Last week I told you why my partner and I divide the household work equally. That’s all about the work to be done at home. The hours spend cleaning, cooking and planning, to name a few things. But there’s another aspect of the household which aligns with this: the household expenses. As an intersectional feminist, I do not only find it important to divide the household work equally, I find it just as important that we divide the household expenses 50/50. Today I want to tell you why my partner and I divide the household expenses equally.
Existing gender roles
For me, the main reason as for why partners should divide the household expenses 50/50 is because we can then break with existing gender roles which have many negative consequences. Right now, traditional gender roles prescribe that men provide in the household expenses and women take care of the home. These traditional gender roles have many negative consequences (which I’ll get to in a sec). If we accept that men pay more of the household expenses, we will never break the cycle of these traditional gender roles. If we strive for an equal division in household expenses, I think we indirectly demand an end to some drivers of inequality.
Relationship with unpaid work
Right now, we accept that men work more paid hours and we accept that women take care of the home and children the most (which is the unpaid work). This way we keep an unequal division of paid and unpaid work, leading men to not only have more freedom in finances, but also a better pension. And there’s an interaction between household work and household expenses. If we demand to pay 50% of the household expenses, we can divide the household work 50/50 as well, since the expenses are divided equally. And on the other side, when we divide the household work 50/50 there’s more time for both partners to work paid hours and pay 50% of the household expenses.
The pay gap
In a way, it’s not weird that in most relationships the men pay more of the household expenses. In The Netherlands, the pay gap is still a big problem. The pay gap between men and women in The Netherlands is 15,5%. This means that men earn 15.5% more salary per hour than women do. About 9% of the pay gap can be explained, because women work in lower paying sectors, less often have leading roles and because women work less hours in general. The 6% that’s left is still pure sexism. There’s no reason for it, we just value women’s work less than men’s work.
The result of this pay gap translates to our households. Because men usually get paid more, we think it’s fair they pay a bigger share of the household’s expenses and that the women pay less. And we then expect women to do more of the unpaid household work. And there we are, back to the traditional gender roles again.
The child penalty
Because of the pay gap, women already earn less than men do. If that alone isn’t enough, there’s another reason why women usually have a lower salary than men do. And that’s the child penalty. After heterosexual couples have a baby, the women is cut in salary after she goes back to work. In The Netherlands, 44% of women work less or stop working alltogether after they’ve given birth. That’s because, due to traditional gender roles and because women earn less wage than men do, women are usually the ones who look after the child most. This again leads to a lower salary for women. And like I said, as this causes men to get paid more, we think it’s fair that they pay a bigger share of the household’s expenses. And then women pays less but does more of the unpaid work.
Fixing the pay gap and penalty
I think that if women no longer accept that men pay more of the household expenses but demand that both pay 50%, we can also demand for other equalities. We can then divide the household work equally among two partner as well. This leaves both partners to be able to do as much paid work as they like, giving both the chance for a good career and building a good pension. Women will then probably work more than they do now, which means we can start repairing traditional gender roles. If we repair traditional gender roles, we can fix the underlying problems causing them (the pay gap and the child penalty) as well. It’s all related.
State of dependence
Another reason for me why I think the household expenses should be divided equally, is because we create a state of dependence if we don’t do it that way. If one partner in the relationships can’t afford to pay 50% of the household expenses for whatever reason, this likely means they don’t earn enough to pay the household expenses on their own either if they want to leave the relationship. This means this partner then is stuck in the relationship, because they don’t earn enough money to be independent. And in that situation, they’re vulnerable to abuse. In The Netherlands, 41% of women are financially dependent on their partner or the state.
If you want to leave your relationship for whatever reason, but know that you can’t live in the same house alone or in another house alone because you can’t afford so, that means you will stay in the relationship against your will. And if anything, I think we should always prevent this. Both partners should always be able to leave the relationship and move on.
