughly the same as you per hour
>Not married or have any children
Why do you think he should financially subsidise you when you refuse to put in more effort while he does? That is anything but fair or equitable.

>>33843043
I do end up doing more chores than him, on account of him coming back from work at 9pm-10pm or so most days.
He doesn't really eat well unless I cook for him (he'll literally just have microwave meals in the evening, if he even eats at all).

>>33843021
>he is investing exactly as much in the relationship as you are, no more and no less.
Not OP but depending on how you look at it he's investing less, because the bills are a lower percentage of his income. By absolute terms yes, they're investing equally.

>>33844386
Dude chores only take up 1 hour of your day, unless you're saying that you live in a huge mansion with a pool?

>>33844386
>he works all day and night
>because of this he should subsidize my life even more
Go fuck yourself

Seems like there are a lot of terminally single people on this board.
If you ask anyone in real life (or for those of you who are allergic to grass, look online), 99.99% of people agree that payments should be split in accordance with income.

Also, there seems to be two opinions held here simultaneously:
>Person A should not have to pay more than 50% for everything, even if they outearn Person B considerably.
>Person B should do more than 50% of the chores, because they have considerably more time than Person A.
How is it possible to hold both opinions at once? Either split everything 50-50 or do things proportionately.

>>33846737
This

>>33842908
You asked in the wrong place. This is basement incel tendy land. Its very normal for domestic partners to be a team and split things based on income. Even if you did this, he'd still have more money left for himself. Also what are you rven doing living together if not building a life together? Anyway doesn't matter cause

>how do I convince him
You cant. Hes a prick. This is who you've decided to move in with. This is how its gonna be. This is the relationship you've chosen. Get used to it or find someone better.

>>33846756
>This is who you've decided to move in with. This is how its gonna be. This is the relationship you've chosen. Get used to it or find someone better.
This.

>>33842954
>keep up with him
LOL either of you could be fired forever at any time, you're both young and don't know any better.
There are no life long jobs or careers anymore.
Best thing to do with his temporary extra $50K is stash it in the bank not spend it.
Thats barely enough to legally max out the deposit to two IRAs, its not that much.
You'll undoubtably need it sooner or later.

>>33842908
Wife and I have a shared bank account that I personally control and we've been together for 9 years now. She can ask me for money whenever, I ask her when I make a big move, I control the finances mostly because she doesn't want the hassle. I treat her good, she lets me do my thing.

Couples living together that split bills and have sperate bank accounts, especially married ones, is embarrassing.

You 2 sleep, shit, fuck, eat in the same household and supposedly love eachother, but can't share money like one.

Embarrassing.

>>33846937
This. Money means very little to me. It's about her.

>>33846937
>shared bank account
>I personally control
She will start hiding money from you or open up a secret bank account.

>Couples living together that split bills and have sperate bank accounts, especially married ones, is embarrassing.
>She can ask me for money whenever
Embarrassing is having to ask your husband for money. Your wife is basically your daughter in this marriage. Not healthy.

being "fair and equitable" in a relationship is a surefire way for that relationship to fail. if a man is able to, he ought to provide for his woman.

>>33846937
this. absolutely mindblowing to me that couples would bicker over splitting bills. my gf makes more than me while I'm grinding to get a business off the ground. I would, and have, give her the last dollar in my bank account if she needed it.

>>33842908
>i dont want to make more money
>but i want more money
solid girlmath

whos idea was it to split things 50/50 in the first place?

I'd keep paying rent
but get him to pay for the groceries which you prepare

>>33847024
Cope harder. I will fuck my wife and sleep well tonight knowing you'll be bickering with your boyfriend over paying 2.5% more of a bill kek

>>33847112
>thinking about me after fucking your wife
Weird.

Your wife is a child for not handling financial responsibilities. Either you'll get carried away with spending, or she will start hiding money. Good luck.

If he doesn't contribute more to the household you have to leave him. You were with him when he made less money and how he treated you for it is telling.

File: 1708959890433190.gif (2.69 MB, 320x240)

2.69 MB GIF

My wife and I split bills and stuff equally enough that i don't worry about it. Sometimes she thinks I think that she isn't contributing enough, but that's not the issue. I just scold her for buying too much junk that just clogs up the house and is quickly forgotten.
The biggest convo we have about money is when we go out and "did I buy dinner last time? What was the last thing we ate? Ok I got it this time"
Couples need to get together and have discussions on responsibilities and come to an agreement on what they deem as fair.
And if your partner doesn't hold up their end, percussive maintenance tends to work.

>>33842908
Maybe have dinner on the table hot and ready every night when he gets home.

>>33847393
I do try to 2-3 nights a week (I'm busy with sports on Fridays and I'm sometimes exhausted from work myself).

>>33847105
>whos idea was it to split things 50/50 in the first place?
We just did it that way from day 1 of dating. He uses a budgeting app (YNAB) so it's really easy for him to split it out on his end, and the same with me using Monzo. Nobody suggested 50-50, it just felt natural at the time (and we were earning roughly the same at the time anyway).

>>33844397
It's more that if he gets back at 10pm and has to wake up at 7am the next day, he sometimes doesn't have much time to clean the kitchen for example. I do like to make fairly complex dishes (normally meals are made with 2-3 dishes), so admittedly it's not just "wash a pot and a chopping board".
I also order the weekly shop, and because I work from home a couple days a week and I'm back sooner in the evening I'm also often the one loading and unstacking the dishwasher.

>>33847510
Oops meant to reply to >>33844424 with the third one.

>>33846937
Operative word is "wife", not gf.

>>33847526
His point still stands though, with:
>You 2 sleep, shit, fuck, eat in the same household and supposedly love eachother, but can't share money like one.

>>33842908
>I like my job and don’t plan to chase higher-paying roles.
>and I don't want the stress or work hours that come with higher-paid jobs.
>>33842954
>A couple is meant to be a team.
>as otherwise I'll be drowning in debt to keep up with him.
So your boyfriend works a stressful, demanding job that you would never do, and you still expect him give you more of his money, in addition to whatever he would spend on you in his role as your boyfriend. Him being "equitable" to you in this situation is basically him paying you an extra part of his salary just because you're dating him. You're whole mindset here is "I have no intention of working harder, and he has it to give, so why shouldn't he?"

>>33847510
> Sometimes I'm exhausted.
You have your weekly night off on Friday.
This is part of your work now if you want a man to pay more than you have to do more.

>>33847572
>So your boyfriend works a stressful, demanding job that you would never do
I don't ask him to do this, and I'm happy to give him support and cook for him etc.
The guy doesn't really survive without me either. I was away for a couple months over the summer (visiting elderly sick grandparents back home abroad) and he dropped from 184lbs to 167lbs during that time (he's 6ft 5in so this is fairly concerning for his height). He doesn't ever ask me to cook or complain if I don't do something. He has microwave meals during the week when I'm not around if he eats at all.
>you still expect him give you more of his money, in addition to whatever he would spend on you in his role as your boyfriend
So we don't spend on each other like that (well, up until now we were earning the same). Everything was split 50:50.
I just figure that it's unfair if I'm doing all of this for him, doing more housework, etc. but we're still splitting 50:50 and he's now earning more than double what I make. I'd prefer we either split the housework 50:50 and the bills 50:50, or do both proportionately. If he pays for 70% of things, I'm happy to do 70% of the housework.

