is there a new cognitive dissonance thread?

[kickassangel]

if so, please link, i can't find it.

if not, i'd like to add some things

using personal experience to prove a point is not a great argument. we have to start with the bigger picture, then see personal experiences as a case study which exemplifies, but does not prove a point.

i'm not even sure that i view myself as a feminist. i view myself as someone who believes in equality (not just on male/female issues). the generalisations about feminism being a religion i find offensive, as they both ignore the patriarchal society we live in (and this assertion can be backed up by endless statistics & experiences), and assume that one particular viewpoint is religious.

is marxism a religion? what about other schools of thought?

feminism is a broad range of thought, and there will be changes and shifts within the arguments, just as there are in other sociological concepts. and there will be women who abuse, just as there are men who do so.

however, look at the structure of society, and it is impossible to say that it isn't patriarchal. just look at the possession of wealth, the media representation of people, the male/female ration in positions of power.

if it was as simple as some women 'not bothering' to push themselves forward, there would still be enough women to fill 50% of all key positions in society, and to hold 50% of the wealth, but that isn't what happens. so, it sin't due to a lack of women exerting themselves, it is due to the inherent sexism within society.

I'm glad you bumped it, tortoise. The issue is a huge one an exercises me greatly. I think cognitive dissonance is a psychological necessity in humans, as much as cognitive filtering. But it's possible to live knowingly with it. Big problems arise, I feel, when people refuse to admit they are living with paradoxical beliefs. They do it because it's easier, I suppose, but that leads to mindless acceptance of brainless ideas.

On a somewhat related note, kickassangel wrote in this OP: i'm not even sure that i view myself as a feminist. i view myself as someone who believes in equality (not just on male/female issues). This is how I, too, outlined my position when I first ventured into this forum. I was roundly told about feminist issues being somehow different from overall "equalism". That, as you've pointed out, demonstrates a high level of cognitive dissonance. I am the white, educated, able-bodied(ish) citizen of a liberal, economically developed democracy. Therefore I have only one significant disadvantage - my sex. To my mind, then, I'm far less discriminated against than people who diverge from the 'privilege template' in two or more ways.

... but I should know better than to attempt Deep Thought (let alone cogent argument!) after being up all night ...

"the privileged person blames the disadvantaged for their situation"

That's so true. I've read about and actually heard people who despise The Poor. I think first of all The Poor make them realise there are problems in this world and, as you say, that they were born with advantages, a silver spoon in their mouth. They want to believe they got there by their own hard work, and they need the poor to stay poor because that makes them privilged, by definition, and some people enjoy the trappings of being privileged.

It's true that that cognitive dissonance does apply to the abuser/privileged person as well as the opressed/undeprivileged/victim person

Excellent post tortoise.

I articulated what's annoying me about what I perceive to be the inequality in our relationship to DH last night.
He was getting defensive, but I pointed out to him that I don't know what the answer is, but that I needed him to be aware of how I feel about it atm.
I feel so much better for sharing it with him.

Wastingaway, your post touches on what I was going to say:
what do someone do about it when she perceives the cognitive dissonance but her partner doesn't? Especially if it is an "awakening", which will be a disruption of the status quo, and it may make him angry.

Sometimes it is the most ?right on? men who are angriest, because they think they are good decent men, and to be confronted with criticism that seems to place them amongst those they like to think of as Neanderthals will be very painful.
Many men in families with children do work hard, just not as hard as their wives. It can seem very hard, perhaps, to be criticised when you are already tired because the implication seems to be that you are not tired enough.

We ? I suppose I mean the people of mumsnet ? seem to imply that it is the woman?s job to simply cut through all this, with some calm explanation and rational argument. Some people find rational argument more infuriating than anything, particularly when in a state of cognitive dissonance. You can?t sit down with a timetable of the week and say, ?yes, I sat down for half an hour here, but you were sitting down here, here, here and here? and expect the person not to be furious.

So what do you do?

For me, the fact that I'm sahm and DH has a long day with commute in a job he hates means that I find it harder to tell if we're doing things 'equally'.
I told him this and that said that if we were both working full-time it would be easy to make it equal, and then I explained SGBs rule of equal leisure time.

I think tbf, that we are both working about the same, but I hate the fact that I do all the shitwork, literally, and have to do all the thinking/planning/shopping.
I guess I feel like his housekeeper which doesn't feel fair, even if we do get equal relaxing time.

My husband loved the rule about equal leisure time.

