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.

This. The idea that my mum was hand washing clothes is absolutely laughable. I think that poster is about 20/30 years out of date!

Re microwaves: these were around in the 70s. One link I read said around 36% of households in 1980s had one. So most didn't but many did.

My mum is slightly older than the waspis.

i don’t think my dad ever cooked a meal in his life.
he certainly never did the laundry or hung it out or ironed anything.

my mum worked several part time jobs in order to do all school drop offs and pick ups and she’d had a good job and a good career before kids.

there definitely was a second shift for her and she was often doing more actual hours working than my dad was but spread over multiple jobs.

It was because older men typically married younger women.

It’s 2026, women still do ‘the second shift’ after work. We won’t be retiring at 60 either.

The pension, and WASPI compensation, isn’t as a ‘reward’ for historical inequalities or discrimination against women.

I was a teenager in the 70s/80s, My parents worked fewer hours than I work and did little around the house. As a teenager I did all of the ironing, some of the cooking and some of the cleaning. My parents took me nowhere. If I wanted to do something I had to get myself there.
I don’t think this was unusual.

Hoovers were around in 70s & 80s: were they quite inefficient then though?

I couldn’t read your link as it would not show the whole article, but the initial reference was American parents- does it move on to UK data?

I was born in the 1960s , so not a WASPI, but that generation definitely did it all , around child care, house work and many did work outside the home.

I don’t know enough about their second shift argument, but I do believe that if any group was told at age 45 that their pension age was being extended and then at 61 the goal posts moved again, that group would have a grievance.

I agree, some seemed to frame it that way but I really don't think governments at the time would have been thinking in those terms.

That sounds very hard. My grandfather didn't cook but he did clean, do other chores (like gardening) & do pick-ups & drop-offs.

I hand washed nappies in the mid 70s. I had a twin tub that was such a pain to set up that it wasn’t worth getting it out every day. Definitely no tumble dryer, freezer, dishwasher or microwave until around 1990. One of the reasons women then tended not to be obese was because housework was so physical and men just never did any - and precious little childcare.

My mother definitely worked less hard than me and got £70000 more than me in pension. I’m not a WASPI but still missed out. It is what it is. It would be ridiculous to pay state pension to 60 year old women now.

Wow, that sounds very hard. I think my grandpa often drove my gran to the supermarket but it was definitely hard work when she did carry it home. She didn't grow vegetables, knit or sew though.

Love that! I think I have gone a decade too far back for waspis to be fair! And I agree with others that i think their strongest argument was about moving goalposts, not the second shift which definitely still exists for mothers.

But it was labour intensive on a council estate in the 70s from what my grandma tells me- she had a job too, she'd do a 6-10 factory shift when my grandad got home.

Should women be able to retire 5 years earlier than men?

Younger adults are being told they will be retiring later again - it’s quite likely many will be told the state pension is means tested and so lose out there too. Should these people be asking for compensation too?

We have an ageing population funded by a dwindling working one - what do you propose the government does to keep the scheme sustainable?

it’s quite likely many will be told the state pension is means tested and so lose out there too. Should these people be asking for compensation too?

If that happens they definitely should. For now they should avoid voting for any political party that includes pension reform in its manifesto.

I was born in the late 60s. I don't know where you got your ridiculous notions from, but my mum worked a hell of a lot harder on the second shift than I ever did. Cleaning was harder, as white goods weren't a patch on what we have now and unaffordable for some. Washing on the line for days on end in the winter. No second car so shopping trolley down to the high street a few times a week with two kids in tow. No central heating. Limited TV to plonk the kids in front of. No flexibility at work - if we were ill the neighbour just popped over to check on us as mum still had to go to work. No kids clubs in the holidays.

We had a great childhood with visits to the park, caravan holidays with all our neighbours, odd trip to the cinema. But there was no money for anything else.

It is massively disrespectful to these women to think they had it easy.

Oh no, I don’t think women should retire earlier than men, we generally live longer anyway.

My argument is not that the change should not have been made, simply that it seems poorly implemented. I am 64, state pension at 67. I have known that for about 15 years and planned accordingly.

But 61 is late to be told you now fall into the category that claims at 65 , instead of 63.

Thank you, yes, probably 50s-60s was surely harder as there were less appliances.

That sounds really hard for your gran : obviously quite a lot of women also worked physical jobs as well as doing physical work at home.

Agree re moving goalposts. My biggest issue is that even if it is just cause, how much can we afford it? Difficult...

61 year olds weren’t told they were going to retire at 65 rather than 63 though.

I was born late sixties. We had a dishwasher before we had a car or a colour TV. My dm worked Saturdays only. My df had an entry level job. They had a three bedroomed house in a nice area of Surrey they bought with no savings. Yes money was tight. All food was cooked at home, no meals out or takeaways. They only bought drinks and chocolate once a week. We didn’t have holidays. Clothes were second hand. But their life in general was easier. I’m one of several dc.

I too was born late 60's and agree with this word for word.

My DM had a twin tub in the 80s but she’d only get it out for big loads. She used to do a lot of washing by hand too.

We didn’t have a microwave and Mum never drove so shopping was done every day. The fridge had a small freezer compartment at the top, no separate freezer. We didn’t have a shower, we had one of those rubber hoses that attached to the bath taps.

She was a single mum and money was tight. Our only TV was rented, and we often didn’t have a landline when it was cut off and she had to save up for the reconnection fee.

Just because things were available in the 80s, doesn’t mean everyone could afford them.

The amount of work a woman did outside paid work and in many cases instead of paid work should have absolutely nothing to do with earlier retirement and imo really waters down whatever weak case they had.
First it was because they claim not to have known, now early retirement should be a form of payment because they had to look after their own home and children??

Does this mean she should get compensation from the government for her pension age changing though?

Hang on these women were having children in the '70s , '80s and '90s in which world did they not have vacum cleaners, automatic washing machines and frozen food ?