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.

My mum still doesn't. She's suspicious of some things & doesn't trust tumbledryers for some reason. I wish she would...

I definitely think parenting is harder now. Standards are higher, more things are unacceptable, the level of involvement is much higher in general. Everything revolves around the DC, and they’re kept younger and more dependent for longer.

Agree - I feel really strongly about the importance of women's unpaid labour, but it seems an odd argument to make in this case. Working-age women now still do a second shift but a lot of them will probably never get a state pension at all.

Yes, I think this too.

I really don't think the passage of time has made the second shift easier. Women nowadays don't scrub their front step but I'd argue it's because a different set of tasks and pressures have replaced that one

I know a lot of this was common but there was also a lot of variation.

By the mid–late 70s a lot of homes had automatic washing machines, vacuum cleaners and central heating, and around half of households had a car. Convenience food and supermarket shopping were available.

And there was quite a lot of children’s TV — just in set slots rather than all day (Blue Peter, Rainbow, Jackanory, etc.). As well as stuff like Top of the Pops and other stuff not technically aimed at kids but possible for them to watch. My mum certainly seems to have watched a huge amount of TV.

I get re knitting & mincing but these weren't universal either. My grandmother doesn't seem to have knitted anything much (I suppose she must have bought jumpers etc?) and didn't serve mince much afaik.

Yes, I think that, housework has become easier but childrearing more pressured.

Erm, tumble dryers, hoovers and frozen food existed in the 80s and even the 70s. I was born in 1980 and we had plenty of convenience food. I also had a very reconstructed father who did plenty of housework and most of the cooking although probably precious little mental load. Both my parents worked full time although that wasn't hugely common among my peers. The main difference was:

-no pressure to do loads of extra curricular activities (people did whatever was local and convenient) or really have any involvement with schooling at all
-we were chucked out to play and no one really thought about entertaining us. Low expectations for doing endless exciting outings.
-jobs were shorter hours and local; both my parents were home by 5.30 or sometimes 6, no work in the evening
-Local family to support e.g. babysitting
-my brother and I had to help out a lot- bringing in washing, laying and lighting the fire, we always washed up etc etc

My mum- who is mid 60s now- would say she had it a lot easier, and she (like me) was the higher earner. I definitely don't remember them feeling as rushed and as busy as DH and I do. Far fewer protections in law for women in the workplace though. Plus she married someone who did not have a rigid approach to gender roles. But I'm still laughing at the idea there were no hoovers in the 80s! (We actually have the same hoover- a Henry- my parents had).

Grandmother! My mother is older than the Waspi women. She never scrubbed a front step. How old do you think these women are?

Yes that rings true to what I've heard, esp re kids helping out. I think that is good. I also get people saying iPads etc have made things easier , and more TV etc, to entertain kids, but it's arguably not ideal. The 70s experience (at least for some) of more playing out, reading, playing with toys sounds better imo, though as pps have said, not everyone was playing out etc

I would also add the fact that a DH has to be a pretty high earner for a woman to be a SAHM or a part-time worker.

Frankly I'm expecting to be told before age 40 that there's no state pension for me. I certainly won't ever be able to afford to have children.

My mum was born in the 1930s so clearly not a Waspi. However she did work full time and I can't remember any of our neighbours or my friends' mums working full time during the 70s. She made a lot of our clothes and baked etc. But, as soon as frozen food became more available, we definitely had some in the freezer compartment of the fridge. We rented a tv but she was quick out of the blocks to get a tumble dryer. No dishwasher because, well, she had kids but the tumble dryer was essential. My dad pulled his weight around the house though.

My grandmother is 93 currently & can't remember this being an issue when she had kids (60s-80s), nor can my mum. As I said we also had a dark front step which wouldn't have showed dirt- maybe that's why?

Was this a big thing 60s-80s for others?

Giving kids iPads hugely stunts their development and is a consequence of having both parents work full-time to scrape by. Even children's TV now is awful, really dysregulating and overstimulating. I despair for overworked adults having to give their little children an iPad. Life now is really nightmarish.

I didn't see anyone just saying about the EARLY 70s though. I was born in 71 so most of my memories would've been 2nd half of the 70s

When I started work in the civil service. There were married women there who had had their pension rights reduced on marriage . So they wee expected to rely on their husbands pensions

I agree. Surely there are other things kids can entertain themselves with, too? I mean, surely small kids in previous times had games/toys etc that kept them occupied to some extent? It's important to keep imagination etc rather than just having a screen etc from a young age.

My mother banned TV when I was young (until 11) as she felt she'd watched too much as a kid. I think this was too much but otoh I think kids' TV now as you say is much more overstimulating etc. If you look at the programs then (I did look as a child a lot at old annuals my mother had then so I have some idea) the colours are more muted, they seem less overwhelming overall. Contrast that to the neons of Teletubbies, or most recently, Cocomelon, nicknamed 'cocaine for toddlers' (good piece here)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/06/17/cocomelon-children-television-youtube-netflix

Sorry...to check, are you from Sweden (I wondered from your username)? If so, I wonder how similar or different this was to UK then..

Grew up in the UK.

Yes, exactly - I'm a 90s baby and children's TV from when I was little (Postman Pat, Bob the Builder etc) was at least cheerful and genuinely engaging with nice storylines and appropriate visuals. Cocomelon and its ilk, on the other hand, are, as you say, just addictive and overstimulating. Poor little kids - my brain is rotted enough from watching shite on TikTok in my twenties. I'm glad the most formative stages of my brain development took place when it was the norm to read books, play imagination games, and be genuinely bored.

If you don't get given an iPad you just entertain yourself in other ways don't you? I used to do big craft projects with zero parental input, read copiously, watch boring TV (ski Sunday anyone?!), play out. iPads make it more difficult imho, because then you have to get the kids off them. We definitely wouldn't have been hanging around whining to be entertained.

All the arguments about what women did, how much they were paid, whether life was easier or harder then etc etc are totally irrelevant to the WASPI cause. The ombudsman ruled that there had been maladministration and said the women should be compensated. This is the only thing that matters now. And why the government is wrong to withhold payment.

Automatic washers were available in 1960. My mum got one when she got married.

Yup - I really think the most important thing for personal and neurological development, as well as creativity, is boredom. A healthy dose of boredom allows your brain to mull over ideas and come up with solutions. I was bored for a lot of my pre-iPad childhood and I did a lot of drawing, reading, sewing, and writing. If I were a parent I would make it my mission to keep my children bored. Being able to entertain yourself rather than being addicted to dopamine (no judgement - as I say, I'm quite brainrotted now) is, I think, a really important life skill.