>>33847645
I do more already, but that's because he doesn't have time to.

OP here, to add further clarity to who I'm not finding a higher-paid job (in addition to not really being cut for high-pressure career grinds):
I'm an immigrant, and trying to get a permanent visa (should come in 2-3 years). My skilled worker visa is tied to a specific employer and job role, so changing jobs requires a new visa application. That adds cost and uncertainty - and could even jeopardize my current visa - making it hard to move to a new job.
So I'm kinda stuck anyway at my current job.
I'm hoping to marry my boyfriend in 18-24 months as a backup for if I can't get a permanent visa, and if I do I can more easily change jobs.

>>33847755
>My skilled worker visa is tied to a specific employer and job role, so changing jobs requires a new visa application.
>I like my job and don’t plan to chase higher-paying roles.
>So I'm kinda stuck anyway at my current job
>The sort of networking and career-oriented ambition they require isn't really me, and I don't want the stress or work hours that come with higher-paid jobs.
Please explain your contradictory OP with your olympic gold medal level in mental gymnastics.
>I'm hoping to marry my boyfriend in 18-24 months as a backup
So you're just using him to gain permanent residency in his country. Thank you for the clarification.

>>33847777
>Thank you for the clarification.
Yep, and he is supposed just to pay her for the privilege of being used.

>>33847777
I don't think it's gymnastics?
>most companies don't want to pay the additional cost to sponsor an immigrant's visa
>switching jobs is a genuine risk because if the new job's sponsorship is delayed, refused, or withdrawn, I lose the right to stay in the country and need to leave within 60 days
>I'm not cut out for networking, long hours, office politics, and working myself to the bone
>I'm fine with doing more housework, provided that my partner makes up for it in other ways (e.g., if they earn more and work longer hours, I can do more housework, they contribute more financially).

>>33847783
Our shared costs (rent + bills + groceries) which we'd be splitting proportionately comes to $4,800/mo between us.

Previously, we were paying paying $2,400/mo each (on 50:50),
However, given he earns $105k now and I'm on $42k, he'd pay for approx 70% of the total, so the split would be:
>$3,430 him (+$1,030/mo compared to before)
>$1,370 me.(-$1,030/mo compared to before)
He may end up paying $1,030/mo more, but his monthly income has gone up by $5,000 - so he's still about $4,000/mo better off.

We wouldn't be splitting everything 70-30 - just the rent + bills + groceries.

In exchange, I'm doing 70% of the housework. So I'm doing the dishwasher (often several loads a day) when I'm working from home, cooking 3-4 times a week in the evenings for us, and ordering the weekly grocery shop. On weekends we can do the chores together, and all he needs to do during the week is clean the stuff I used to cook the meal after he eats.

>>33847832
>as a backup
Bitch, you are using him for a visa and are upset that he’s not paying enough for the privilege of you not giving a shit about him. “Partnership” my ass. Every single penny of your paycheck should go to him just so that you can maintain him as your backup.

File: 615-6159039_cat-reaction-(...).png (509 KB, 860x720)

509 KB PNG

>>33847832
maybe its just me but does this not seem retarded to you
by your proposal he pays 2k more than you (24k A YEAR) for a few extra meals during the week, a grocery shop, and "several loads" of dishwashing?
and you split chores equally on weekends?
he's not even free from housework during the week as by the sounds of things from your post earlier >>33847510 you make complex dishes that are probably a pain to have to wash if hes coming back late at night
sounds like an awful deal for him

>>33847832
>i'm in a precarious position
>and i want ~2 thousand dollars a month to do chores
holy fuck, the entitlement is out of control

>>33847846
Ideally I won't need him for a visa. I get my permament visa without him in 2-3 years anyway - getting married for the spousal visa just means:
>No worries about immigration reform suddenly making my skilled worker visa no longer elegible
>Means I can change jobs before I get my pernament visa if we get married before then

Skimmed the thread and surprised to see how radicaly different you guys are here.
e.g.
https://www.google.com/search?q=split+finance+with+partner+site%3Areddit.com
Pretty much every result has everyone clamouring for a % split based off post-tax income

>>33847863
What a lovely “partnership” when you only ever give a shit about yourself as your man works himself to death day and night, and your entitled cunt ass demands that he pays you more for your benefit. You are a testament to both women and immigrants.

>>33847858
>>33847859
Feels a bit misrepresentative. I'm not getting paid $2k. He's giving me $1k.
Surely you must agree that me doing more of the housework is unfair if we split things 50:50?
There may be a solution somewhere in the middle, but I just figure that if he's not able to split the chores 50:50, it's only fair he cover it in another way.

>>33847876
Brother, who hurt you? The projection here is concerning.

>>33847883
OP, you're in a room full of monkeys asking questions about calculus. The users here are all terminally autistic teenage virgins who have never hugged a woman much less been in a relationship. It boggles the mind what useful advice you think you're going to get here.

>>33847876
I make sure he has a meal to come home to every night, for one (and a fancy meal, like "takes 2-3 hours to cook" kind of meal).
My bf would literally waste away without me, or be malnourished. Seriously. His parents (and even some of his friends) have told me to make sure he eats enough, because he'll literally forget to eat or get to engrossed in what he's doing to realise that he's not had more than a banana in the last 36 hours.

>>33847889
be that as it may, even an autistic person can see that paying someone $2k/mo to do chores is ridiculous.

>>33847905
>concern is not for your “partner’s” health
>concerns is that he doesn’t pay you thousands a month
If you’re going to be a whore, at least be more useful than a meal and a hole.

>>33847832
What does she get out of it though? If it's the case of "Well, as his girlfriend she should care about his wellbeing", why doesn't it work both ways?
She's taking care of this guy and helping him. It's quite possible that without her support he'd be too physically weak (if the malnutrition is true) to work the way he does for very long.
They're not even married. If she put all that effort into the relationship and did the bulk of the housework, she has nothing to show for it if they split up, while he has the increased earnings.

>>33847935
Meant to reply to
>>33847915

>>33847832
It's worse than that. I'm guessing you're in the UK (based off some of those specifics around visa). I'm a dual citizen of US/UK so thankfully know a bit about tax over there (and have the autism to do the maths).

Because of the way tax works, his take home is only 50% of that raise (assuming he has a student loan as he's young). So his gross pay goes up by $5k/mo, sure, but after taxes and the $1k payment he only gets $1.5k/mo of that.

You, on the other hand, get an extra $12.3k post-tax per year from him.

With some back-of-the-enevlope math:
>Your boyfriend was on $45k. and is now effectively on $85k.
>You were on $42k, and now are effectively on $60k.