I hate our situation because it makes me feel like his mother sometimes, but DH has adopted the habit of asking me if there are any tasks I want completed before leisure time sets in. He's used to me being a constant tidying force (in the sense that I am always picking up as I walk through, etc instead of setting out to do one thing and then finishing it and relaxing), so it's a way for him to know what high priority tasks I want done so that he's not relaxing while I am working and resenting him for it.

I hate that I have to tell him and that I am still managing. I even told him it makes me feel like his mother (and he pointed out that his mother never did that - part of our problem I think). Ideally I would like him to SEE that the sink is full of dishes and just load them in the washer the same way I have to do, but it's a measure of improvement and for now I will take it.

Part of my problem on that score marenmj is that my housekeeping isn't consistent so it's harder for DH to slot in.
For instance the bin needs cleaning where something has spilled, so I quickly sling a carrier bag on a cupboard door handle until I get around to the grotty task.
DH doesn't know this so puts rubbish in the bin.
I know which cloth on the side is for wiping sides down and which I've only used once for the dishes.

I need consistent protocols for the housework, rather than keeping it all in my head, as it's my job.

wastingaway, could you think about different ways to split housework?

For example, DH and I now take responsibility for different areas of the house. I do kitchen and living room. He does the bedrooms. That way we don't need to know the other's protocols. We just take a look at the rooms that we are responsible for and tidy up any mess. In the bin scenario, I wouldn't expect DH to put anything in a bin that didn't have a bin liner in it, which is pretty basic and not something personal to you I suspect.

It's the general stuff I guess, like I'd expect him to wipe the surface off after making some food, though I wouldn't expect him to do it after dinner as that's my job. But the cloth doesn't come into the 'sandwich' task and if it did I'd have to be very consistent with my cloth protocol.

It would benefit me to be more consistent with those sort of things so I should do it, but it's that mindset of 'my housework'.

Oh, that's easy, your DH needs his own cloth! Then there will be no confusion. (I'm not joking by the way, I would in that scenario buy my DH his own set of cloths. Or he can do as my DH does which is to use a tea towel and throw in the dirty laundry basket immediately. Or kitchen roll and then throw in the bin.)

hs who does the bathroom?

We do cheat and get a cleaner once a week to do the whole house properly so not much needs doing in the bathroom day to day. If anyone does make a mess in there they clean up after themselves. Pre cleaner we would aim to do it once a week and take in it turns (ie all the once a week stuff including bathroom, hoovering etc was alternated).

I realized that today was probably not the best day to think about housework equality as I was fuming while doing a whole weekend's worth of dishes this morning. I was too ill this weekend to get out of bed, and DH 'picked up the slack' by cooking all the meals and nothing not much else.

I'm absolutely livid as he had major surgery early this year and couldn't do any housework for months and yet he never had to catch up afterwards as I did it all . I may have put major projects on hold during that time, but I never let the day-to-day tasks pile up with the assumption that he would do them when he was well.

And of course, the worst part is that he's not even assuming I will do it. He just doesn't even think that someone will have to clean them. I'm not sure which is worse.

that's the awful thing about it isn't it. The ssheer luxury - privilege - of it not occurring to you that someone will have to pick your shit up if you don't, because it doesn't pick itself up. It's like being a child, or bertie wooster.

And I have to go back to the other point about the SAHM. The only way the husband can forge ahead with his career and have the pleasure of children is because he's got a wife to give him wrap aroudn childcare. She, on the other hand, has no career to speak of and will probably be stuck with part time work for the rest of her life, or dependancy on him financially. So the husband gets a lot out of having a SAHM in many cases. It's not as simple as saying "she gets to sit down for an hour when the baby is asleep"
She literally cannot be doing anything else, so she is tied to the house and children, which is part of the "invisible" work of the job. I was a free spirit before I got married, would travel at the drop of a hat, take off for the day and not come back till very late etc etc, so I really feel the chains of my role, even though it appears as though I'm not doing that much.
It bears repeating that I enjoy raising my children, but there is something very wrong with a society that puts a woman in a position of such vulnerability for her to be able to raise her children herself.

Yes Sakura! That's it really. DH gets to go away doing v. groovy stuff because I don't. Hmm.
I haven't even bothered trying to find an evening activity for me to do weekly as he might be away and I don't want to overuse the MIL. I'm sure she wouldn't mind, but I don't think she approves of fun or me-time for mothers.

wastingaway, I think that's one of the problems that a SAHM faces. My Dh is perfectly happy for me to join a book club or go out and do things just for me. In fact, he encourages me to do this as he thinks I deserve it (or after hearing me whinge enough about how he gets to talk to other adults whenever he likes ).

