Household Labor

Household Labor

During the evolution of sociology, or more specifically the evolution of cooperation, individuals seem to at one point or another compare their own efforts, pay-offs, and rewards to those of other people. In the article “Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay”, the comparison is with, as the title clearly states, monkeys! A nonhuman primate; the brown capuchin monkey; Cebus apella. This is what I find so unique about this article versus the other ones on the topic of household labor. It is always interesting when/how authors take a new perspective on a particular topic, just as Brosnan and Frans took this biosocial perspective on household labor. I do also very much like the title the authors chose for their scientific report, however I wonder how seriously it would be taken as the title seems like more of a newspaper headline..

This makes me think of philosophers such as Plato and Kant who believed in a rational basis for fair behaviour. I also think of the famous comment by Gordon Hewart in 1923: “it is of fundamental importance that justice not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.

Questions:

1. What do you think of the chosen title for the article by Brosnan and Frans: “Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay”?
2. What was the division of household labor like in your home? Was there gender division?
3. Thinking about Hook’s article, what do you think about policy-makers promoting equal division of household labor for women?

Week 9: Household Labor

Week 9: Household Labor

When it comes to the issue of household labor, we are able to see that there is no clear-cut answer to who invests more in this. There are research results which point out that nowadays, more men are doing more than they used to while females are doing less than they used to. In addition, we are able to see a decline in stay-at-home mothers while there was an increase of stay-at-home fathers. However, even if there exists an increase (with the percentage itself is significant), the number of stay-at-home mothers was larger than that of the stay-at-home fathers. Through these results we are able to see that there still exists discrepancies in unpaid work.

In her article, Hook claims that men participate more in unpaid work across diverse countries while policies and practices may either hinder or facilitate men’s unpaid work (Hook, 656). Even if they do participate in more household labor, could we assume that they are of same value compared to the labor that women partake in the domestic sphere? Men tend to do the “temporary” jobs within the family (i.e. mowing the lawn, fixing the house, taking care of the children on the weekends, etc.) while women are involved with the “permanent” household labor (i.e. cooking, cleaning the house, doing the laundry, taking care of the kids, etc.). Even in two-job families, women tend to partake in the permanent aspect of unpaid work—a second shift—after coming home from work.

Hochschild’s article on gratitude was a very interesting read. The idea of tracing gratitude in terms of a moral frame of reference, pragmatic frame of reference, and a historical frame of reference is interesting and seems to make sense. The life course theory seems to mesh well with what Hochschild is claiming with regards to the idea of exchanging "gifts" and the ripple effects it has within the larger society.

Q1] Can we measure or quantify the value of household labor? Why or why not?

Q2] What are your thoughts on providing a type of wage for the “unpaid labor”? Do you think that as a policy, it would work out and perhaps reduce gender inequality within the domestic sphere?

Q3] After the Second Feminist Movement, many claim that there is this “stalled revolution” in which women are exposed to a daily grind of household labor, leisure gap, and time famine. What are your thoughts on this claim? Will women be able to pull themselves out of this stagnant state and achieve complete equality with regards to the public sphere as well as within the household?

Household Labor

A common issue in all the readings is the notion of traditional versus non-traditional gender roles, household division of labor and childcare. I found very interesting the case of Salvadoreans Carmen and Frank and what Hochschild writes as a possible explanation of their notion of gendered gifts: “They were recent immigrants in the diversity of San Francisco, and maybe roses and pie made them feel more American” (2003, p. 109). To what extent consumption patterns and the “American dream” shape family relationships and gender roles of immigrants? How do American media and pop culture consumed out of the United States shape family relationships and gender roles of those in the rest of the world? How are ideas of gender diffused with the globalized media and migration? Do you think that this has had a positive or negative effect in other societies?

I was glad that this set of readings included an international comparison and I really liked Jennifer Hook’s paper since I think that it is important to understand how individual and household level mechanisms are related to national level policies and employment practices. It is interesting to think not only about cross-country differences but also on period and cohort differences. I found very important the methodological implications of her study (Hook, 2006, p. 655): “a reliance on typologies may conflate disparate national characteristics and policies, lead to faulty conclusions, and obscure what aspects of context matter most, […] researchers should expand inquiry beyond couples, [… and…] researchers should not assume that the effects of basic demographic characteristics are stable across time and space because they vary as a function of contextual factors”.

