‘But women have evolved to love hoovering’

[Gladysthesphinx]

I was chatting to a male friend the other day about ‘wife work’- the emotional practical & organisational burden that falls on women in terms of managing domestic & family life (see thread about women in lockdown for instance).

His response was: but women have evolved to be more nurturing; to care about the home (in early days, the cave). This is their role. They have higher domestic standards because that’s their nature! Basically, we’ve evolved to wield the hoover.

The points I made to him were roughly as below. What did I miss? I was so astonished by his suddenly turning into Fred Flintstone that I was rather thinking on my feet.

1. We can’t realistically tell what results from nature & what from nurture, in complex modern societies.

1. Even if in the Stone Age women took on primary responsibility for sweeping the cave, gutting the mammoth, whatever, the burden of modern domestic life is very different. Stone Age women had to worry about starving to death, not about organising parents evening & paying bills & doing laundry & overseeing homework & caring for the elderly relatives while also working full time & commuting. It’s completely different.

1. The fact that so many women are clearly discontented with wife work seems to militate strongly against this ‘evolved to hoover’ line of thought. Look at the number of divorces initiated by women. Listen to women talking about their lives. They’re fed up. Where we’ve genuinely evolved in ways that promote certain behaviours - for instance loving our children, wanting to have sex- those behaviours are generally valued and wanted. Wife work however is not. Women generally hate it.

1. In any event, it’s a fallacy to conclude that ‘natural’ is good. It’s not natural to clean our teeth.

1. This line of argument is of no practical use whatsoever. It’s not going to convince unhappy women that they love hoovering. It’s not going to keep a marriage together where the wife is discontented & resentful because of her domestic burden. So what’s the use of it? It’s a cop out, not a useful argument or tool.

I feel I let myself down a bit- would appreciate further thoughts (apart from anything else because I’m going to revive this discussion).

Why does very very old= better/right? Humans have always been clever enough to be dicks to each other, and men are physically bigger than women so they probably got dips on the arseholery in prehistory too (maybe, not my period!) It doesn’t mean they were right.

And I’m certain it has feck all to do with biological evolution given how long that takes.

I remember watching an episode of Naked Attraction (ahem) in which they had a “science” part suggesting that men are evolutionarily predisposed to prefer women who don’t have pubes. Given that almost all women grow pubes, I think that might be the worst example of poorly applied evolutionary biology I’ve ever heard (unless they were trying to suggest that all men are naturally attracted to children )

@Butterer

That was to *@BewilderedDoughnut* btw. Not every pregnancy is intentional or through a consensual encounter; not all women are able to access contraception or termination.

And as I pointed out to BD upthread, often men don't show they're a complete waste of space till after the first child is born.

And as I pointed out to BD upthread, often men don't show they're a complete waste of space till after the first child is born

So either don’t have children at all therefore guaranteeing your freedom from trash men. Or don’t go on to have child after child. So many women do this. I could ‘maybe’ get my head around having one... but having two with the same useless deadbeat is on you.

This is why I live alone. I don't hate cleaning, I hate cleaning up after other people. My cat is an exception to this.

This is my biggest problem. I like having a tidy house, I like getting the DIY done. What riles me is having another adult in the house making more work, not less.

And by doing that, passively undermining my training of the children to do their bit too.

I grew up in a fairly chaotic household, where not a lot of housework was done by anyone really (or it was only half done) - so I've had to try and teach myself, as an adult, the right habits to keep a house working - and so also teach my children those habits I've fought to learn, but when the second parent doesn't, then I run the risk of them learning that I do everything to keep a house tidy, rather than that the adults in a house do.

"And as I pointed out to BD upthread, often men don't show they're a complete waste of space till after the first child is born."

...a sentiment most mothers share, nicely summed up in one sentence.
I only wish more young women would listen to experience before making the most serious decision of their lives. But hey, youth has always been arrogant and hence the cycle keeps on repeating itself. If I only had a dime for each time I've heard: "but my man is different; we are committed to splitting work equally" :)

@BewilderedDoughnut

And as I pointed out to BD upthread, often men don't show they're a complete waste of space till after the first child is born

So either don’t have children at all therefore guaranteeing your freedom from trash men. Or don’t go on to have child after child. So many women do this. I could ‘maybe’ get my head around having one... but having two with the same useless deadbeat is on you.

I never get this counter-argument.

If you want two kids, even if you leave deadbeat dad after Child 1 and get together with someone else, the chances appear to be odds on that he might also morph into a waste of space after you've had Child 2.

Now you've got two kids but two men to deal with instead of just one. Doesn't surprise me at all that people settle for having the number of children they want with the same father before considering whether to move on or not.

