So easy to be subtly sexist by way of what we expect children to buy with their allowances. I'll agree with that.

I think the issue is complicated by the fact that boys are, on average, less interested in clothes and appearance than girls, and spend less on that particular category of expenditure, where in fact parents tend to be fairly happy to give their children control over their choice of clothing through allowances. So girls might spend their allowance to the limit on clothes and make-up etc and boys might not - but boys will get more sports equipment and technology and other large one-off purchases out of their parents "on the side" than girls do.

My DSSs cost an absolute fortune to feed!

Yes I can see that & the way my ds eats, food could add £££ a year to his cost . Obviously there will be lots of exceptions, but as an average you are probably right.

I guess it still depends what you are expecting a child to buy from their allowance though - I still buy my dcs swim kits, musical instruments & music etc for their hobbies and I feed them, so allowances are for extras above that sort of thing which I still suspect are more expensive for girls. In any case, I think we're agreeing that it's nigh on impossible for any allowance system to be completely fair.

He has a point, but he's missing the point. The money is not given as a gift. If it were a gift, then you are being unfair. But actually it's given as a living allowance from an age when you think he requires it (16) to an age when he can supply for himself. You have applied the same policy to both of them.

I would be saddened by the sense of entitlement which his approach shows.

I think we can discount school fees (I'm absolutely positive that this wasn't taken into account). It's the sports, sports equipment and boy toys plus all the extra food, IIRC, that make the difference, and it really is significant.

Really Anna? I wonder why. I know boys school fees are likely to be higher than girls but that's not a normal expenditure & hardly going to come out of an allowance. I suppose boys may tend to have more expensive hobbies? I'd not really thought about that. I was thinking about simple things like makeup, costs of haircuts, clothes, shoes & the like.

snorkle - all the evidence I have ever read says that boys cost far more to bring up than girls!

I guess the moral of the story (to people with younger dcs) is to raise allowances at the start of school years rather than at birthdays to avoid this situation (so your dc's would have both had their allowance either at the start of year 11 or 12 rather than from their birthday).

However, I think your ds is being a little churlish - life is never completely fair and you acted in good faith with your system. With the current negative RPI he can't even claim his allowance has less buying power, which can be an issue for children usually with a greater age gap than yours.

I actually think allowances tend to favour boys as their 'expenses' are typically less than for girls - but I'll probably get shot down for saying this. What I'm really saying is that even if two children get exactly the same allowance it still might not be entirely fair as personal circumstances are different.

Tell your DS1 to wind his neck in and be thankful that you are able to support him with a monthly allowance and university.

OK fair enough - it doesn't stop, it changes!