suppose the logic is that

she was being married to Argers, and bringing up his children, when she would otherwise have been working and investing in her own pension.

She now has neither a pension, nor a career history to help her build one (and maybe she's got to carry on child-rearing, so she can't anyway?)

Whereas Argers can carry on working, and growing a new pension.

Guess the logic was something like that.

Posted By: Tricky Hawes, Oct 5, 15:13:47