@Butterer

Given the amount of men who anecdotally end up in A&E with Hoover related penis injuries, I suppose I could argue that some men also evolved to love hoovering - just not in the traditional sense. And usually they only attempt just the one experience...

Not sure if it's evolution, but I'd love to have one of these.

I read this article on the BBC website a couple of months ago, bemoaning the falling fertility rate. It's an impending disaster apparently

but not for the individual women concerned

if you give women a choice, as a class, they don't choose to be tied down by having child after child. Yes there are women that do, and if that choice is freely made, then good for them

but as a class, we don't want to do that when given the choice.

and as a PP has pointed out, women also often choose to offload men who have proved themselves to be too lazy to tolerate. which really roasts the chestnuts of men like Jordan 'enforced monogamy' Peterson.

oh and BewilderedDoughnut. Blimey. you're extremely pleased with yourself, which is utterly delightful for you. but have you considered thinking about things from the point of view of others at all?

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg oh and BewilderedDoughnut. Blimey. you're extremely pleased with yourself, which is utterly delightful for you. but have you considered thinking about things from the point of view of others at all?

I am immensely pleased with myself because I’ve taken very decisive steps not to end up trapped at home with kids with the majority of the childcare and housework responsibilities crushing my shoulders. I can see things from the perspective of others but I’ll never understand why some women seem to imprison themselves optionally.

you're making me think of Jeffrey Archer BewilderedDoughnut

he said that before he went to prison he never understood that there are some people for whom prison is almost inevitable, just due to the circumstances of their birth. he was ever so pleased with himself, Jeffrey Archer

after he went to prison he was able to understand the lives of those people a little more

if you give women a choice, as a class, they don't choose to be tied down by having child after child. Yes there are women that do, and if that choice is freely made, then good for them

Yup, give women control over their fertility, plus financial security, and most women will settle for two children. There will of course be women who don't want children at all, and some who want to stop at one; there will also be a few who want more than two children.

But my betting is in a society where women had control over their own fertility, could find jobs which gave the flexibility to raise children and paid a living wage, and where decent childcare was affordable - you'd find at a population level, the average number of children would hover somewhere round about replacement rate (which is just over 2 per woman).

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg you’re making me think of Jeffrey Archer BewilderedDoughnut, he said that before he went to prison he never understood that there are some people for whom prison is almost inevitable, just due to the circumstances of their birth. he was ever so pleased with himself, Jeffrey Archer after he went to prison he was able to understand the lives of those people a little more

I’m not about to get pregnant by a deadbeat, leave my job and take on all the childcare and housework so I understand better.

@TheMarzipanDildo

I remember watching an episode of Naked Attraction (ahem) in which they had a “science” part suggesting that men are evolutionarily predisposed to prefer women who don’t have pubes. Given that almost all women grow pubes, I think that might be the worst example of poorly applied evolutionary biology I’ve ever heard (unless they were trying to suggest that all men are naturally attracted to children )

That's extraordinary, Marzipan. (Fab user name, btw, just totally surreal!)

yes. I would suggest that the fact that the fertility rate is below replacement level is a sign that women are voting with their feet.

as a class they've seen the what's on offer, don't like it much, and are making choices to try to make that offering more acceptable to themselves

i'd suggest that implies that women are not predisposed by evolution to be happy with the status quo

And I wouldn't suggest any course of action to you to increase your knowledge and empathy BewilderedDoughnut. you clearly know all you'll ever need to know

In many prehistoric societies There wasn’t really something you could Call “public” or “private” spheres in that women only interact with family and men across family. Women and men would tend to do different kinds of work, and usually men would tend to range further In their roles. But that’s not the same thing.

Even if men’s and women’s work was sex separated, women were often / usually Directly involved in decision making of societies (what we would call public life now).

BewilderedDonut what a charmed life you must have led without any unforeseen changes in circumstances, no unexpected economic challenges, no appalling bosses, no health crises that make you or others more dependent. If only silly other people could just sort themselves out and be similarly lucky.

Honestly, why argue with stupid?

@HecatesCats BewilderedDonut what a charmed life you must have led without any unforeseen changes in circumstances, no unexpected economic challenges, no appalling bosses, no health crises that make you or others more dependent. If only silly other people could just sort themselves out and be similarly lucky

I have faced many challenges including some of the ones you listed but they were all out of my control. Getting pregnant and getting lumbered with the majority of the housework and childcare is not out of anyone’s control. It is a choice. It’s well known women make the most sacrifices for having children. There was a thread on here the other day and a HUGE number of women said they wish they’d never had kids. Not having kids guarantees you don’t end up being just another women with the weight of the responsibilities on her shoulders.