He works his ass off, you do some chores, and he loses a load of his raise (and you get a pay bump)? If I were him this would demoralise me and disincentivise me from trying harder. I'd certainly hide any raise I got from my partner if I knew this would happen.

Yes I am autistic if you can't tell.

>>33847913
>be that as it may, even an autistic person can see that paying someone $2k/mo to do chores is ridiculous.
Wrong. An autistic person with zero real world, grass touching experience can't tell you anything useful, especially when the internet has turned their brains to mush.

>>33847738
>I don't ask him to do this, and I'm happy to give him support and cook for him etc.
but then
>He doesn't ever ask me to cook
so he doesn't deserve consideration for working hard because you "didn't ask him" to do that, but you deserve consideration for housework despite the fact that he "doesn't ever ask" you to do that. this is what we describe as "mental gymnastics"
and stop comparing housework to an actual job with responsibilities. Emptying the dishwasher? are you fucking kidding me? it takes five minutes, but more than that, THERE ARE NO STAKES. at worst you could smash a plate or something. even cooking a meal, the worst that could happen is you ruin it and need to order takeout. whereas working the kind of job that your bf has almost certainly means that dozens of people's jobs depend on him.
Get out of the relationship, and get out of the country. please and thank you

Why aren't you married?

>>33842908
You have 2 choices.
>be a tradwife
My wife, for example, has never had to get a job and I pay for 100% of everything.
>let him fuck other women
Or at least throw him a few FFMs every now and then.

>>33842908
>I make $42k working 37.5 hours a week as a student support admin - it's low stress
>I don't want the stress or work hours that come with higher-paid jobs.
>His job is intense - 12–15 hour days, on call most weekends and holidays.
By your own admission, his job takes up almost all if his time, and yours is far less intensive and stressful. How exactly is it fair for him to effectively do all that work for a lower salary?
>However, by my understanding, this kind of split seems to be ubiquitous
That's not a valid argument.
You probably say things like "I am the table"
Back in the time before government made it almost impossible for couples/families to survive on a single income, the wife didn't relax all day just because she wasn't employed.
If you want him to invest money in your relatonship, you should invest your labour in it too. I hope he comes home from his 12-15 hour work day to a home cooked meal.

>>33848082
When we started dating he said he didn't want to marry until we've been dating at least 5 years, and we've settled into our lives and career paths.
I think it would feel too soon if we were to marry now.

>>33848138
>be a tradwife
I'd probably always want to earn some kind of income, even if it's trivial, so as not to become wholly dependent on my boyfriend.

>>33848149
>By your own admission, his job takes up almost all if his time, and yours is far less intensive and stressful. How exactly is it fair for him to effectively do all that work for a lower salary?
If we were flatmates and I asked this of him, I agree that it'd be unfair. However, we're in a committed long term relationship, with the intention of staying together for life.
>If you want him to invest money in your relatonship, you should invest your labour in it too. I hope he comes home from his 12-15 hour work day to a home cooked meal.
I do, I currently do more of the housework and he does come home to a home cooked meal
I'm more than happy to do an outsized share of the housework

>>33848576
After two years, either you will break up or you will have to accept never being married to this guy. But since you have already "been together" three years and aren't married, he already made up his mind to not marry you. You have much bigger issues than splitting bills equitably. I would worry about what to do when your lease is up since you guys at maximum have about two years left together anyway. Unless you want to deal with the uncertainty of him breaking up with you whenever he wants at any point in time, but forever.

File: 4.png (460 KB, 921x667)

460 KB PNG

>>33844386
Equity is almost never a fair choice and you fucks don't seem to get it.
Equity in theory allows one party, one demographic, or one target "disadvantaged" participant to be subsidized for "the greater good".

The "greater good" is a terms defined differently by different people.
Your idea of a team is to subsidize eachother IF one gets to earn more, his idea of a team might be forward progressive (since he is the type anyway), who knows.

The point is, the moment equity is not accepted within a group, the people who still push for equity inadvertently get to victimization, that's because equity rewards the lesser. "but I end up doing more chores than him", the moment you open the transactional can of worms the relationship is kind of fucked.
Additionally, did you have this equity discussion with him before it became beneficial to you? Was it your true belief AND known to the other party beforehand? Or did you change your view on how a team should split costs? If you're an honest ideologue then I understand, but you're still punishing his effort and rewarding your comfort.

I do believe equity can help, but as it turns out, it has the potential to enforce laziness, victimization and transactional thinking. I am the high-earner in my relationship and the difference between us is almost 90-10, so the reward for my hard work is most of the responsibility, it's not fair but I'm okay with it because I came up with the idea, not the benefactor. Yet the consequences are on the benefactor's side too because they feel guilty and indebted to me.

That's because teams aren't supposed to split the work equitably, they're supposed to equalize opportunities within the group in the face of adversity of the external.
"I'm not doing your job, we're finding ways of making you more capable."

Does it make sense? Debate me.

>>33842979
Funny how OP ignored this.

>>33848604
>did you have this equity discussion with him before it became beneficial to you?
It only became more relevant as his hours started getting much much longer (as his career progressed) and we had a few smaller arguments over housework, because he didn't have much time to do stuff during the week.

>his idea of a team might be forward progressive
Not sure what this means sadly, I'm a non-native English speaker

> equity [...] has the potential to enforce laziness, victimization and transactional thinking
How so? I can see an argument for transactional thinking and victimisation IF it's rejected. Not sure on the laziness side.
In this case I'm doing more housework. I think it would be unfair of me to demand pay from him if I also demanded we do a 50:50 split of housework.

>>33848576
>If we were flatmates and I asked this of him, I agree that it'd be unfair
You are flatmates. You are flatmates that have sex. I am sure that he tells you that he intends to stay together for life, but what do you expect him to say? If he is honest and says that he only keeps you around for your pussy, you would stop giving it to him. He doesn't marry you because you aren't worth marrying. But you at least have a vagina, so you are worth keeping around as a wet hole to dump sperm into. If you don't believe me, stop having sex with him and see how quickly he gets rid of you. You are what you give him and that is all that you are.

>>33848610
I don't think it's necessarily relevant. I'm basically asking him:
>"Hey, I'm doing most of the chores and housework because you never have time to do them during the week. I'm happy to take on the extra burden of the housework, if you're happy to split bills proportionately with income".

>>33848659
Dusting and running the vacuum a couple times a week is not worth $2k a month. It's "proportional" in the sense you want both to be a 70/30 split but the numbers involved are very different, it's a false equivalence.

File: 7ffb1c1f11cd715c99148e64c(...).jpg (24 KB, 453x340)

24 KB JPG

how does a man even make 50:50 seem justifiable?

i had a similar conversation with my ex a while back, and it never ends well.
there's just no way a man can stick to 50-50 after an equitable proportionate split is proposed by the woman, at least not without losing social face
the woman will go and tell her friends or complain that her boyfriend outearns her but still expects equal contribution
it's a lose-lose for the man. he either loses money, or all of his close circle think he doesn't treat her well

>>33848667
Women aren't supposed to have an income in the first place, she should be married and take care of the house in exchange for the man paying for everything. That's what leads to this "we're roommates who split everything like a formal rent agreement but also you have to be nice to me and give me free shit when it benefits me because we're sleeping together". It shouldn't ever be this complicated.

