Is fulfilling the stereotypical 'female' roles necessarily oppressive?

[DSM]

Following on from another thread that I don't want to hijack..

If a man in a relationship is simply not as good as a woman at a certain task (lets choose ironing) what should she do?

The ironing must get done. Should she do it herself, and risk creating an environment where is becomes 'expected' that this is her job? Does she try to 'teach' the man to iron? If she does, surely its akin to a man trying to tell a woman what do to, something that is considered sexist? Or should she wait and expect him just to learn himself, leaving the ironing undone? If she chooses this option, should she nag at him to get on with learning?

I am just posing the question that because a woman does the majority of the household work, because she wants to not because she has been told to, is that still feminist opprression? I don't think it is, but am open to debate.

.

SweetDreamerGirl is right- tasks should not be allocated on the basis of gender expectation- provided that the work and the responsibility are fairly shared then it doesn't matter who takes responsibility for what; and I think that while a lot of men shirk the work there are a lot of women who shirk responsibility.

My dh is much tidier than I am and puts his stuff in the dishwasher while I do not. We share responsibility for our ds (although I am a bit more proactive). I do all shopping and cooking and he takes the rubbish out and drives. We both work FT, so if either gets lazy the other soon tells him/her

"Does she try to 'teach' the man to iron? If she does, surely its akin to a man trying to tell a woman what do to, something that is considered sexist?" Erm, nooooo it isn't. Teaching a man to perform a task that needs doing - and let's face it, most of it needs doing for men, as they still have those PITA shirts - cannot be described as sexist. If my DP tried to teach me how to e.g. put up a shelf, I would be pleased because I wouldn't have to ask him for help every time it needed doing. As Annabafana said, the ideal surely is that both parents are able to perform any task in the house, as and when it needs doing. I would be cross if my DP left a shirt around for me to ironing because "he can't do it" or "it's not his job". If you're an adult (even if you can't see dirt ) you know when the laundry basket is full and what to do with it, when dinner time is and how to cook something for it etc etc. Women take on the bulk IME because the bloke doesn't take the initiative.

Nothing wrong with doing the ironing if you want to, nothing wrong with being a stay at home mum/housewife if you want to.

Question is do you really want to tho?

for example the maternity laws in this country make it so it is more financially sensible for the women to stay at home, the mother may discuss going back to work with the father and think she is making an informed choice but the state and society has nudged her in that direction and makes it harder for her to go back to work after becoming a mother then it does the father.

Thus is it really her choice?, expectations are drilled in from birth we get so used to it we fail to see it over time so what appears to be our own choice really isn't.

There are 2 issues for me.

One is as Solidgoldbrass points out, the total amount of free time each partner has. Mowing the lawn/servicing the car are more occasional things (and arguably a bit more exciting) than washing up laundry cleaning cooking shopping ironing and all that daily repetitive but necessary stuff.

The other is the long term financial implications. Given that over 40% of marriages currently break down, and that figure is rising, also given that women on average live longer than men, I think any feminist has to consider seriously what the long term financial impact is of one partner doing more of the unpaid (undervalued by society, unpensioned) work, and the other partner "specialising" in the paid work with pensions, future work prospects, etc. There are huge numbers of divorced/separated/widowed older women with poor or non-existent pensions or savings, due to having been the one doing more of the unpaid domestic work.

so, if those two concerns are sorted, then I'd say no there isn't a problem per se with a woman doing more of the housework if she chooses. but for me it's only if those two conditions are fulfulled. Which doesn't usually happen in reality.

Interesting discussion. I have to add a couple of things though - the OP defines a couple as a a m/f couple which is heterosexist. Assuming everybody is the same as you is anti-feminist.

I had to laugh at this comment:
Re your question about a woman doing most of the housework because she wants to... well I'm afraid I think that's a bit strange and am struggling to understand it. I think if you counted every single thing that had to be done around an average house (laundry, cooking, DIY, gardening, admin - ie bills and stuff - etc), all of which I would count as housework, then that is too much for one person to do on their own, especially if there are kids too.

What do you think lone parents do?

earwic - I think what lone parents do, is one of the following, but others may add to the list:

a) have a nervous breakdown/ alcoholism/ other form of madness trying to do it all themselves

b) accept that it is all too much for one person to do and just lower their standards for a few years

c) have part time or no paid work so that they have time to do it all

d) have a highly paid enough job so tht they can employ someone else to do some of it

and/ or

e) commandeer their children into doing their share as soon as they are old enough

I have done b), c) and e), myself.

Ha HB - I've done some of those myself and am working on e)

I am a SAHM and I do all the housework except DIY and lawn mowing and most of the childcare.

DH earns all the money and works in a stressful job.

I don't FEEL oppressed but in feminist's eyes would I be?

Maybe DH feels oppressed because he has all the responsibility for earning money and less time than me for hobbies and socialising.

Sorry - bit of bad grammar - I meant I do most of the childcare.

It's not really that that much to do if you opt out of the whole house proud mentality which has always struck me as a particularly evil form of female oppression. It's insulting to suggest that adopting different values equates to a lowering of standards, I think it's a positive expression of higher ambitions.

As a large family over three generations we have overwhelmingly rejected both the romantic ideal and those stereotypical roles. My grandmother had five children and her own farm as a single parent, my mum married but remained economically independent throughout her other career of churning out babies (am one of seven children). Nothing scares me more than the idea of total financial and emotional dependency on a man, except the idea of scurrying around cooking and cleaning for one. I suppose have always viewed having a partner as being at least 50% about being a partner which would detract from interests and available energy.

Paradoxically I do feel a bit sad that my almost 20 yr old daughter is having a baby and planning to live alone, despite being in an overall happy relationship with the father. She plans to continue supporting herself and studying, none of us have ever claimed any handouts including tax credits or lived in any form of subsidised housing - I think it is a total myth that caring for able bodied children should in any way remove you from an otherwise economically productive life.

Also think it is so important to be an inspiring role model for next generation, what we do is so much louder than what we say.

Sound scarily like Lydia.

I mean XENIA. RoF flashback.

Good points Itchy.

I can't think of anything more joyless than sharing a home with someone yet doing only your ironing or washing.
God, sounds like a grim student houseshare.

So MitchyInge, do you think that doing loads of housework makes a person a bad role model?

Also, I don't understand where being totally *emotionally dependent" on a man fits in? I agree that nobody should be totally emotionally dependent on one other person but should have other people/activities in their lives, but I don't see that doing more housework and earning less money causes this.

Haha, re-reading it and it looks like warped elaborate excuse for being too lazy to do anything about squalid, foetid hovel other than pay someone else.

Yes, if you see them in those terms.

And if not that, they are fucking boring, to say the least.

Nowadays a lot of women have the luxury of choosing to stay at home. However, for many women that luxury is still unavailable because either two incomes are necessary for the family to survive or there is little employment for men and the woman is the main earner - the economically depressed areas of Northern England and Scotland spring to mind.

However, with some changes in attitudes, as well as the law, women are now permitted to have a career alongside, or instead of, being a mother.

For our great grandmothers that choice didn't exist. Even as late as the 1940s a woman had to retire from the Civil Service once she married.

I often think of that untapped talent from women in earlier centuries who must have gone quietly mad because they wanted something beyond the home, husbands, and children but were denied it simply because they were women!