Divorce
But let’s say that the partner who wants to leave the relationship does it anyway, despite the financial dependence on their partner. For the rest of their life, they suffer consequences from that state of financial dependence. Most likely, their income is not enough to find a new home right away. They struggle to find a job that pays enough for them to get by because back when they were in a relationship, they likely did most of the unpaid work and therefore have not built a strong cv. And when they do find a house and a job that pays enough, they have a very low pension when they retire because they did very little to no paid work for a big share of their life. I think this situation can be prevented if we choose to pay the household expenses 50/50 in a relationship and stay financially independent.
Prevent it in all cases
I would say that paying 50/50 in household expenses is always the thing to thrive for. Some people would argue that this is not always possible. That may be true, in some cases it’s not possible. If one partner is sick for example. But I would say, in most relationships it is possible to divide the household expenses equally. Let’s say you want to go live together with a partner, I would say you would only do so if you can both afford 50% of household expenses. If not, I think it’s better to find a smaller home. Or one of the partners should work more if they can. Anything better than being financially dependent on your partner.
Equal relationship
For me personally, a healthy and equal relationship means that we divide things equally. That goes for the household work, but also the household expenses. I would never agree with a partner paying more than I do in the household expenses. Even if I earn a lot less than them. For me it would feel like the relationship is unequal if I would pay less. I want to own (or rent) my share of the house. And I want to do my share of the work. We’re doing this together. Like I said, it’s a personal thing. But as long as I have a say over this, I want things to be divided equally. For the sake of equality.
Individual money separate
Most people who do not pay the household expenses equally, put both incomes (the higher and lower one) onto one bank account and pay all the expenses from that bank account. Honestly, I think this is unhealthy for a relationship. I think it’s healthy if both partners have a say over their own money and not that of their partner. I have my own financial goals and priorities and I don’t want to debate every single purchase with my partner. Nor do I want my partner to spend my money without debate. I honestly don’t know why people do it this way. I want to stay in control over my own money in a relationship.
And sure, I have a shared bank account with my partner as well. But we both put 50% of all household expenses (mortgage, groceries, taxes, etc.) in there. If we go on a holiday and book it, we transfer both 50% of the sum to the bank account. But the rest of my finances stay on my personal bank account. And I can choose to do whatever I want with it and so does my partner with his money. Maybe I choose to work more paid hours, or I have a higher salary. That’s my own individual accomplishment and I should decide over that money. It’s a matter of autonomy within the relationship.
Why divide the household expenses uneven?
And I know that many people say that they divide the household expenses to financial capacity. Let’s say one partner makes 4000 euros and the other makes 2000 euros. The household expenses are 1500. Most couples in The Netherlands then decide that the partner who earns 4000 euros pays 1000 euros for the household expenses and the partner who earns 2000 euros pays 500. Both pay 25% of their income. As a consequence this, the partner who contributes 1000 euros then thinks it’s fair that the partner who contributes 500 euros can do more of the unpaid household work. And when a child is born, the partner which earns 2000 euros stops working and takes care of the children.
And there we have it again, women are then the ones doing most of the unpaid work. Because in our society they earn less money. They built less pension, they don’t built a career and traditional gender roles are kept in place. We cannot break this cycle if we do not choose to divide everything 50/50. In that case, both partners pay 750 euros on household expenses, both do 50% of the unpaid work and both spend an equal amount of time with kids if they choose to have any. For me, that’s what we’re thriving for. An equal division of just about anything.
No personal attack
I know that some people are going to be offended by this post, because they do not divide the household expenses equally. This article is not meant as a personal attack. The system that we live in is broken and so most people do what seems logical in their personal situation. I get that. But to me, the personal is political. I think we are the ones who have to break the cycle and make the system change. And sure, the government can assist a great deal, by providing free childcare for example. But a big part of it is culture. And that’s very hard to change. It means that we consciously have to go against what is ‘normal’ or sometimes ‘economical’.
Yours sincerely,
Romee