To partially disagree with the argument about the 'second shift' made by some WASPIS?

[Carla786]

I know that workplace discrimination was rife for women who were born in the 1950s. Lack of childcare etc. I'm not disputing that.

I disagree partly with the argument made by some WASPIS that the 'second shift' (housework/childcare) they had to do while in paid work is important to their case.

For one thing, women in the 1970s & 80s were more likely to work less hours, work part-time. Men were more likely to work longer hours, do more overtime. Obviously this was fuelled by discrimination, lack of childcare that I mentioned above.

This ties to my other point : in the 70s & 80s raising children was often less labour-intensive than today, in the sense that children played out a lot more, ferrying to many activities was less common, parental input even in primary school was generally a bit less intense than expected often today. Studies (I'll link) have shown mothers (and fathers) spend longer with their kids today, whether or not they work.

So I suppose my point is: did that many WASPI age women experience a second shift as such?
I'm not disputing the misogyny of the era often but otoh if childcare was less labour-intensive than today, and many women were SAHM, part time, and less likely to work overtime, were a lot of women necessarily experiencing a 'second shift' in the sense of spending more hours working than their husband? In this equation, housework and childcare are counted as work, as well as paid work.

It's just another way they like to frame things to make out they're victims and should be compensated.

The information wasn’t freely available because the 2012 legislation introduced a plethora of different state pension ages. It also increased state pension age for women at very short notice. It is now illegal to increase state pension age with less than ten years’ notice.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7f02e640f0b62305b84929/spa-timetable.pdf

I am in the age range for being a WASPI woman but, for the record, I don’t agree with them and don’t think they have a case. I did work and I do think I did a second shift but more because my husband left most childcare to me. I don’t know if that was typical. I got an automatic washing machine and tumble dryer in 1980. I got a microwave in the 1990s. Frozen food was available and I had a freezer. I lived rurally and did plenty of ferrying kids to activities. They didn’t play out for hours like I did in the 1950s. Child care was difficult to find. No wrap around care at school. I paid another Mum for after school care and my parents were very helpful in the holidays. I don’t think things have changed dramatically except for the child care being more available but very expensive.

PS if my eldest child had been one year older maternity leave would not have existed and I would have been asked to leave my job.

The 2011/2012 legislation is a completely different matter to the announcements made about changes from 2010 which started in the mid nineties. Fifteen years notice.

I'm not listening to the women who say they never got a personal letter or who were living in caves on remote islands at the time as reasons why they supposedly didn't know. It was everywhere.

The ombudsman report states that in the first few years (was it nine years?) there was plenty of coverage about the changes. And that it was the rapid changes much later on that were problematic.

You obviously aren’t a neighbour of mine. Your point is??

And that it was the rapid changes much later on that were problematic.

Which is exactly what I just said. Another few months - which was literally what it was - when you’re in your 40s, you just shrug and say OK, it’s not much and it’s about 20 years away. Adding a further three years just as you’re looking down the barrel of 60 is a piss take, particularly with the insane and massively unfair implementation timetable.

As a result of the WASPI action that won’t happen to younger women because there now has to be a ten year notice period of any further age changes, giving them plenty of time to avoid voting for any government that proposes it.

In 1980 41% of households had no car at all. And about 20% had tumble dryers ( which meant your mum was well in the minority)

Your direct experience of your neighbours doesn’t make your opinion factual on a wider scale. Your neighbours might have 2 cars, the vast majority of the UK do not so your claim is nonsense.

No, because you can prove all sorts of things by manipulating statistics.

By taking % of the population or households as a whole, you are not factoring all the households that are made up of a single person.
You are not factoring in the fact that living in London means you don't need a car to get around due to the fabulous public transport system.
You are not taking into account the elderly people who have given up driving.

@Happyher 's point is valid in terms of "the people that live in houses where there are two or more adults over 18 and under 70 who don't live in an inner City environment where cars aren't needed" . It isn't just anecdotal to her (like knowing a heavy smoker who lived to be 102), it is clearly the case in towns and suburbs across the country.

