If both parties' consent is necessary to get married (which, you know, I hope it is), then either can veto it. If both parties need to provide in order to main

If both parties' consent is necessary to get married (which, you know, I hope it is), then either can veto it. If both parties need to provide in order to maintain a decent standard of living (which is the reality of America today), then either party can look at the other and say, "This person is not providing anything" and exercise their right to veto. If women are more stably employed than men, on average, which is again the reality of lower-income areas, then it is women who will be dominantly in the part of the person judging and vetoing, without any sexism (except, I suppose, possibly on the part of the employers who make lower-income men less stably employed, though I don't think that sexism is the causal factor there).