File: 1.png (409 KB, 800x809)

409 KB PNG

>>33848653
>It only became more relevant as his hours started getting much much longer (as his career progressed) and we had a few smaller arguments over housework, because he didn't have much time to do stuff during the week.
Fair enough, we'll consider you an honest ideologue either way.

>Not sure what this means sadly, I'm a non-native English speaker
Same here, so communication might be lacking here and there, but I meant that he's more interested in progressing his financial gain, you're not.

>How so? I can see an argument for transactional thinking and victimisation IF it's rejected. Not sure on the laziness side.
>In this case I'm doing more housework. I think it would be unfair of me to demand pay from him if I also demanded we do a 50:50 split of housework.
Congrats, you've entered the "transactional" thinking in the worst possible way.
Yes, healthy relationships rely on negotiations to make things work between two parties but direct transactions will almost always result in a broken relationship.
Due to the current era of extreme independence due to culture, social and economical factors retards arrive at the conclusion that people can't not be transactional with eachother, which is true, it's a wisdom that some might not achieve, but they act as if it's the absolute truth.
I'm saying this because although we're still being transactional with one another, the missed point of most people that the closer the relationship is, the less directly transactional are and instead it adopts a specific currency, trust. It's why we don't play the game theory meta strategy of tit-for-tat with loved ones or very close people, we give the benefit of the doubt, that benefit of the doubt, those second chances are transaction on which we or other spend that trust currency, until the bank is empty and ultimatums are given as "these transactions proved a net negative for me in the past X interactions".
(1/2)

OP here, thought I should calculate based on take-home pay, as it makes more sense.
>For him, that'd be $6,250/mo (70%)
>For me, that'd be $2,700/mo (30%)
Our shared costs are $4,800/mo, so I should pay:
>$3,350/mo paid by him (+$950 more than before)
>$1,450/mo paid by me (-$950 less than before)

He still ends up with more disposable income than me per month:
>He has $2,900/mo (rather than $3,850/mo)
>I have $1,250/mo (rather than $300/mo)

Our disposable income ends up being in a 70:30 split above as well, coincidentally. This just seems a lot more fair - we're equally burdened by the bills.

File: 3.png (518 KB, 824x784)

518 KB PNG

>>33848691
(2/2)
Now, to get back to your point, "it's okay for me to be subsidized financially because I'm subsidizing him in some other ways" and yeah, it's a very fair point to make, but you're digging a grave that demands more graves because we have three problems:
By thinking of this situation in a direct transaction manner:
1. No trust is exchanged, believe me dearly when I say that if people don't exchange trust, the diplomacy dies immediately.
2. It promotes the subject of discussing what's the worth of your homemade meals, please try and attempt to put value on something that was supposed to be an exchange of trust and love.
3. It also promotes the subject of discussing more and more other areas of transactions between the two of you that are very hard if not impossible to be valued financially.

Oh and the reason it promotes laziness is because you don't need to pull the cart as hard, someone else will do it for you, people require mostly negative incentive otherwise they adapt and take their current status for granted, studies exist on the matter you're a grown ass woman, look them up.

Your ability to do house chores and provide home cooked meals are not and should not be taken for granted just like how his financials shouldn't be taken for granted.
Both of you negotiate these things ON THE SPOT or at large, not as a contract.
Which means that if you want something outside of your financial range you can ask it from him, you're giving him an opportunity for a trust transaction, by doing this for you, you might be better to him, by making him home cooked meals, that's a trust transaction towards him and he shouldn't take it for granted for he has no right to expect one anyway.

There's a reason why Givers are eventually taken for granted and Takers are eventually forced to find other Givers.
There's a reason we cannot enforce responsibility unto people, how would the average woman feel if there was a responsibility to submit to sex at any time?

>>33848691
>I meant that he's more interested in progressing his financial gain, you're not.
I guess this is true. I don't want to age my way to an early grave through work stress - I like my current job, it's dangerous for me to switch jobs (if ANYTHING goes wrong and a new employer messes up the visa process, I'd have to leave the UK). He's lucky in that he's a UK citizen so can switch jobs and pursue any opportunity, whereas I face more difficulties even if I wanted to find something broader. The sector I'm interested in (education) isn't notably high-paid over here anyway, so even without the visa restrictions I'd struggle to find something high paid even if I wanted to.
On his end his closest friends friends are high achievers in finance and tech. His family are all private doctors (except for him) and wealthy. He went to an incredibly selective school. He was brought up in an environment where success was mandatory.
Just to give you a picture on this, to give you a sense of what his headspace and how we differ.

File: OIP-3964447377.EIw5lpVKzc(...).jpg (14 KB, 474x262)

14 KB JPG

>>33842908
Dave Ramsey would have a field day with this one

>>33848667
it doesn't really matter cos he can just dump her whenever he wants since they aren't married if she gets too annoying

>>33848691
I think some of my issues with going blindly on "I'm happy to do more housework and not have some transactional split" are:
>If I were living alone, I'd have less housework to do. If I need to do 70% of the housework for 50:50 split, I'm basically increasing my housework by 50%.
>We're not married - while I don't think it'd happen, theoretically he could just decide to leave, after I've tried to support his success and made his life easier.

>>33848725
by the sounds of things he'll starve to death without her, see >>33847905 and >>33844386 and >>33844386. she said
>He doesn't really eat well unless I cook for him
>I was away for a couple months over the summer and he dropped from 184lbs to 167lbs during that time
>he'll literally forget to eat or get to engrossed in what he's doing to realise that he's not had more than a banana in the last 36 hours.
you cant work for 15 hours a day on no food for very long. hes 25 now so maybe his body can take it but if he does this for a few more years hes fucked
desu he needs a woman like this in her life to cook for him

File: cr2QWpuNoSuz9kC8NFbpSez9x(...).png (23 KB, 256x256)

23 KB PNG

Why does /adv/ hold such a radically different opinion to the wider internet on this? I think she's being ridiculous but was surprised to see that this is a controversial take with the wider population

>>33847872

>>33848722
doesnt that guy more cover people who are in stupid levels of debt
from what i know he's fairly traditional, i think he'd probably tell the guy to pay more

File: 2.png (569 KB, 824x784)

569 KB PNG

>>33848715
Thanks for the background, it's largely irrelevant as it explains what we already knew, you two have different objectives and that's completely normal.
The problem lies in the fact that none of you should expect anything from one another, that's a romantic relationship based on trust and freedom of the individual. Enforcing expectations is a deal.

