
“On What Planet Is This Reasonable”: Well-Earning Guy Hopes His Unemployed Girlfriend Will Split The Rent 50-50, She Asks The Internet To Weigh In Interview
In 1995, a study found that the average American chose finances as ‘the most important thing in life.’ Although things have thankfully changed since then, with people starting to prioritize family and love life over money, it shouldn’t be all that surprising that money is a sensitive topic that can cause many headaches for people in relationships — especially if both partners’ financial situation is as different as day and night.
When this 22-year-old graduate was asked by her much older and well-earning boyfriend to move in with him across the country, it sounded like that could be the next step in their relationship. But then the financial disparity between the two raised some serious concerns for the author.
Confused about whether this is the right idea and how committed her boyfriend really is, both financial and emotional, the author of the story turned to the trusted ‘Am I The [Jerk]‘ community to seek the perspective of others.
Regardless of how happy people are with their significant others, money is a topic that couples consistently disagree on
Image credits: Mikhail Nilov (not the actual photo)
No matter how old you are, all of us probably have heard the Beatles’ famous lyrics: “I don’t care too much for money; money can’t buy me love.” And while that is unarguably true, money, however, can make one’s love life much easier: not only does finances make it harder to enjoy each other, as 1-in-3 couples in America will attest, it’s one of the most common reasons why people fall out of love and eventually divorce.
To understand what role money plays in a relationship, Bored Panda has reached out to Kim Stephenson, a financial psychologist and the co-author of ‘Finance Is Personal: Making Your Money Work for You in College and Beyond.’ One of the first things Kim tells us is that there’s a false misconception that money and wealth is directly linked to happiness. “The fact is, money doesn’t predict happiness,” he said. “Everybody thinks, ‘I’ll be happy when… I get a pay rise, a bigger house, car, better spouse etc. And experience and masses of research show that isn’t true. You maybe feel good for a few weeks and then you figure you need another pay rise.”
As Kim explains, we live in a time when most of us want more of everything, ignore the important things in life, and fail to realize that “money isn’t important until you know what you want the money to do” — hence the titular story. What he suggests is relatively simple: be clear and honest about what money means to you with your partner. Stephenson notes that this line of communication helps to express “values, what is really important to each person – not in terms just of material goods. But in terms of what they want their life to be about, what purpose they see in living and what they want to do with their time, money and other resources.” In other words, if you really love someone — “use your money as a tool to get the life you want [together].”
And when the financial disparity becomes too obvious to be ignored, this can lead to a serious make-or-break situation
Moving in together with your significant other is one of the most nerve-wracking but exciting moments in a person’s life. Still, despite what some relationship experts say — moving in together puts the couple ahead of the relationship game — it’s also linked to greater odds of divorce. Believe it or not, there’s even a name for this phenomenon called the “premarital cohabitation effect.” Over many decades, researchers and academics have found that while living with your partner pre-marriage doesn’t have an effect in the first year of marriage, it increases the odds of divorce in all other years.
Does that mean people should stop living together before finally tying the knot? Well, no. But as the ‘evidence’ shows, moving in can act as a break-or-make moment — especially if the financial disparity between the two is as big as the Grand Canyon. To this, Kim notes, there’s an antidote called communication. “It’s not the money disparity that’s the problem. It’s the relationship and people being honest about what they want, about feeling valued for who they are (not just for how much they’ve got),” he explained. “If people can’t be honest, then all sorts of elephants in the room start appearing.”
For the couple in the story, their elephant was their financial disparity. One was expected to punch above her financial weight, while the partner simply followed the big money. Asked what Stephenson would advise people placed in a similar scenario, he said: “If I were coaching or advising a couple on that, I’d start by getting them to talk to me and to one another. You don’t have to be a financial wizard, or ask for ‘expert’ advice — you’ll know what the obvious solution is,” he told.