True but ready meals weren't great and food was more expensive relative to income so for me and other young wives)mothers in the 70s they weren't something you'd have regularly. Thinking about it I didn't have a fridge in the early 70s let alone a freezer. Two in nappies, not disposable, and no washing machine or tumble dryer but I did love my little spin dryer.

From personal experience it was harder than life for my DD with her car, washing machine, freezer etc etc but who knows how it was for everyone.

I'm not sure it's worth worrying about now.

the 70s & 80s raising children was often less labour-intensive than today

It wasn't.

We didn't have a car till about 1982. I probably got an automatic washing machine and tumble dryer about the same time. Probably linked to younger child starting school and me working full-time. Suddenly had a bit more money.

I agree the second changes didn't give sufficient notice. I'm always surprised that the first changes get more publicity than the second.

I work PT. School hours to be precise all yr round. I online shop for groceries and am fortunate enough to have my own car and pay for help with some of the domestic load. A privilege that was not the norm back then too.

A lot of homes didn't have two cars back then, so even grocery shopping was more labour intensive. I'm sure many other things were too. Even if children played out more.

Yes, there can be confusion because results online often talk about US, whose housewives (at least in well-off suburbs) were more likely to have had that kind of stuff earlier on.

Yes, my grandmother didn't have the use of a second car, but this mattered less as her mother was living close by (and eventually in with her). Plus she had no siblings and friends were concentrated in the neighbourhood.
I can definitely see the issues not having 2 cars would have caused (and still can) for many women, but otoh networks in the 70s etc would have tended to be more compact on average probably.

Not all families lived near each other though. We didn’t have a phone so staying in touch with aunties, grandparents etc was done by visiting each other. All our family were 2 bus rides away unless my dad could drive us there. Myself I think that most generations of women do a ‘second shift’ if you work and have a family. Things change over the decades but it’s usually the women who manage the home and kids

Yes, that's definitely true re cars. One car families could try to do a bigger shop at weekends using the car but that still requires shopping at other times.

Re hiring help, it was definitely less common then but it's arguably not that common now either relatively. Apparently around 17% of households hire a cleaner, around 9-12% a nanny (including part time, full-time is about 3%)

Would you like to maybe give more detail?

This! I grew up in the 90s. Neither parent drove. We didn't have a landline until I was 9. So even phone calls my parents needed to make involved a walk. Everything definitely took longer. Going to the drs, shop, dentist, work, school run. The nearest bus to town was at a stop that was a 15min walk away. No family near. Parents did everything down to even cleaning own windows where as a lot of people have window cleanes in my street now. No room in the kitchen for a tumble dryer or dishwasher.

I often also think about how much non grocery I order online that would have been a 3 mile walk to town (or bus) for my Mum.

I really don't think looking back it looked like she had more free time than me. I very much doubt that was better for her mother in the 70s.

It wasn’t my mum- it was me! My Mum actually got a tumble dryer around 1980 , she was by no means well off, she had worked evening shifts in a cotton mill. She was born in 1920. In the 1970s she had a boiler with wringers. Yes, there were far fewer cars and a high proportion of women either didn’t drive or could only use the car when it was convenient for their husband.

I found raising children quite labour intensive in the 1980s and 90s. Plenty of running around after work and school taking them to activities and they weren’t really playing out unsupervised much. I would also,like Carla786, like OP to elaborate on why she thinks it’s harder now. ( I agree it isn’t easy now but I don’t think it ever was).

Pages and pages of people just moaning about how they win the difficulty Olympics and how hard their life is compared to others. Not sure any of this has to do with the pension age!

From what I've read (I know I could be wrong), 90s saw less playing out, as did later 80s, due partly to uptick in car use. So I suppose when I'm thinking of 'more playing out' I'm thinking more of 70s-earlier 80s.