Something I found interesting from the readings and responses of other classmates is the notion of courtship. Hochschild talks about the gifts associated to this initial stage of the relationship and I wonder how this initial courtship and romance period will influence later stages due to the relation between gifts, money and power imbalances. It is interesting that what is “accepted as the norm” is that it is the man who proposes to the woman and although the woman has the decision, her role is less proactive. In “traditional” positions, she is the one receiving flowers and chocolates. Could this be because “capuchin females pay closer attention than males to the value of “exchanged goods and services” (Brosnan and de Waal, 2003, p. 298). I wonder if there has been empirical research that compares gender roles and division of household labor in couples that have started with different types of courtship and where the woman has been the one that takes the initiative. Also, after watching the video posted I have to say I spent some time in YouTube watching other videos related to that one and found an interesting one on gender stereotypes in the media that you may want to check out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nIXUjzyMe0&feature=related

Q1. How do you think that the focus of only couples on the papers we read are affected by what Jennifer Hook found out and her methodological implications? Do you agree with her that “what is particularly interesting about a general change among all men is that it suggests a different view of gender relations than argued in some cross-national work focused solely on power, bargaining, or divorce threat” (Hook, 2006, p. 655)?

Q2. Hochschild discusses the idea of “lucky women and unlucky men”. What do you think about this idea of luck versus what was expected? How do you think the early stages influence later possible power imbalances and women’s position in negotiating within the couple and deciding who will the lucky one be?

Q3. To what extent differences in the papers read are due to social class, ethnicity or religion? How are gender codes related to political views, for example? Do you see misleading conclusions of the papers after reading the methodological implications of Hook’s work?

Household Labour

After reading for this week, I took a little time to think about Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay… now what exactly was it doing there? On readings about dual-income parenting and sharing of household duties, where exactly did this fit in?

I think after doing this weeks’ readings the findings point to a gender discrepancy when it comes to housework, or unpaid labour. It seems that women are assumed to be doing the housework, unless a negotiation or shift has occurred. Take for example the fact from Jennifer Hook’s research that “for each percentage increase in national levels of married women’s employment, men’s unpaid work time increases by 0.5 minutes.” So, it follows that only when women are not at home, a negotiation or shift needs to be made.

Coltrane also mentions that in ¾ of the couples interviewed, the women performed the majority of the early infant care. Coltrane also stresses that almost all the fathers stressed that they had to learn how to nurture, as if they were starting from scratch, and it was something that did not come naturally to them. There was also the example in which the man would set the table, and clear it, but not to his wife’s liking, so she still essentially cleared the table. This was interpreted as men doing domestic work, yet the house is still evidently the domain of the woman.

So, why is gender a factor in housework? Why, in a sense, don’t married women reject unequal pay for domestic work?

1. Reading Hook’s article, I came across a few items that made me pause and think of explanations. First of all, she says that married men do more unpaid work than single men. Also, she said when men are NOT employed, they do 19 minutes less of unpaid work per day than do employed men? How does this work? Any ideas?

2. How do you interpret the Monkeys Reject Unequal Pay article? Do you think it's relatable to human actions?

3. After reading all of the readings, are you convinced by Risman and Johnson-Sumerford’s finding that gender equality can be found in the home?

Household Labor

This week I found the gendered division of household labor to focus more on the negotiation of the husband/father ideology than the changing expectations of the wife/mother.  As Hochschild mentions in The Economy of Gratitude, wives are constantly navigating married life in reaction to the expectations and demands of motherhood and wifehood.  Hochschild implies that these wives respond to the role of husband and the promotion of the role of father/husband in a similar way as previous generations.  This resulted in my wondering: is this gratitude lag time or simply a sustained power dynamic with a different name?  The suggestion that women will come to embody the same power position as men seems uncertain.  Further undermining this shift is the cultural significance of the male breadwinner depicted in Coltrane’s article: Coltrane emphasizes the tendency of households with egalitarian divisions of labor to reference time availability as more important than gender when determining labor assignment.  Is feminism rooted more in ideology or practice? 

If women must often rely on the changing practices of their male counterparts to alter labor divisions in marriage, than Hook is correct in asserting that policy-makers must evaluate which factors, although ideologically sound, provide females/wives/mothers with the greatest environment to promote egalitarian relations.  If ideology is mute when challenging the embedded attitudes and structural forces that influence both home and work experiences, then it becomes less important to change opinion and more beneficial to focus on structural/environmental change.  The role of feminism is an interesting one; even for families that espouse gender equity on the home front, feminism is still dismissed as radical ideology.

