How much do you expect a man to provide financially in a marriage ?

50/50 is more than just financial. We keep forgetting this. If you go 50/50 in finances, then the man has to go 50/50 on childcare and housekeeping. But men rarely do right? So it ends up being 50% for the man and 150% for the woman. If the man expects you to be half the provider then he needs to do half the woman's work. If he expects the woman to do 100% of the home and child care then he needs to be 100% provider.

"Is that too far fetched?"

always remember the golden rule: no standard is too high. never allow for anyone to standard shame you.

as someone who grew up with a financial scarcity mindset, i expect the man to cover ALL big purchases/financial responsibilities and any dates we go out on.

I think the men that we are dating should want to make us feel happy and comfortable.

For me personally, that would look like a man paying for all dating expenses during the time we are bf/gf and engaged.

After marriage, I would want our incomes pooled together in a joint account. However, I would want 3 months of salary (plus additional salary if children are involved) set aside in a separate bank account that only I have access to. If he ever mistreats me, that will be my escape hatch.

To me, an ideal split in marriage would be like 60/40 or 70/30 (with him paying more). I'm never having kids and plan to always work so I don't need or want a man who's going cover all my bills. For me, it's a psychological thing, being able to pay for my own stuff helps me feel independent and in control of my life. But of course, a generous man is a necessity. Day to day, I wouldn't mind splitting expenses (provided that we are also splitting household chores, I will never be the type to do the majority of the housework and emotional labor) but I would prefer that over all, he pays more. For example, we may split the cost on a wedding, but he pays for the honeymoon. Or if we go on vacation, he would pay for flights and lodging and I might pay for a few dinners.

I think there’s a difference between a marriage i.e. true legal, social, and financial partnership, and being vigilantly against 50-50 before it. I do expect some level of resource pooling in that scenario (which by the way makes married people richer than single people, a fact brought to my attention on the daily in this economy!).

In traditional marriage (of working class people) wife controls finances and spending, husband gives all earnings to wife.

To be honest, if a man is not 100% a provider, it creates a mental block for me and I am no longer sexually attracted to him, so what would be the point.