>>33848726
I know, I'm not saying that full equality should be enforced or supported either, Trust me I've been analyzing relationships because of my own relationship for months on end because I'm a hopeless romantic.
No political agenda is good, all have underlying issues and it all comes down to ego or self-interest, we're the problem, not the systems themselves.

And yes, relationships are a risk, whoever lied to you that relationships/marriage are permanent or something is an absolute moron. The history is full of brother killing brother, son killing father or betrayals in general for the self-interest of others, truth is, politics (and yes, even a two person group has to politically decide for the group) are studies with the goal of finding common-ground between two self-interested parties.

Now, on the part of a relationship, romance is an ideology, it has rules (that still differ from person to person) but it's mostly based around sacrifice of the self for the other, romance usually results in uneven outcomes, for the "greater good" called love.

Either way, you're on a slippery slope and so far your relationship sounds doomed to fail unless these things are discussed at the round table.
From here you'll probably:
a. Do the negative like >>33848736 presented and stop cooking for him, he'll eventually burst out that you don't love him anymore, good luck
b. Do the positive and sacrifice yourself, risk him taking you for granted, good luck
or
c. Negotiate some more until you guys reach a common ground

Just don't forget death and taxes.

>>33848710
>Oh and the reason it promotes laziness is because you don't need to pull the cart as hard, someone else will do it for you, people require mostly negative incentive otherwise they adapt and take their current status for granted, studies exist on the matter you're a grown ass woman, look them up.
I believe you, and agree that if I were expecting a proportional split but 50:50 on housework, I'd be lazy. But I'm more than happy to pull the cart in other non-financial areas.

The general trust transaction stuff is interesting. If I'm understanding you right, are you suggesting
>Rather than have a formal agreement on how things should be split, it should be done ad hoc. He treats me to things I might not be able to afford, I treat him to meals and a clean home.
>Give each other opportunities to show care, because care is more meaningfully/healthily expressed when it's willfully given rather than contractually enforced
I think this makes some sense. Certainly I wouldn't want to draft a contract saying "I must cook 4 meals for you a week". Finances feel differnent though because it's more objectively measurable and easier to split (there's no debate over what we made in a month, but unless every chore is logged and assigned a value you it's impossible to do this for housework).

>>33848752
out of interest op can you give a breakdown of what you and him do housework wise

File: ferrin_style_study.jpg (572 KB, 2360x1640)

572 KB JPG

>>33848752
>I believe you, and agree that if I were expecting a proportional split but 50:50 on housework, I'd be lazy. But I'm more than happy to pull the cart in other non-financial areas.
Then that's the political agenda you can press forward for a more fair trade.

And yes, you understood me properly, just take note that these are my conclusions from personal introspection via multiple lenses, I'm still imperfect as everyone else and may have missed multiple lenses of analysis which could skew my conclusion.

And beware that it's prone to it's own problems like being taken for granted, human relationships are RARELY equal. Look up the Game Theory branch of mathematics, it's very interesting, it's a meta analysis on the strategy and outcome of different strategies interacting with one another.

One more small thing to add but imperative nonetheless
>Finances feel differnent though because it's more objectively measurable and easier to split
They do feel different, but they're not, the old adage of "time is money" is really everything you need to know to understand it. What we earn as an "objective" form of currency is actually a substitution of our time and effort which in turn is being formally formulated by immeasurable external factors, from the actual work you're doing, to how many people it benefits, to the capital interest of the current system, etc etc etc

So in truth, it feel objective, but it couldn't be farther from the truth.

>>33848755
Sure.

On the weekends, chores are split equally, and are done ad hoc together as they come up. We're both around, and it'd feed weird if he was sitting on the sofa relaxing while I cleaned the kitchen, for example. On weekends we cook together in the evenings. I may sometimes make him breakfast on weekends though.

On weekdays AND weekends:
>The living room is his responsibility to keep clean.
>The bedroom is my responsibility to keep clean.
>I order the online grocery shop, and I'm responsible for making sure the kitchen, toilet paper, etc. are all regularly stocked.
>The bathroom is a shared responsibility to clean.
>We take care of our own laundry.

During the week:
>I cook meals for him 3-4 nights a week (not Friday as I'm usually out until 10pm as I have sports activities). These meals are almost always fairly complex meals (2-3 dishes), and fancy ones that take 1-2 hours to make, sometimes more.
>I run the dishwasher (sometimes several times a day as it's a small dishwasher)
>He cleans the kitchen (including things used to cook with) after we eat on a week day.
>When I'm working from home, I'll clean up after my mess from lunches. Sometimes I'll ask him to clean up one of my pans if I'm about to start cooking and need it and he's around.

>>33848766
wait so these are the only things you do above and beyond a 50-50 housework split
>order groceries and keep the kitchen stocked
>run the dishwasher when he's not home
>cook (fancy) dinners for him 3-4 nights a week
and he's paying $1,900 more than you per month for this?
plus if hes cleaning up after your "fancy" meals which you said involve 2-3 dishes, thats not a normal amount of cleaning either
i know when i cook something fancy theres a fuckton of mess in the kitchen to deal with because it seems the fancier a recipe and the more dishes you do, the more likely you are to use everything in the fucking kitchen

>>33846737
Chores are not equivalent to a high stress job. You can do the dishes while watching YouTube.

>>33842908
This site tends to attract young, hyper-individualist men. Anons here won't see “a couple building a life together”; they'll see “a man being exploited financially.”
Income-proportionate splits are the norm among cohabiting couples.

In reality, as you said - you're not looking for a handout. Fairness means both contribute in proportion to what they earn, so the impact feels equal for both of you. A 50/50 split ignores the reality that the same bill is a much bigger burden for you than for your boyfriend.

Posters here would have you believe that if he earned $10m a year or something, a 50:50 split would still be justified.

>>33848752
>>33848764
Oh and forgot to mention
>Certainly I wouldn't want to draft a contract saying "I must cook 4 meals for you a week".
And yet you're fully aware that's what you're doing with his finances, right? Just pointing out double-agendas.

People are free to drink their own kool-aid as much as they like, my personal vendetta is against people treating other people differently and while still believing in their own ideology.

>>33848802
Maybe the tone wasn't clear - it's something I'd do for him, but I wouldn't need a notarised contract to enforce it. If he said we'd split payments 70-30, I also wouldn't need a contract.

My statement there is more "I don't need a formal contract signed in writing", rather than "I don't want to promise I'll cook for him"

>>33848794
>This site tends to attract young, hyper-individualist men. Anons here won't see “a couple building a life together”; they'll see “a man being exploited financially.”
While true, it's irrelevant to the point at hand.
It's an appeal to bias, simply because a person might hold a different view isn't necessarily invalid.

>Income-proportionate splits are the norm among cohabiting couples.
That's an appeal to normality, question normality first, then speak.

>Fairness means both contribute in proportion to what they earn, so the impact feels equal for both of you. A 50/50 split ignores the reality that the same bill is a much bigger burden for you than for your boyfriend.
While I agree with the proportional split, hence why we've concluded in our relationship that it should be the norm, it doesn't mean that it's fair.

