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.

That's important re phones : I think as the 80s went on most families did have a landline but that still leaves a lot who didn't, especially in the 70s.
I think it was less common for families to be dispersed overseas but I can see a lot must still have been quite separated.

Good point re cars, that sounds very hard. In the 90s around 25% of households didn't have one & surely more for 80s & 70s (or it was only used for work, probably usually father's work).

It's got fuck all to do with it, I agree.

I agree it’s nothing to do with it but OP is really asking if the “second shift” is a myth because she is saying that women worked fewer hours and child care was less labour intensive and people are discussing that. She isn’t really focusing on the pension age. Personally having been a parent in the 1980s and then having watched my daughters be parents I think some things are now easier and some are harder. It’s not really generational, some people get a lot of help and some don’t but it’s never been particularly easy.

I was first person out of my family to get a car and that was in 1992

I remember a schoolfriend in the 60s who had a phone but it was a shared line with their neighbour. No one would put up with that now.

I don't think the second shift was wholly myth for WASPIs, it's more that I don't think it was necessarily much more common for that generation, compared to ones before and after. It is true that WASPIs were more likely to be Sahms or work part time esp for early parenting years.
I understand people wondering about the link with pensions/WASPIs but I started due to seeing some WASPIs online use that argument. I don't know how common that is, though, I need to read up more on the debate

Lots of people still had a shared party line into the 70s. Once I'd left home, I didn't actually have my own phone (landline) until the early 90s.

Party lines were very normal in the 60s and 70s.

Although I was born in the early 1950s I don’t agree with the WASPI women. I don’t think they have a case. I agree that many women of all generations do the second shift but I think it’s more dependent on whether or not you have a partner who pulls their weight or paid help than on your age. I get what you’re saying now. I think your original post ruffled a few feathers because a lot of women of my generation did work outside the home and look after their kids with very little help.

I don't know really. Unusually DM worked 9 t 4 and I have been SAHM for a long time. Dm had a twin tub .and spent WE on it! Didn't drive.my own DC driven around and taken to clubs .DD home schooled. Activities for DS most nights. Dd taken to clubs too.I think WASPI women seem to complain a lot.I won't get my pension to 66 5 .this will only.increase .in time.there aren't the funds to reimburse them

I think it's relevant to say how early in the 50s you were born as it sounds like you were affected but you might not have been.

For clarity I was born late 53 and my pension was delayed weeks short of five years. I don't agree with all the WASPI stuff, particularly the first change.

I was born right at the beginning of 1953 and was less affected than those born at the end of the year. I agree that the second change was unexpected and I do think the smaller number of people who were affected by that were unfairly treated. The first change I think people knew about well in advance.

I completely agree with you. I was born in late 53 and was entirely sanguine about the first change. I was incandescent at the unfairness of the second one. Especially when I saw the timeline. Eight weeks difference in age meant a whole year’s difference in pension date. It’s beyond me how anyone could think that was fair.

Agree entirely

Agree entirely

If I'd been born eight hours earlier I'd have got my pension three months earlier. That did surprise me.

I know. That transition timeline was insanity. It’s like a bunch of civil servants went out for a boozy lunch and concocted it on their return.

It was a strange timeline.

Just checked the dates on the gov.uk site in case I misremembered. Turned out I did, if I'd been born eight hours earlier I could have got my pension four months earlier. I don't know why I'm finding that quite funny. I mean you have to laugh or you'd cry.

The whole process sounds really badly managed, definitely. ☹️

A WASPI born middle of the cohort in 1955, having her first child at average age for the time which was 26 was 1981. Let’s say she went back to work when her child was 2, makes it 1983. I was a young woman in 1983 and I can tell you for certain that many, if not most young people had these things and this started in the late 70s. They were called “mod cons”. There were no Dysons but everyone had a functioning hoover (ours had a light in the front). Automatic washers increasingly common, tumble driers and dishwashers too but certainly fewer than now. Fridge freezers mainstream - which were filled with choc ices, Findus crispy pancakes, pizzas, frozen veg, fish fingers - there was even an early version of Iceland - Bejam, freezer supermarket. Poor women would not have had dishwashers or tumble driers - but they don’t now, mainly related to smaller kitchens. The 1980s weren’t the 1950s.

But doesn’t that timeline still exist today? For instance I was born in ‘78 but after April so my retirement age is 68 but if I had been born from Jan-April I could retire at 67.

Yes, most of the things WASPI women have complaints about are true of every other woman.

No it doesn’t. Have a look at it, there’s a link upthread. How much notice have you had? Somewhere in excess of 30 years, isn’t it?