Equality at home - Can this really be achieved?

[marga73]

There is an issue I've been wanting to discuss for a long time. It's the issue of equality inside the house.

Even though women now work and are able to gain respectable positions in the workplace, and we can say that some level of equality has been attained, it seems to me that once they have children, women lose more than men in terms of work opportunities and financial independence. And all because the house and the children still seem to be a "woman's job".

It's all great to find women who are happy being the SAHP, but don't these women feel sometimes that being 100% financially dependent on their husbands is frustrating? Doesn't this situation make them feel trapped and powerless? Is it OK for women to sacrifice their independence for the sake of their children and the house keeping?

I work part-time, and have two small children, and still feel trapped sometimes. I'm grateful in many ways that my husband earns enough so we don't have to worry about paying for mortgage, food, childcare etc - and I contribute to this too - but I feel it's far beyond from the ideal I had when I was young and it really annoys me. If I'm honest, it makes me very angry.

I would like a society where men and women work part time, share domestic tasks 50/50, and look after their children part time, and therefore pay for everything on equal terms. Is this too much to ask in the fierce capitalist society we live today? Am I naive to think that should be the case?

where did highpowered come from?

Xenia-I'm not going to scroll back looking for it, but I am letting women down by being content to settle for less-or words to that effect.

Snap
Yeah, perhaps. I suppose we'll see what the rest of the questionnaires show. It'll certainly be interesting! This is not within the UK by the way. It would be interesting to do a comparative study.

snap love the way it's 'her' fault her husband does bugger all yet believes himself to be doing loads. it's not down to him to do more but her to do less? interesting.

dont you think they are both responsible for continuing an unequal situation?

she is enabling him to be in denial about how much work their home is.

There is a lot of enabling and plenty of woment need a good kick and be told to insist on equal rights at home, stop being wimps, realise your own worth. Why on earth should a man ever have more free time than a wonman. What a ridiculous concept. I find it hard in 2012 particularly on a thread for feminist that any woman thinks that's fine "because she likes to be busy". Wemight as well be in Saudi.
So many women are weak pathetic victims and they need to grow a tougher skin and get on with asserting their rights. I haven't read back over all the last posts as I'm abroad on business.

I can agree for once Xenia! Don't wait for society to force it do it for yourself. You choose to get married or live with a man-make it an equal partnership to suit you both. I call it equal for me to do most of the childcare and DH to be the main breadwinner because we are both doing what we like best and all the money is our money anyway.

Sorry-lacks punctuation. It means sort it for yourself, within your own home, and don't wait for society to do it for you.

wasabi Its her fault for accepting this. Stopping doing any housework that relates to her DH would help address this - i.e. stop cooking him meals, leave his clothes out of any wash etc etc
Of course men need to take responsibility but women need to expect more

ah yes the "it's all women's fault that men exploit them" hypothesis. that is always the most convincing one because it rests on the assumption that women are stupid

swallowedafly there have been many people on this thread who have supported a middle ground, a partnership, a team effort in terms of who does what at home yet you have contradicted every one of these posts as though they are somehow outrageous notions of self-imposed oppression. I would show a lot more interest in what you have to say if you showed a little more respect and tolerance to others.

Feminism has nothing to do with who does the housework, it has everything to do with who does the work.

Can't we just be pleased for someone that has a decent egalitarian relationship where both parents are happy?

I still think that the main problem is the fact that flexible working and sharing childcare is not incentivised in this country. Unlike in Germany, as you say Widow. This has a huge impact on equality - the biggest there will ever be - but it has to be part of a complete package of decent health, education and welfare. As long as it there is incentive in paying privately for health and education, the family that chooses to share the workload will suffer.

At the moment, in this astounding country, we have a situation where most parents both have to work just to keep a roof over their heads, get untrained nannies to look after their children and feel they have to elbow their way into the 'better' school for fear their little ones will be left on the employment scrapheap in the future.

I call it social desperation.

Point of order (though I'm sure she doesn't need anyone to speak for her): swallowedAfly has done nothing of the sort.

Feminism has everything to do with who does the housework, particularly when who is in the house in the first place is enforced financially at state level from the earliest moments of a child's life.

Those who are suggesting that women somehow just buck up and go on strike, or have somehow brought this on themselves by not 'discussing' and 'asking' thir partner, are missing the point by quite some way. I agree entirely that women should go on strike until men pull their weight domestically; but there is the fact that having a baby reinforces the 'woman at home, man at work' scenario at the STATE level.

I know it wasn't specifically aimed at me but someone up there ^ said 'don't wait for the state to do it for you'. Erm, what? MrVG can parent our child until the cows come home but he's not going to get any paternity pay for it, is he?

If families go down the route of male SAHP in the first year, they will lose an entire income which they might not ever get back (this of course happens with women as well, it's just that women get the tiny sop of Statutory Maternity Pay). All the talking in the world about who does the hoovering doesn't change that fact.

At the heart of femiinis is who does the housework and always has beenand anyone who thinks it is not needs to go on a feminism weekend deprogramming course or something.... Of course it is all about that. There is no parity of desirablity or economic worth between sweeping the floor and running BP or Ernst & Young. The latter is fascinating and wonderful and the former is dull and any moron can do it and no one enjoys it. Women are kept within the confines of the home (another feminist issue) and men allowed out to earn and work.

