Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

Financial privacy isn’t always about the government or corporations. Sometimes it’s simply about peers. Here’s an anecdote.

In Egypt, people born into lower socioeconomic statuses often don’t have a lot of flexibility for their life path. It’s often largely set by family and tradition, especially for women. And so, it’s kind of the luck of the draw how constructive their family is.

In certain social circles, a girl is generally considered the responsibility of her father. If she dates, has sex, doesn’t wear hijab, etc, then it is considered to reflect badly on him.

Once she marries, responsibility over her is transferred to her husband. He will usually control the main income, he will often control the family finances even if she does have an income, and he will often control most major decisions. And divorce is structured in favor of men here. Initiating a divorce as a woman comes with more limitations and consequences.

Many fathers push their daughters to marry pretty early so that they can relieve themselves of responsibility for her, even if she’s not thrilled about the prospective husband. She can be pressured socially, economically, and sometimes even physically. And at that socioeconomic level, she likely isn’t fluent in other languages, likely has not been exposed to outside ideas very much, is likely surrounded by people who would take her father’s side against her, and so the direction and pressure from her family is mainly how she contextualizes her role in the world.

So in many cases, someone goes from a girl with little power to a wife with little power at a young age, and with limited economic, social, or legal recourse if it ends up not being a good path. A decent percentage of fathers and husbands are abusive, unfortunately. In theory there are safeguards against this, but in practice it’s easy to fall through the cracks.

I know a family that owns an apartment building in Cairo, and they employ a husband and wife as live-in assistants to oversee the property and their family, like a casual butler and maid basically. He cleans, runs errands, and provides security, while she cleans and cooks. The husband and wife come from a low socioeconomic background, and have both been working for the family for 15 years, and are heavily trusted. They make like $4k/year USD equivalent combined, plus receive free basic shelter and a used car.

The husband and wife do not have bank accounts, so they just save in physical Egyptian cash that quickly devalues. Inflation in Egypt hurts people like them the most. With their extended family, they also own a unit for themselves in an apartment building in a poor neighborhood. It’s an unfinished raw brick building that they don’t live in. Their extended family all contribute to the shared building structure and underlying small land lot, and they own their unit within the structure and can choose to invest in finishing it with electricity and plumbing and flooring and furniture to live in, or just leave it as an empty brick hull. Many remain unfinished like that indefinitely throughout Cairo; it’s basically treated as illiquid savings and optionality.

Anyway, one day when the wife was getting a raise from the family that employs her, she asked that her raise be kept private from her husband. She wanted to have autonomy over that portion; their combined income is otherwise mainly under his control. Her husband is by all accounts a nice guy, but that is the common way of doing things in their socioeconomic circle. A private raise would let her keep a tiny bit of pocket cash in her own control. One of the things she wanted to do with some of her own money was send a tiny bit each month to a family member that needed help. So the family agreed to keep her raise private.

As her pocket cash eventually grew a bit, the next challenge arose: how to keep it safe and secret while living in a 250 square foot living area with her husband and daughter. She went back to her employer and asked if she could keep her private savings with them as an informal bank. They agreed to do that for her as well.

As is the case for many people like her, even though she doesn’t have a bank account, she does have a smartphone. Over time, certain types of mobile wallets and their widespread adoption could improve her ability to save privately and in less debase-able ways, and that don’t rely on the particular helpfulness of her employer. And if not her, then maybe her daughter one day.

A shoutout to all the devs working on such wallets and their ease of use; there are certainly plenty of people in the world who could benefit from them!

I agree with everything you say except your conclusion- if they can't verify the trustworthiness of their own husband how are they ever going to be in a position to know enough to be able to trust an app developer?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

It’s not about trust in that context. He controls their money. She wants to do some things with money she earns, and he says no.

So she does it anyway since some of it is her money.

The better comparison is trusting an app developer vs her employer. She’s lucky enough to have a very trustworthy employer; many are not.

t-y Lyn, appreciate your takes

I dunno, I think you're making too many assumptions. Do you know she is capable of managing money better than her husband? Maybe he really is protecting her. If their collective income improved a lot, how do you know the husband wouldn't spoil her? I mean, after 13 years, I'm pretty sure they have some kind of understanding that goes beyond male domination = bad.

If you know he is controlling and abusive then fine, but this generalisation is not the best of arguments. It's really no better than a politician pushing for laws "to protect ud" for all the same reasons.

Care to imagine what would happen when the husband finds money on her phone?

I understand your POV is from a good place but just too many assumptions about cultural differences, wanting a round peg to fit into a square hole.