Simply because you refuse to question normality or the reality, it doesn't mean that it's the truth, it's the literal definition of drinking your own kool-aid.

>Posters here would have you believe that if he earned $10m a year or something, a 50:50 split would still be justified.
Interesting bias friend, you can even foresee our thoughts, why even discuss it then? You are always right due to the generalizations you believe.

>>33848744
He'd tell them to not shack up and then do married people stuff with their money. And he's put quite a lot of "let's split it equitably" people in their place

>>33842908
first off? you aren't going to get a real answer from the seething incels of 4chan

but my argument to him would be that as he works more hours, you pick up more of the chores required to do at home. if you guys move to a more expensive place to live and you are living in his budget, not yours, point that out.

if you are splitting 50/50 then everything needs to be set to the lower earner's budget.

now, that all being said, this is a very clear indication to me that he doesn't see a future with you. him continuing to split 50/50 is basically you subsidizing his lifestyle while being his free maid & chef. if he cared about you, he would care about your financial wellbeing as much as his own. it raises a lot of red flags. i wouldn't stay with him personally.

>>33848847
As someone who used to watch him a lot, I don't think that's the case.

His approach tends to emphasize a team mentality, often with one person managing the finances. He usually suggests a proportional split or other methods to ensure fairness (most often ensuring each person has an equal amount of "spending money" left after bills).

So he'd probably advocate for a much more radical income split here, where they'd take their combined $4,150/mo after bills and split it equally, so both get $2,075 a month.

>>33848847
See this for example https://youtu.be/RlzzfJDPN3s

>>33842954
>A couple is meant to be a team.
That only matters after you're married and have joint finances. You're just boyfriend/girlfriend now.
If you get married and have joint finances then it doesn't matter at all because then the bills are all being paid from the whole pot instead of halfsies.
>>33848659
No, you're being petty and resentful. Nothin in any relationship is EVER completely "equitable". There are always "imbalances" in who does what, who pays more, who works more, and who puts in more effort. Misery will only result from claiming you are contributing "more" than the other person or in a disproportionate manner.
>you never have time to do them during the week
BECAUSE HE'S WORKING AT THOSE HOURS. Explain why he needs to indirectly compensate you because he's getting paid money in the timeframe that he can't be at home doing chores. That makes no fucking sense.

>>33849119
>Explain why he needs to indirectly compensate you because he's getting paid money in the timeframe that he can't be at home doing chores.
Because otherwise I end up doing 70% of the household chores. If he wants to split things 50:50, we should be doing chores 50:50, no?

>>33848766
Why would he agree to such a huge change in his expenses when the amount of "labor" you are doing in your claimed "imbalance of chores" doesn't measure out to the proposal?
Say you got a job working at a restaurant or as a maid doing those "extra" chores". Figure out how little money that is for a given week.

Now compare that amount against what he could pay for a competing service if you stopped doing them entirely.

This is all excessively petty and is really just derived from you being envious of his higher income. Does doing these chores make you unique miserable somehow and you would like to restructure who is responsible for domestic things? I highly doubt it.

Are you interested in sabotaging your current relationship over petty finances? Are you not planning to eventually get married to this person, where none of this would even matter anyway?

>>33849142
I'm probably doing an extra 2-3 hours of housework a day during the week. My effective hourly pay at my job ($42k a year, 37.5 hours a week, 48 weeks a year) is $23.33.
We'll say 10 hours a week (as I'm out on Fridays), so $233.33 a week, or $1,100/mo.
By my proposal, he ends up paying $950 extra a month.

The numbers don't look that far off to me?

>>33849138
>Because otherwise I end up doing 70% of the household chores
That doesn't reflect what you listed as typical weekly domestic effort.

He cleans one room, you clean another. 50/50
You share joint responsibility in one room.
You both do your own laundry.
You cook some nights, he cleans up after those. That's 50:50 also.
Cleaning up after yourself while you're home would happen even if he wasn't around.

The only chore you seem to be exclusively doing is the dishwasher, and ordering groceries. Big fucking whoop. Please explain how those two things couldn't be done by him so he could avoid paying more than half of living expenses.

>>33842908
Asking 4chan moids who hate women and think they deserve to be served and worshipped househusbands was a mistake.
Your request is reasonable. A man should want to take care of his woman. He should view you as a team, with not "yours" and "mine," but "ours."
I notice that you've been together for 3 years though, and still just a girlfriend on top of your current financial predicament, which tells me he doesn't see you as a serious long-term prospect.
You should leave and find someone who loves you and wants to take care of you, instead of someone who wants a roommate they get to fuck.

>>33849142
>Are you not planning to eventually get married to this person, where none of this would even matter anyway?
I'm not sure why marriage has to be the point where bills are split like that. We're living together, we intend to get married. Why should it matter if we get married in 2 years or 5 whether we merge finances?
>Are you interested in sabotaging your current relationship over petty finances
Also, the same could be posed on him I guess.
Anecdotally, speaking to my colleagues at work and my friends, they're surprised/shocked that we split 50-50.

>>33849164
>You cook some nights, he cleans up after those. That's 50:50 also.
The "I cook, he cleans" isn't 50-50, in my opinion. He can clean the kitchen in 20 minutes. The cooking takes hours.
>Please explain how those two things couldn't be done by him so he could avoid paying more than half of living expenses.
If I'm the one cooking I need to plan what groceries we need.
For the dishwasher he's offered to do this when he gets back, but there are often times in the day where I'll need to use something that's dirty and I don't want to wait for him to get back before I can use it.

>>33849159
>My effective hourly pay at my job
You wouldn't get paid that much doing domestic work.
>I'm probably doing an extra 2-3 hours of housework a day during the week.
I don't believe you based on your list. By your own admission he is pulling nearly 40% of his weight when it comes to chores. You can ask him for another 10% of chore effort on weekends, but you're splitting hairs and providing an absurdly inconsistent story when it comes to this claimed "imbalance" in daily life.

I'm in the opposite situation as you now, and was in your same shoes years ago.
I have, no matter what income imbalance has existed in my direction or not done more chores than my wife. Even when I worked twice as many hours as her, even when we earned the same amount of money, even when I earned less than her.
I took on the chores that I hated the least, that I knew needed to be done consistently to not complicate our lives, and left her with the chores she didn't hate and were more flexible in terms of when they could be done.

You are going to sabotage your relationship if you are going to start obsessing over "balance" in your relationship when it comes to effort or money. And trying to put a price tag on things you do for him or for yourselves as a couple will kill your relationship.

You don't have leverage to make such a stupid ultimatum because no relationship is ever going to be completely equitable anyways. You both should contribute what you do because you want the relationship to be healthy and lasting. Instead you are choosing a path that leads to resentment, pettiness, and bitter comparison.

Quit before you destroy your relationship over money/effort.

>>33849208
>You wouldn't get paid that much doing domestic work.
To be fair, minimum wage in the UK is $16.25. Living wage in London is $19.70.
So even if paid minimum wage, the minimum value of 10 hours of extra domestic work a week is $650-788.