The key to a happy, stress-free relationship, Stephenson explains, comes down to basic skills: honest communication and finding out what really matters to you in life. After you sort that out together, nothing will stop you. At least not until the first scandalously expensive rent payment.
It's absurd to expect that someone without any money shares the costs of living with someone who allegedly makes $500k per year on a 50-50 basis. It's good to read that the woman already dumped him.
The saying, "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free" springs to mind. I agree that's it's good she dumped his ass.
I do know of someone who had a marriage like that. Of course the higher-earning party had been divorced and was horrified that the spouse had been able to claim community property and child support, so for the second marriage they insisted on an ironclad prenup and all expenses paid 50-50. The wealthier party knew they were treating their partner badly, and said several times that even though the intrinsic arrangement was unfair, all the basic expenses were calculated to meet the poorer partner's financial needs, and the wealthier partner was generous with both gifts and in helping their partner into a better-paying career. Of course it didn't last, and by the time I knew the participant they were divorced, but at least the poorer partner left the marriage better off.
Paying her to live with him? Sure sounds like he basically considers her a hooker. This guy just goes from one extreme of disrespect to another. Glad she decided to unload him.
No, supporting a spouse or S.O. isn't treating someone like a hooker, sometimes, it's just, well, being supportive! Nothing wrong with someone who's making good money helping their S.O. get their degree, if that's what they both want, investing in someone's future is a loving thing to do. But it really doesn't sound like either of them was committed enough to the other to be thinking that way, it sounds more like he was moving away for a job, and thought it might be nice to take his girlfriend along with no strings attached. NEVER give up your life and move to another state with someone, unless all the strings are firmly attached!
When the other party is leaving because unreasonable requests, like moving away and expecting to pay massive rent, and then going all "no no dont go I will pay you if you stay with me" doesnt sound like supporting your SO
I was speaking generally, as helping your SO achieve their dreams is usually a loving thing to do. However, this offer was not made in a spirit of love and support, it was made in a spirit of... convenience. For him. As I said, I think she was quite right to turn him down.
"I'll hand you cash to warm my bed" isn't how one treats a hooker?
Interesting he did an about face. A ten year age difference isn't huge. However, the circumstances he originally proposed sound like the next step was he would want to go on expensive vacations and expect her to pay her own way. And yes, sharing rent should at most be a percentage of each one's earnings.
A ten year age difference CAN be huge depending upon maturity. 17 and 27? Yeah, two very different points in life...43 and 53? Not nearly as much. I think the age is a factor here due to being at very different life points when you are just entering your 20's versus when you have a couple of years before hitting 35. As one of the commenters pointed out, he is probably dating so young because the average 32 year old woman would have laughed in his face and told him to kick rocks if he proposed splitting living expenses 50/50 while he makes a half million dollars and she is unemployed.
When I was taking early childhood development courses, one of the topics was that, it's often a red flag in a relationship beginning with children and into adulthood, that when individuals pair up with people that have a age gap between them, it's often done by people who are missing important developmental markers. They have often missed stages in their development cycle during early childhood and have difficulty bonding with people of their own age. Often due to being stuck due to the gap, immature due to repeating cycles of behavior that are caused by not effectively completing the developmental stages, and also having regressive behaviors due to the same. It's difficult for these people to recognize that they have these issues, that are often caused by neglect or abuse as a child, but can sometimes be helped in therapy if they are recognized. Most often though, the cycles of behavior will continue to repeat until the particular developmental stage has been met and completed.
I started dating my now husband when I was 33 and he was 23. He was an introvert with low to moderate social skills. Still, he was very mature at that point and we had no problem with the age gap at all. So it all depends, whether the age gap is an issue or not. Judging from the post the OP seems very mature, she's aware of her own worth and financial responsibilities. Some people are taught valuable life lessons or are just smart enough to learn by observation. We've all heard about "mature beyond their age" type of people. On the other hand, I agree, that guy is delusional if he thinks 50/50 split in this case is reasonable. What got me in the added post was he called financial support a monthly allowance. What a twît.