1. To what extent does the state replace the male breadwinner?  How are fathers/husbands released from familial responsibilities in the presence of generous social policies?  Is there a lag between the changing expectations of children and fathers as well?
2. Coltrane mentions that when parents have more equally divided child care children tend to discriminate less between parents.  Recalling previous articles on divorce outcomes, could it be that poorly invested parenting is more to blame for the negative effects of divorce than the change in household dynamic or composition?  Are there state policies that can alter this situation to promote greater parent-child bonds after divorce?  Would these policies encourage healthier parent-child relations within marriage as well?
3. It is interesting that men may cite the desire for emotional care associated with traditional marriage, yet omit the pressures from external forces to abide by traditional norms.  When couples are probed, these realities are revealed.  To what extent do external pressures shape personal relations?  In an earlier article on happiness in homosexual relationships, relationships are said to be happier when there exists a great acceptance of homosexual families/partners from friends and family.  How much do broader social contexts shape individual action with regards to the division of labor?  Is change hidden behind a traditionalist façade still valid?

Household Labor

The juxtaposition of emotions with divisions of labor left me thinking about two issues relevant to the readings: how does “love” interact with perceptions of household labor, and how do these perceptions apply to family structures outside of marriage and even beyond cohabiting couples? The former question came from a quote in the Hochschild essay. She describes one woman as stating, “If you help me at home I will feel grateful for that and love you” (115). This struck me as odd; is love reliant almost purely on this economy of gratitude? Increasingly we see couples living together before marriage (if marriage occurs at all), so is this exchange and division of labor not established before marriage? Does it change drastically with marriage (previous readings would indicate that marriages do enforce traditional gender roles more so than unconventional arrangements). Perhaps this change can be explained by an examination of life course, or more simply time. Marriages and relationships can extend for long periods of time and require constant negotiation on the part of both individuals, and understanding each others perceptions of gratitude are a part of that.

However, I wonder if this “economy of gratitude” extends just beyond couples to all kinds of familial relationships. Reading all these accounts of the divisions of labor and the integration of gender roles, I couldn’t help but think about the importance of these relations in two other kinds of relationships: roommates and larger families than parents and children living in the same house. Even though Americans and Canadians tend to hold individualism as an ideal, sharing living space is a reality for many more than just college students. A few examples we have discussed are the prevalence of children moving back home, living longer without bring married, and multiple families living in the same home to save money. From my experience living with three men for four years, I can say that most people expect I am fully responsible for cooking and cleaning, while in reality we have established a much more egalitarian division of labor based on the fact that we’re all decent human beings who care about each other. I wonder how gendered divisions of labor change for other unconventional yet prevalent family structures. In general, I feel that it is important to examine the division of labor in married couples, but equally as important to recognize that these are not the only structures in which people situate themselves, and perhaps seeing the married couple as the ideal perpetuates stigmas which harm all sorts of familial relationships.
1) Hochschild discusses that the economy of gratitude can be applied to lesbian and gay couples as well. Research on this differs, so does anyone know if “gendered” or unequal power relationships are a factor of earnings?
2) What other family structures could provide a more egalitarian division of household labor, and how can they be more institutionally recognized?
3) Is love purely a factor of the economy of gratitude?

Household Labor

When someone gives the gift of performing housework, it is normally interpreted as the worst gift any woman can receive. To be fair, I can understand how men believe that women should be appreciative of their help if it is not what the man usually does around the house. In reality it should not be considered a gift. According to Hochschild, “74% of mothers with children 6-17 are in paid work” and they are still doing the majority of the housework so, they are working two jobs. In our readings this week, Risman et al., Hook and Coltrane examine families who are equally sharing household needs. All three of these studies tended to focus on the idea of spouses relying on equal sharing of tasks, or in other words they had created a gender-neutral household, in which not all daily chores were the responsibility of the female. In fact it seems like the readings give us a glimpse into the world where a man is showing his ability to act as a woman and for that he is receiving extra credit, because traditionally it is not his job to perform these household tasks.

In Household Labor and the Routine Production of Gender, it is clear what happens when men no longer depend on the fact that a man's masculinity is dependent on not doing the things that mothers do. Men help to take on a portion of the female role and remove themselves for their responsibilities of a traditional father’s role of begetting, protecting and providing for children. Even in this study where much of the housework is divided between both spouses, women still laid claim over the household, maintaining a manager-helper relationship. It may also be observed that when men step out of their perceived, socially constructed role of father, they are given extra gratitude. Whereas when a woman performs these tasks, they are expected of her. All these studies show that we are (slowly) moving to a world that even monkeys can understand; a world in which women should not accept anything but equality through all aspects of their lives.

1. Hochschild describes gendered gifts as flowers from a man and food from a woman, what do you think would happen if a stay at home father was brought home flowers as a gift by his wife?

2. Is it possible for couples to truly share the housework, or is there always someone in charge? Is there always one persons expectations that are required to be met?

3. What is a power-balanced couple? Is it possible to have one, or does one person always hold more power? Do you consider your family gender neutral?