(I'd also argue that the cooking I do isn't bare minimum either - he's getting meals each day that are the kinds people make for special occasions, or if they decide to go "all out" for a meal. That's subjective though so I won't push too hard on that specifically).

>>33849181
>I'm not sure why marriage has to be the point where bills are split like that.
It depends on how committed the relationship is. Maybe instead of niggling over specific details on finances now is that time to propose merging your finances. Which would make this whole discussion of "balance" moot.
>The "I cook, he cleans" isn't 50-50, in my opinion.
You're ignoring my point. There is no such thing as "50;50" anyways.
In my marriage of 15 years now, I have always done 95% of the cooking and buying groceries.
>The cooking takes hours.
Bullshit.
>He can clean the kitchen in 20 minutes.
You could do the cooking in 20 minutes. Meal preparation time is extremely variable. And most "cooking time" is just spent waiting on timers or doing other things while things are inside an appliance. The only day of any year I have ever spent "hours" actively in preparation is Thanksgiving because we're doing up to 6 side dishes plus desserts.
>If I'm the one cooking I need to plan what groceries we need.
Which you only do for 3 to 4 meals. Say you stopped cooking entirely or planned way simpler meals. You have agency.
If he ordered food for delivery or just made frozen meals he would probably save himself a hell of a lot of money compared to your absurd proposal that you somehow are owed $23/hr for homemade meals 3 or 4 nights a week.

Do you uniquely hate cooking? Do you have cooking for your boyfriend and yourself? I do all the cooking in my household primarily because I'm a much pickier eater than my wife is. And I get home before she does so it makes sense in both regards.
>Also, the same could be posed on him I guess.
He's not the one making this proposal. You previously agreed to 50/50 split, you're trying to change the terms because he's now making more money. That strikes me as petty.
>Anecdotally, speaking to my colleagues at work and my friends, they're surprised/shocked that we split 50-50.

File: 200w.gif (515 KB, 200x200)

515 KB GIF

Can someone cleanly explain to me WHY a 50:50 split of finances is best?

Everyone has explained why they think a proportionate split is bad, but I'm not sure why a 50:50 is better.

Would it still be right if they worked the same number of hours?

>>33849267
The only people who think it's best are those that earn more, because they benefit more, and they are selfish.

>>33849257
>>33849257
>It depends on how committed the relationship is. Maybe instead of niggling over specific details on finances now is that time to propose merging your finances. Which would make this whole discussion of "balance" moot.
He pushed back when I brought up splitting proportionately. I don't think he wants to merge finances, at least not before we're married. He made some comment about being more willing to merge if I made changes and had some more defined upward trajectory in my career, and that he'd ideally like to see me be more active in improving my income.
>Bullshit.
It does. I mentioned earlier - I like to make 2-3 dishes for a dinner (1 main dish, 1 secondary main dish, 1 side dish). I use fancy cookbooks. He eats a lot and I don't really like leftovers anyway so I can't exactly keep food for the next day.
His and my friends comment a lot about how lucky he is to eat like he does.
>If he ordered food for delivery or just made frozen meals he would probably save himself a hell of a lot of money
He used to just do microwave meals for $8-$10/night, but he'd eat very inconsistently (if at all) and lose a lot of weight.

>>33849291
how much do the two of you spend on groceries per month
2-3 fancy dishes a night and no leftovers cant be cheap

>>33849295
About $1,000/mo, though that includes things like washing machine pods, toilet paper, etc.

A lot of misers here

This is bait.

It seems odd that there are so many people itt saying that its only loser, terminally online, no grass touching "moids" that think like op's bf is in the right. But wait! Nuh uh! Because ops bf has a gf and a job, and still thinks he is right. Damn, need to cook up some new ad hominem for this!
He does not see you as serious enough to spilt bills. If he is worth marrage, marry him and have his children.
YOU ARE NOT WORTH HIS MONEY YET. MARRY HIM OR PAY YOUR SHARE. HE CAN DO HIS DISHES AND LAUNDRY. MARRY HIM, GTFO, OR PAY THE BILLS.
you may go to reddit for faggot retard simping.

>>33849661
Yea imagine guilt tripping your bf for thousands a month because you do basic chores. Hard to believe a guy would fall for a miser like that.

>>33849933
Maybe it's just because I'm sleep deprived but I have no idea whether you support the boyfriend or OP

>>33842915
>>33842970
These
Either you are married with joint assets or you're being a bitch
Split 50/50 and stop being a nuisance, it's like you're looking for means to destroy the relationship

>"My boyfriend should pay more so I can pay less. It's only fair that I get to keep more of my money and he has to spend more of his."

>>33849267
It's more like a reasonable division of labor. I think what you ultimately want to end up at is both people "work" roughly the same amount of hours with the same effort. If I make 150k a year but work 60 hour weeks and my wife makes 50k a year on 40 hour weeks then I get to do either little or no household chores because household chores take up less than 20 hours a week. If I make 150k doing 20 hour a week then actually i think that I should be doing a bit more around the house than my wife just because I have more time available than her even though I outearn her. This division should really be decided on a pragmatic basis outside of extreme circumstances like if you personally are rich enough and don't want your wife to do anything. Take an extreme example- i am a trust fund baby working 0 hours but making 200k a month while my wife works 40 hours and makes 50k. Well desu in that event even though I out earn my wife by a factor of 4 i should still do most if not all the chores because I don't really have a job and a lot of time.

Everyone's ignoring the fact that even her BOYFRIEND doesn't wanna pay more than 50%.

He pays 70% now that he got a double paying job? All of this because of a mere promotion? She benefits of HIS promotion instead of him. What a fucked up place we live in. What does he get out of you?

>>33844386 >>33842908
>I do end up doing more chores than him, on account of him coming back from work at 9pm-10pm or so most days.
>He doesn't really eat well unless I cook for him (he'll literally just have microwave meals in the evening, if he even eats at all).
Tell this shit in front of his face. No one accepts your bullshit excuse here not even him.

He's not your sugar daddy. Go divorce with him as its fair for everyone than you leeching 30%. No sane man would let you screw him over like this. He gets nothing out of your deal.

Honestly, this is why bitch ass like you shouldn't be trusted. If he kept his mouth shut about his promotion you wouldn't brought this shit up you untrustworthy bitch.

>>33847872
Redditors are a bunch of troons and developmentally stunted communists, of course they'll spout nonsense.

>>33848576
>>33848149 here.
You actually seem to be a reasonable and principled woman, which is unfortunately quite rare these days. I've never lived with any of my girlfriends so I have no experience with your situation, but yoi could propose a joint account just for your regular expenses. My parents used one for a while, my mum had the higher paying job but when my dad finally got he payout from his long term business project he contributed a large portion of it

>>33851747
You'd expect at least one person to suggest a 50/50 split, but I couldn't find one across perhaps 50-60 threads I saw on the topic.