Our problem is that he works either long or unpredictable hours and childcare is expensive. The last time we went out we were gone for 5 hours and it cost us $75. Which isn't too terrible considering that $15/hour is a reasonable wage for a good babysitter (adult, trained in CPR, not a neighborhood teenager, etc).

DH never gets home before 6:30pm and compared to his job in the UK that feels pretty generous (he was kept until 8 even if he had no tasks because his producer was a tosser). If they are in crunch and have a milestone looming it's not uncommon for him to sleep at work. In fact, I usually try to go visit family during deadlines just so I don't have to deal with it.

So to bring it back around to valuing SAHM, it often feels as though I bring no income into the house, so activities that I want to do that cost money are not as permissible iykwim. And it's not DH telling me that - I think it's a self-edit that SAHM's do to themselves and that's why it's often beat over our heads how important it is for us to take me time and we still never do it! It's this idea that I ought not do things that cost us in childcare, and since we have no friends or family close everything that I want to do out of the home between the hours of 8-6:30 on weekdays costs us in childcare. It's one of the things about visiting my family that I love - I'm the oldest of six children and between my parents and everyone else, once I go through the door I rarely even have to take notice of where DD is except to check on her nappy every few hours because my 14-year-old brother loves to take her off to play with her and never notices when she's messy

I'm probably not making myself very clea, but I feel like if the SAHM role was more valued by society women would find it easier to let themselves take 'me' time, even if it incurred a cost. (not that I would even then - we're watching every penny right now)

Lenin, this isolation and almost sole responsibility was such a surprise.

I feel like my Mum should be knitting in the corner, and my sister pottering on her laptop next door, but they live in different parts of the country.
I thought the making friends with new mums thing would be easy, but it's really hard.

The playgroup we've started going to is pretty much a group of Mums hiring a hall and it does feel a little closer to how things should be.

Thank god for the internet!
I've managed to keep my hand in, and have done work I never would have thought of if I hadn't been a SAHM that I will be able to take up when the kids are in school FT/
But it is rarely acknowledged that deskwork is just impossible with a baby or children around. Impossible. That's another suprise. I just imagined I could get things done and the baby would come along for the ride, when in fact the baby/children are the sole focus and life has to fit around them.
Anything that requires concentration is just a no-go.

Luckily I pay someone to take DS for a few hours in the morning so I can do some deskwork.

marenmj, I used to worry about spending money, but I've totally got over that now. It's our money!!!

Sakura, I know what you mean, on both counts. If I try to do deskwork (or MN) DD hangs and swings on the back of my computer chair. I can turn on a television show for her - she gets her screentime while I get mine I guess, but that only lasts about 20 minutes.

I do worry about spending money in general, but that's just because we are buying a house right now and we really don't have any to spare. I felt a lot more guilty about our relative incomes before we were married, but not anymore. Actually, I take that back, it was when we got a joint account when we got engaged that it really became 'our' money not his and mine. Neither of us keep individual accounts, all of ours are joint. I know that's not the way some people do it, but it really gives the feeling that we are in it together.

I just think that, subconciously, SAHM's evaluate our activities a little bit based on 'worth' and the worth of the activity is rarely determined based on our individual needs (instead of balanced family needs vs financial needs).

Yes, that's the entire root of it Lenin. Bloody industrial revolution has a lot to answer for because it created the home/workplace divide. Before, work and home was the same venue.In Wales, where I'm from, kids would work with the sheep on the farm with dad. MUm would go to market to sell her apples, with or without the baby. Same all over the non-industrialised world.

THe phenomenon of man=breadwinner, woman= homemaker is such a recent, artifical construct. But it suits men so well that all the media etc pretends that it has always been that way.

Also it was the industrial revolution that broke down communities as well.

I am not convinced that things were better pre-industrial revolution. Childcare must have been easier in many ways - it is a weird phenomenon that when there is only one adult, 100% of her attention is demanded. More than one adult and you can get on with stuff.

But I suspect that subsistence would have been a kind of hell.

"But it is rarely acknowledged that deskwork is just impossible with a baby or children around."

That has been a revelation for me. Why is discussing this stuff so taboo?

I guess if we act like we can have it all, that makes it true.