Anyway there is much less discrimination at work these days and most of the areas still be won for feminists is to ensure they have fairness at home. Women have a responsibility to other women and to their children not to end up with an unfair situation at home.

The political issue of whether the state should laud those and financially reward them who take on work which is low paid and unskilled (ie childcare and cleaning) is not a feminist issue. It's a political issue and just muddies the waters.

"Feminism has everything to do with who does the housework, particularly when who is in the house in the first place is enforced financially at state level from the earliest moments of a child's life."

I agree very strongly, VictorGollancz, that states, wittingly or unwittingly, intervene to make housework women's work.

You really do have to speak to yourself-I would hate to run BP or Ernst and Young-it wouldn't be in the least fascinating and wonderful to me-it would take up way too much of my life and leave me no time to do the things that really matter to me and I enjoy-in fact all the things that make life worthwhile.
How can I run Ernst and Young and get home to read a bed time story, get to a Nativity Play at 2pm, have time handicrafts, run a Beaver group, take my elderly mother out-even manage to read a book?
If I was running anything I would like to run a Nursery (either children or plants)-at least it would be interesting to me. Number one spot would be running a Museum in a nice little country town.

You do have to get out of the mind set Xenia that we all find the same things fascinating and wonderful-running BP would send me into deep depression.

Women have a responsibility to other women and to their children not to end up with an unfair situation at home.
I have a fair situation at home-I don't however see how anyone would know.

I wouldn't even want to be married to someone running BP-when would you ever see him? What chance would there be in a job like that of saying -I'm off on a school residential visit next week-you need to get the DCs to and from school, cook meals supervise homework-get my mother to the doctor etc-absolutely none I would say. Certainly he would have to take the week off-and I would bet he would say it was an impossible week to take off.I can't imagine why anyone wants to run BP! It would certainly come first before family or anything. The entire family would be living for the job.

Anyway there is much less discrimination at work these days

Pop down to my company sometime Xenia - you'd be very surprised :(

Quality of life comes first for me-for the whole family. I think that if I was married to someone at the head of a firm we would need a complete life change and escape-go off and run a hotel in Cornwall-or similar. (a few years to earn the money would be enough-I could put up with if there was a limited plan and an end plan)

I think that my equality would be that if either of us wanted to run BP or similar it was for 5 years max-and then we leave it and get on with our lives!

It's a big mistake to think that equality is doing the same thing. It's not. Equality is each doing what they want to do (within reason), making a similarly valued contribution to family life and getting a similarly valued return from it.

where have i accused anyone of self-imposed whatever it was i was accused of?

all i've critiqued on this thread is the tendency of people to polarise any discussion on this area into a sahm v wohm battle that is unconstructive and non-reflective of the majority of women's experiences.

of course feminism is about housework - the very existence of the divide between domestic labour and public labour is based on gender power imbalances. and of course what we do is influenced by greater things than what we want and choose when we live in a society of any kind let alone one so governed and media'd. and of course what we do has greater effect than just on us because we are raising children and modelling things to them for one thing and intentionally or not we are reinforcing or challenging the gender system.

these are non avoidable truths.

and no it is not all in our control as individuals battling it out in our own relationships and why should our daughters have to battle it all out again and their daughters and theirs and theirs..... there is a structural, system reproducing these conditions that needs changing so that this ceases to be something women have to battle over.

and no it's not 'women's fault' in the sense that they should just individually not put up with it, or not have kids if they don't like it or stop 'enabling' their partners. it is bigger than that.

i don't think i'm saying anything controversial or attacking in this and i'm a bit lost as to what i was accused of and why because i honestly can't see how it connects to anythign i've been doing on this thread.

Exactly and then if I was married to the head of BP the money would be mine too-I am enabling him to earn it.
Once you have DCs one parent has to have a 'lesser' job. It doesn't matter if the mother or father is top dog in BP-they have to have someone at home doing everything necessary-unless you employ a full time house-keeper and nanny and have a gardener and probably cleaner and a PA.
I am trying to imagine me having a hard day at work, saying to DH (the Head of BP) -'see you later I have an evening meeting-hope to be back by 10pm-and by the way George needs a costume for a book character tomorrow-I haven't had time, Miranda has a lift to Brownies but you need to collect and take home Lucy and Mary.Oh and please test Josh on his spellings and I said you might give him a game of chess later'.' It doesn't work.
Is it good for DCs to have it all done by staff?-not IMO. They want your time-not your money.

Sorry-I was agreeing with Bonsoir.

no one parent doesn't have to have a lesser job - the premise of this thread was that both parents could work part time so that that inequality didn't arise.

and exotic you're back to wohm bashing with emotive arguments.

"Is it good for DCs to have it all done by staff?-not IMO. They want your time-not your money."

I very much agree, exoticfruits. Right now DD and I are sitting around a table at home. I am on the computer, answering emails, making appointments, MNing etc and she is doing Bond papers (maths), sitting right next to me. From time to time she asks me a question. Would she be likely to be doing Bond papers if she were (a) at a playscheme (no school on Wednesday in France) (b) with a French (or African, or Filipina - more likely) nanny? The answer is a resounding no. She might, just possibly, be persuaded to do some if she were with an Anglophone au pair who was very school focused... I have known a (very) few, but they are like gold dust and it is no use thinking that is what you are going to get when you look for childcare.