>>33855213
If you want to experience misandry, just lurk in the comments of the amitheasshole and aitah subs. These are not just some 2xchromo subs…these are some of the most popular and “neutral” of reddit. It will blow your fucking mind if you look at all the comments to every thread, every day.

>>33842915
This.

>>33842908
He has earned a higher income and has more money to do what he wants. And you want to drag him down. Talk about ick.

>>33851190
>it's like you're looking for means to destroy the relationship
This is it exactly. Women LOVE stirring up drama. It's how they feel alive.

>>33842908
So if the roles were reversed would you be okay with split based on income? I highly doubt that if you were working as hard as your BF. Why would anyone want to do a split based on income with someone that's admitted they have no ambition and are okay with making a dogshit salary. It will only enable that person even further in their lazy ass lifestyle. You should honestly feel ashamed to even think what you're asking for is ok. You 2 are not compatible with each other. He needs to find a woman who can match his salary.

>>33847883
>Cover it another way

You're not going to get far with that argument about chores lol. It's pretty absurd for you to think just because you do extra chores around the house he has to cover 70% of the bills to make it fair. He could literally just hire a maid to do his chores and it will be cheaper than paying 70% of the bills lol.

>>33848766
So most of these aren't even chores it's just not making a mess and cleaning up after yourself lol. me and my wife don't have kids so keeping our house clean requires very low effort and just being mindful i.e washing a plate right after using it so dishes don't pile up, picking up or sweep bits of crumbs or trash we see etc. unless your BF is a total slob I don't see how your chores require much effort at all.

regarding the cooking, who is deciding to make those meals that require so much time and effort? if he's requesting those complex gourmet meals then you are justified to ask him to cover more of the grocery bill. if he isn't willing to do so then stop making such complex meals or just stop cooking for him in general.

>>33849138
So how does doing 70% of the chores equal to him paying 70% of the bills? You can easily cut back on the cooking and it's complexity and the other chores aren't hard or time consuming. No way any of your other "chores" takes you more than 30 minutes to do and the rest is just maintaining what's already clean lol.

>>33842908
Listen, hon, my wife and I have been married for almost 20 years at this point and money used to be a real sticking point between us. Household chores too. What I've learned is that money and chores are the 2 most common things couples fight about and if you're not careful it will ruin your relationship. First off, most men (including myself at first) don't value household chores they way they should, as evidenced by this asshole:

>>33848664
>Dusting and running the vacuum a couple times a week is not worth $2k a month.
(Continuing from above, not responding to this asshole). What you have to understand is that men don't respond to emotion. They respond to logic and reason. You can plead with him all you like about how you feel unappreciated and you know what? He doesn't give a shit. Why would he? From his perspective, you're just an ungrateful bitch who can't even run a mop over the floor while he's at work slaving away. His perspective is wrong but you'll never convince him of that if you stick to woman tactics of appealing to emotion.

If he's bringing home that kind of cheese then he should be paying for a housekeeper, end of story. And if he didn't have you, he'd either have to hire a housekeeper or live in filth. So here's what you do. Find out how much it would cost to pay someone to come in and wash your clothes, cook your meals, and clean your house. Once you have the numbers, present them to him and offer to do it yourself for half of that (since you're splitting half the bills, remember?). You'll get an extra $15,000/year minimum that you can spend on your 1,211th purse or 876th pair of shoes whatever retarded woman things you want to buy. Because that's really what this is about. You want more money so you can fill his house with useless junk. (Continued in the next post).

>>33856086
Continued:

Next, how to handle money in a relationship. You should have a total of 4x accounts (all of which should be joint if you're married, separate if you're not).

Account #1 (Master Account): This is where both your paychecks go and what bills are paid out of.

Account #2 (His Personal Account): This is the account where a set amount is automatically transferred from the Master Account that he can use for personal shit he wants to buy.

Account #3 (Your Personal Account): Pretty self explanatory but you're a woman so I have to be clear that anything you buy "for the house" like fucking throw pillows or scented candles or whatever other retarded shit you want to buy needs to come from your personal account. If it's something he wouldn't buy if you weren't around, it needs to come from here.

Account #4 (Emergency Fund): Pretty self explanatory as well. Any unexpected expenses like car repairs or whatever come out of here.

You need to both sit down and do a budget and figure out how much you can afford to put into your emergency fund each month, and how much you each get in your personal accounts. It should be equal. If he gets $1,000/month to piss away then so do you. If you want more money, you can do all the housework and get paid instead of paying the housekeeper, or you can get a better job. If he wants more money then ditto to him. This is what a fair and "equitable" setup looks like. But I suspect you're not looking for this. I suspect you're like most women and just want more (free) money to spend on absolute bullshit that you don't need, but if you continue with this attitude, it's going to end your relationship. If you want more you have to WORK for it, not just demand that he do more.

Men are so angry itt. It's not difficult to be a generous partner and lover, I intend to support me and my bf 100%. I only have career aspirations so that I can buy him more things because being in love rocks. And yes, his company, smile, and, indeed, the chores are worth every dime.
If you are unhappy in your setup with this man, you can almost definitely find someone more generous and loving.

>>33856891
Words and promises doesn't mean shit. Relationship can be destroyed in an instant like how you bitches go on about this.

>If you are unhappy in your setup with this man, you can almost definitely find someone more generous and loving.
You bet her husband is happy to file a divorce over you sucking leechers. You can't give decent advice because you're wrong and she can't even leave him because you two know nobody would ever keep up with your bullshit.

Convincing is all you can get aka "MANIPULATION". This shit won't work out and all you bitches do at this point are red flag that you're about to ditch them at some point as you're hoarding money by making them pay 70% more and you just pay 30%. Do the fucking math.

>>33842908
If your not married and have no kids I would leave he's not worth it if he's making you go into debt. He's probably also cheating on you if he's gone on purpose all the time

>>33858638
>words and promises
I have paid for every dinner and date with my boyfriend, I pay for the apartment he is going to move into with me soon, I have bought him video games, I have bought him clothes, etc.
The most he has paid was his half for dinner on the first date and he bought me snacks a couple of times. I'm not bitter about this, I actively love it. My point is that people like me exist on the dating market, gender irrelevant, and if OP wants to find someone who shows love through generosity then she definitely can. And if she doesn't? Better single than live with someone incompatible.
It's less trouble for her boyfriend if she leaves anyway, so he can also find someone who is giving or is equally career oriented. This guy actually sounds like the type who DOES want a girlboss businesswoman wife to power couple with. And he should also have the chance to find her.
>relationships can be destroyed in an instant
Sometimes they should so both can find a better match.
I do agree the higher-paying partner takes a certain level of risk and responsibility. If my boyfriend suddenly left I'd be bummed and it would feel unfair, but focusing on being defensive because of my abandonment fears would rot our relationship.

>>33858746
>This guy actually sounds like the type who DOES want a girlboss businesswoman wife to power couple with. And he should also have the chance to find her.
Not sure how you can tell this based off a few sentences from OP.