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.
Who really cares about the dynamics of a couple's relationship regarding how they divide work and homecare responsibilities? If he or she can afford to stay home, fine! As long as public funds aren't involved in what they do, then nobody else really has a dog in this fight!
That may be your perception, but feminism actually devalues the notion that being a stay-at-home mom should be a woman's entire identity. Once upon a time, a woman's worth was measured by her marital status, whether or not she produced children, and how well she kept house. Feminism was born out of the idea that women may want more out of life, especially once they no longer had small children at home during the day.
What I find ironic is that one can preach against feminism, but still want to be part of a duel-income marriage; not too long ago a husband would be look at as a poor provider if his wife worked, even if they had no children yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSmuggler
Nice strawman.
And plenty of men have also loved, respected and provided for their homemaking wives for their entire adult lives, for thousands of years.
But it was a nice attempt to make it "men's fault," all the same.
Feminism has solely been responsible for the devaluation of the stay-at-home mom role.
I don't think feminism or any other social movement was the driving factor in why SAHMs are viewed differently today as opposed to fifty years ago (they are still valuable btw), nor did men devalue the role to any significant extent. It was the dynamics of the economy which played the largest role after many manufacturing jobs were shipped overseas in order to cut costs for the big corporations. No longer could a man, with barely a high school education, get a job which would support a wife and five children. Both spouses HAD to work in order to maintain the same standard of living as the previous generation had from just one working partner. Feminism was primarily concerned, and rightly so, with voting rights, reproductive rights, and equal treatment under the law. But it was the oil crisis of 1973, the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs, the recession of the early 1980s and the money hungry corporations which forced both spouses into the workforce. There was almost no choice in the matter.
Yeah, I would say that the chief reason for the rise of the dual income household is the limited economic feasibility for many of doing it any other way.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa
Yeah, I would say that the chief reason for the rise of the dual income household is the limited economic feasibility for many of doing it any other way.
I agree. But could an argument be made that the addition of women to the workforce, which increased supply of labor, led to a decrease in wages?
Maybe not as there wasn't much, at least initially, competition for the same jobs (men and women had different fields generally), but isn't that a possible factor?
Families having two incomes also probably led to increase in housing prices, since there was more money available to spend, which creates a vicious cycle.
Yeah, I would say that the chief reason for the rise of the dual income household is the limited economic feasibility for many of doing it any other way.
But which came first, declining economic opportunities or the dual income household? The economic environment of today certainly requires 2 incomes, but that wasn't always the case according to the Two Income Trap. Essentially, two income families bid of the price of housing so much that now people need the 2 incomes just to survive. Had they saved that extra money or used it on vacations it would still be possible to survive on one income, or so the argument goes.
I agree. But could an argument be made that the addition of women to the workforce, which increased supply of labor, led to a decrease in wages?
Maybe not as there wasn't much, at least initially, competition for the same jobs (men and women had different fields generally), but isn't that a possible factor?
Families having two incomes also probably led to increase in housing prices, since there was more money available to spend, which creates a vicious cycle.
You should get a gold star. If you examine inflation adjusted wages for both men and women since the 70's you see that wages for men are basically flat, wages for women have increased, and those at the bottom have fallen slightly. Nothing happens in a vacuum, but less MFG jobs, coupled with more labor supply, and buying the best house one can afford gives us what we see today.
I agree. But could an argument be made that the addition of women to the workforce, which increased supply of labor, led to a decrease in wages?
Maybe not as there wasn't much, at least initially, competition for the same jobs (men and women had different fields generally), but isn't that a possible factor?
Families having two incomes also probably led to increase in housing prices, since there was more money available to spend, which creates a vicious cycle.
This was also a factor IMO. But, the outsourcing of jobs overseas came first. The decrease in wages would have occurred anyway because they were paying foreign employees a lot less, so wages dropped here as well. Either I stay content with making 10 dollars per hour or I can protest and demand $20, all the while the corporation either gives my job to someone else or they move them all overseas where those workers will be more than happy to have them. But, sure the supply of workers was important in all of this, can't deny that.
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.
If you examine inflation adjusted wages for both men and women since the 70's you see that wages for men are basically flat, wages for women have increased, and those at the bottom have fallen slightly. Nothing happens in a vacuum, but less MFG jobs, coupled with more labor supply, and buying the best house one can afford gives us what we see today.