It's absurd to expect that someone without any money shares the costs of living with someone who allegedly makes $500k per year on a 50-50 basis. It's good to read that the woman already dumped him.
The saying, "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free" springs to mind. I agree that's it's good she dumped his ass.
I do know of someone who had a marriage like that. Of course the higher-earning party had been divorced and was horrified that the spouse had been able to claim community property and child support, so for the second marriage they insisted on an ironclad prenup and all expenses paid 50-50. The wealthier party knew they were treating their partner badly, and said several times that even though the intrinsic arrangement was unfair, all the basic expenses were calculated to meet the poorer partner's financial needs, and the wealthier partner was generous with both gifts and in helping their partner into a better-paying career. Of course it didn't last, and by the time I knew the participant they were divorced, but at least the poorer partner left the marriage better off.
Paying her to live with him? Sure sounds like he basically considers her a hooker. This guy just goes from one extreme of disrespect to another. Glad she decided to unload him.
No, supporting a spouse or S.O. isn't treating someone like a hooker, sometimes, it's just, well, being supportive! Nothing wrong with someone who's making good money helping their S.O. get their degree, if that's what they both want, investing in someone's future is a loving thing to do. But it really doesn't sound like either of them was committed enough to the other to be thinking that way, it sounds more like he was moving away for a job, and thought it might be nice to take his girlfriend along with no strings attached. NEVER give up your life and move to another state with someone, unless all the strings are firmly attached!
When the other party is leaving because unreasonable requests, like moving away and expecting to pay massive rent, and then going all "no no dont go I will pay you if you stay with me" doesnt sound like supporting your SO
I was speaking generally, as helping your SO achieve their dreams is usually a loving thing to do. However, this offer was not made in a spirit of love and support, it was made in a spirit of... convenience. For him. As I said, I think she was quite right to turn him down.
"I'll hand you cash to warm my bed" isn't how one treats a hooker?
Interesting he did an about face. A ten year age difference isn't huge. However, the circumstances he originally proposed sound like the next step was he would want to go on expensive vacations and expect her to pay her own way. And yes, sharing rent should at most be a percentage of each one's earnings.
A ten year age difference CAN be huge depending upon maturity. 17 and 27? Yeah, two very different points in life...43 and 53? Not nearly as much. I think the age is a factor here due to being at very different life points when you are just entering your 20's versus when you have a couple of years before hitting 35. As one of the commenters pointed out, he is probably dating so young because the average 32 year old woman would have laughed in his face and told him to kick rocks if he proposed splitting living expenses 50/50 while he makes a half million dollars and she is unemployed.
When I was taking early childhood development courses, one of the topics was that, it's often a red flag in a relationship beginning with children and into adulthood, that when individuals pair up with people that have a age gap between them, it's often done by people who are missing important developmental markers. They have often missed stages in their development cycle during early childhood and have difficulty bonding with people of their own age. Often due to being stuck due to the gap, immature due to repeating cycles of behavior that are caused by not effectively completing the developmental stages, and also having regressive behaviors due to the same. It's difficult for these people to recognize that they have these issues, that are often caused by neglect or abuse as a child, but can sometimes be helped in therapy if they are recognized. Most often though, the cycles of behavior will continue to repeat until the particular developmental stage has been met and completed.
I started dating my now husband when I was 33 and he was 23. He was an introvert with low to moderate social skills. Still, he was very mature at that point and we had no problem with the age gap at all. So it all depends, whether the age gap is an issue or not. Judging from the post the OP seems very mature, she's aware of her own worth and financial responsibilities. Some people are taught valuable life lessons or are just smart enough to learn by observation. We've all heard about "mature beyond their age" type of people. On the other hand, I agree, that guy is delusional if he thinks 50/50 split in this case is reasonable. What got me in the added post was he called financial support a monthly allowance. What a twît.