So is Christmas women's work then?

[Katisha]

Following on from my thread here in which in would appear that left to their own deives most, (not all), men would hardly bother with Christmas at all, I would be interested to know why this is.

Is it because women do it all for them? Is it because only women want all the traditional food, decorations, visiting, card sending and frenzy of present buying?

Are women propping up some ridiculous commercial christmas industry and men are right to despise/ignore it?

Or what?

That makes a lot of sense Sakura.

"womens subordinate status"?speak for yourself.society is flawed isnt perfect but hell if you assume subordinate status sure as hell someone will dish it out.

your choice of language eg underlings
subordinate is very much of acquiescing and flaccid acceptance of victim status

i find this apparent acceptance of victim status really galling

The thing is, it's possible to love the idea of Christmas with beautifully-cooked dinner, presents, decorations, tree, lovely clean house ... and still not to want to make those things happen! I'm getting the impression from this thread and from people I know, that plenty of men love 'Christmas' including all the above, but don't want to put the work in to make it happen. I love 'Christmas' like that, but - unlike, say, sm's relatives, I don't actively enjoy peeling potatoes and cleaning the kitchen floor.

In that situation, I think it's only fair that DH and I should both do equal shares of the work to get the end result. But it's usually expected that women only get to opt out if they say they hate Christmas, not if they 'only' feel they're doing more than a fair share of the work.

i agree but a crow bar and wd40 couldnt wrench some of the women in my family out the kitchen at xmas.they love the peeling spuds, mashing,stirring for hours and no way would they be argued with not to do this. they do think it a bit nutty that dp and i share it and we prep up in advance so on actual day not so much to be done

however,in no way would they consider selves oppressed or subordinate.they chose those tasks, like the significance and for them it has meaning.they have capacity and chose to undertake those tasks,declining male and female offers of help.the tasks have meaning and significance for them.xmas very much their thang,and their way.they do see it as womens work, their work,family business so to speak

scottishmummy, I know you live in feminist utopia, but well, I live in a world where women make up the world's poor, where there are only 20% of them in parliament, where the IMF< OECD, WTO, governments, any organization or institution with any power at all is dominated by males.. women are left with the scraps; tokenism

i dont assume myself or others to be "subordinate" or "underlings" (your terms)i acknowledge structural and social inequalities and pragmatically do what i can.

I just spli up with my bf of 7 years, because of him drinking and not helping me at all, just sitting there in a front of the computer :/

clearly uses "underling" and "subordinate" as definitives to describe what she believes women's situations to be. i dont see her refuting those words.seems apparent in post she believes women to be "underling" and "subordinate" in status

but women are subordinate in status. Not because we feel subordinate or think that's what we should be. Society affords women less status than men.
You have a strong personality SM, which is great as you are able to shrug off pressures that are put on women.
I don't think Sakura feels that women are less than (I know she doesn't) she is describing the situation that women have been pushed into.
Status is something that is imposed on us.

find it a bit flaccid and defeatist.i acknowledge the structural and social inequalities but imo that doesn't equate to accepting ones status as "underling" or "subordinate".christ id hope most people have bit more gumption and fire in belly than that.i wont bring my children up to accept it either

Feminism exists because of the gumption and belly-fire of those that don't accept the status quo. It's not about accepting lower status, it's about acknowledging that our current status is unacceptable and fighting for better.
If women were just accepting it, we wouldn't have boards like this one.

no just because something is said doesn't make it so,but i struggle with the fatalistic dystopian interpretation that as women we are inevitably subordinate etc.im not disputing it happens,it does and is well documented but no i dont consider my self subordinate.

No-ones saying we are inevitably subordinate. But atm we are treated as subordinates regardless of how we consider ourselves.
Some women encounter the subordinate message and feel subordinate. Some women encounter the message and refuse to feel subordinate and try to fight it, both within themselves and the children they raise.
If you had considered yourself subordinate you wouldn't have been able to counteract the messages that say you are.
It's not about what you consider yourself to be, it's what the world sees you as, regardless of your own view.
Does that make sense? the sentences were a bit garbled.
I don't want to go on too much, I feel I'm getting drawn into furiously agreeing with you
Everything you said in your post is correct but it doesn't factor in the outside world's sexism and it's inevitable influences.

no, we bought all gifts online, only sent close relatives cards, and dh did all the cooking and the clearing up

as individuals we balance and mediate internal self (values,attitudes,psyche,mojo)and external environmental factors (society,culture,gender).the rub is the negotiation is different for all of us.and i adamantly dont want to be associated with the we is all subordinates school of thought. having been raised and influenced by various strong women (mum,aunts,sisters etc) they were no ones lesser and i wasn't raised like that. nor will i raise my dc to believe they are subordinate to anyone ,they aren't.

Acknowledgement isn't the same as acceptance.

what acceptance you referring to?

The fact that you personally are not subordinate, scottishmummy, does not change the fact that many women in this world are, obviously.

Repeatedly saying "well I am not subordinate" doesn't make any difference to those that are.

And I think that what sakura was saying is that many women who don't actually have much power in the scheme of things (NOT YOU, nor indeed me) invent types of power for themselves, such as power over the arrangements for mealtimes and other domestic circumstances, and get very possessive and proud about them, thus perpetuating the whole women's work thing.

and repeatedly asserting some are subordinate doesn't negate others experiences of not feeling subordinate

the lived experience and interpretation is crucial here

i am not disputing many people feel oppressed but that isnt necessarily a perceived shared or common experience

the rub is we all perceive and experience situations/experiences differently.human condition,higher exceutive functioning and all that

well indeed beertrickspotter,the assertion i am not suppressed is in itself defiance

I don't think the issue here is whether or not those of us on the thread feel subordinate. I should imagine most, if not all of us, don't.

The issue is WHY (in this case) so many women take on huge amounts of domestic tasks, letting men absolve themselves of responsibilities. Sakura's point illustrates one possible answer. It's a general issue.

But specifically, I want to know why women take on so much responsibilty for Christmas preparations, and why men (generally speaking, there are always exceptions) don't do it to the same degree. And why they are allowed to get away with it.