Should Finance Dictate Valentine? Or Is That the Wrong Question?

It was kind of weird: For more than just a few years now, my wife has shown little interest in my pay check. Actually, she doesn't ask to see it anymore. An improvement in our maturing relationship, or something else going on?

Then I heard this news story about more and more women making more money than their brothers, boyfriends or husbands. I also read a news story, stating one-third of women in the United States now out-earn their husbands.

Writing for Psych Central, Dr. Marie Hartwell-Walker, elates, "It was inevitable, really. With more women than men going to college, with women taking less time out from careers to raise children, with more women choosing careers that only a few years ago were the province of men, better jobs and better money have become available to them."

So, it is in my son's future that his girlfriend or bride will earn more than he? If so, who's going to pay for their wedding? His wife-to-be coupled with his mother-in-law?

Frankly, I thought this whole business of women out-earning men was some kind of feminist joke or a conspiracy to further marginalize the male species.

Reality hit when I logged in to TaxAct to file our 2009 tax return. The numbers on those W2 income record don't lie, do they? When the numbers clear, my eyes captured the gulf-size difference between my wife's last year earnings and mine: about $7,000. The only comfort that soothed my psyche and cooled my manly sweat drops was the fact that I received a housing allowance. I'm laying my head on that soft pillow for the next 12 months, until we do the 2010 taxes. But I predict, soon there will be nowhere to hide, because my bride just got another raise, not to mention the uptick in her retirement benefits, which is great for our budget but brutal on my money-linked male esteem.

In practice, this turn of income has upset the traditional rules of the home game, though some guys are still stuck in the past, expecting their belabored wives to put in 12 hours at the office, then come home to cook dinner, clean the house, do laundry, bathe the baby, and of course, roll over for romance and sex. Most men don't take it easy that when a guy says, "I run things at home", he really means he runs the washing machine and dryer, the dishwasher, and the vacuum cleaner.

But this African-born dude is adjusting, sort of. I have finally accepted my Mr. Mom role, which began again in October 2004 when our late comer was born. I'll be babysitting her until August when she begins kindergarten. Hopefully that will return a piece of my manhood, even if it's in my mind.

Anyway, the whole, "She makes more than I the man" thing is tempting me to rewrite the rule on Valentine's Day. I'm trying answer this question: "Should she who owns the finance call the romance?"

Now, I haven't told Miss Harriet this, but is it OK to ask her for a loan so I can afford to buy her some flowers or chocolate or a $200 ring as my Valentine's Day present this year? I'm also thinking, if the loan is big enough, I could put some towards our Valentine's date night, not to mention the usual hotel room bill that comes standard.

The loan deal is just for this year. Next year we may take the next logical step: Have a discussion about having Miss Harriet give me Valentine's Day presents and take me out as her Valentine.

Even when it comes to romance, I'm willing to let finance lead the way too. I'd just stick to sleeping, snowing and drooling on the couch until my earner queen signals an interest in some bed games.

Over all, it's tough on the male ego. There's no denying that. But IMHO, this reversed Valentine scenario seems to jive neatly with the new reality of purse-power women with increasingly broke men.

Happy Valentine's Day to all of you women, high-earning or not ....(and you men too-:)