Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So women should have kids then be paid to take care of them? Do the dads get paid too for mowing the lawns and taking the little kids fishing? This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read, but in a world that has gone mad, I guess you have to push things a little farther to the idiotic to have your articles stand out if you are a "journalist" these days.
Women mow lawns, take kids to endless activities, fix cars, often repair things around the house and even pay for those repairs. Women do grocery shopping, cook meals, come up with extra cash when needed, take kids to doctor, size and buy clothing for kids, take care of extended family, and still expected to find the time to make pretty as possible for going out in public.
My dad fixed our cars and did construction on our house...I wonder how much that unpaid labor is worth?
IDK but a lot of people are missing the point.
The contention was married men were the family breadwinner. There is worth in bring home the bacon. A actual definitive worth. A married women was a homemaker, caring for the children, doing all the domestic chores. There was no definitive money generated from that thus her role was seen as having no worth.
What was never taken into consideration is what would it cost the breadwinner to take care of all the things she did if he had to pay someone to do them, maid, housekeeper, nanny, etc. Amounts IMO are exaggerated and vary and as we know single working parents do those things themselves, but in general that line of thought put a definitive value on the role of a homemaker. Gave her some worth whether it was monetary or just realization that if your working 40+ life is sure a heck of a lot easier if you have a mate to take care of all or most of the other stuff.
Honesty, I'm not real sure the angle of the role of women and domestic duties related to the study the USA article was based on. The study was more about wealth disparity between the poor and the 1% and who benefits for the workers, even unpaid work.
Women mow lawns, take kids to endless activities, fix cars, often repair things around the house and even pay for those repairs. Women do grocery shopping, cook meals, come up with extra cash when needed, take kids to doctor, size and buy clothing for kids, take care of extended family, and still expected to find the time to make pretty as possible for going out in public.
When you get my age you give a big F it to other peoples expectations. Especially those as ridiculous as looking pretty.
But yes plenty of women mow the lawn, work on cars and make repairs or pay someone to (I'm not much of a mechanic). Single women do it all the time. Now if I were married I would expect my mate to share in those chores. Actually, I enjoy mowing and I'd swap that one for laundry, cleaning bathrooms, sweeping and moping any day.
Yeah the value proposition of my wife staying home was more than if she had continued to work. So she does and we’re both happier. Recognizing the value of a homemaker doesn’t mean actual pay has to be involved.
You are casting pearls here.
This article is skirting some serious social reproduction theory having to do with the values of women's work in a capitalist and patriarchal cultural.
If there is a top to which we are can aspire and achieve in capitalism, where's the bottom?
We could just lay it all off on Eve eating the apple. If you live in a house, somebody will have to clean it, sometime. And children need to be cared for and taught, and meals need to be prepared.
Some in my family believe that the feminist movement was all about getting 2 workers for the price of one.
When I married many years ago, we were students. We both worked until the kids came along. DH took 21 hours a semester, made all As and had 2 part time jobs. We could pay for the dr and birth out of our income. If the baby got sick we could pay the dr and get the RX filled out of the grocery budget. When his first job paid 525 a month we thought we were rich. That paid for a nice apartment, a car, 2 kids and a SAHM. Plus saving for them to go to college and our buying a house.
You can no longer do that.
And at the very bottom of keeping it all together way back when and today are black females.
While expecting a 3rd child, I had help one day a week. The neighbor ladies called on me to stop paying her above whatever the minimum wage was at that time because I was ruining the N------.
Who puts the value on women's work? Who decides the value of cooking, cleaning raising kids, shopping, protecting the family property? Done properly and well should it pay as much as truck driver, mail carrier, a corporate COO, yada yada?
It's rather offensive to assume all men do no indoor chores. This married dude splits indoor chores and does 100% outdoor chores. This isn't 1950.
No one is assuming that. But the data shows that on average, women who work outside the home do 2.1 hours more indoor chores per day than their working male counterparts. That equates to 14 hours and 42 minutes per week or almost 32 days a year.
In no way should they be monetarily compensated. It’s their choice to accept an uneven distribution of labor.
The contention was married men were the family breadwinner. There is worth in bring home the bacon. A actual definitive worth. A married women was a homemaker, caring for the children, doing all the domestic chores. There was no definitive money generated from that thus her role was seen as having no worth.
What was never taken into consideration is what would it cost the breadwinner to take care of all the things she did if he had to pay someone to do them, maid, housekeeper, nanny, etc. Amounts IMO are exaggerated and vary and as we know single working parents do those things themselves, but in general that line of thought put a definitive value on the role of a homemaker. Gave her some worth whether it was monetary or just realization that if your working 40+ life is sure a heck of a lot easier if you have a mate to take care of all or most of the other stuff.
Honesty, I'm not real sure the angle of the role of women and domestic duties related to the study the USA article was based on. The study was more about wealth disparity between the poor and the 1% and who benefits for the workers, even unpaid work.
Not to her husband and children.
Feminists were the ones who decided that women who were homemakers were completely useless.
Most women took pride in their houses and families. Until they were told not to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
