In the US, the average woman spends so much more time on chores than the average man that to equalize the load, women would have to quit the housework entirely on Sept. 5 for the remainder of the year. That alone represents progress: The gender gap in chores narrowed a bit from last year, when women would have had to quit on Aug. 29, a day I dubbed “Equal Housework Day.”
Since 2012, men have added about 12 minutes a day of household labor, extending a gradual long-term rise. To my surprise, women have not dialed it back, but have added about five minutes each day. If men are doing more, why are women not doing less?
That question is not easily answered, in part because the amount of time people spend on housework varies widely according to whether they are rich or poor, working or retired, parents or childless. But in every demographic group, women do more housework than men.
Illustration: Mountain People
Even single women living alone do more housework than single men, said Liana Sayer, a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland. The disparity is amplified in opposite-sex couples. When women do less, it is generally not because men have taken on more. It is because of another woman, such as a hired house cleaner.
First, just to get this out of the way: Whenever I write about this, men e-mail me to explain that the data must omit the stuff they do: paying bills, mowing the lawn, house repairs and so on. Yet their objection does not hold water. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics data takes such “typically male” tasks into account. Plus, I excluded the enormous amount of time women spend on unpaid caregiving for children and other family members.
What we are left with is an apples-to-apples comparison of all the daily stuff of life: cooking, cleaning, laundry, car maintenance, gutter-clearing and all the rest. Even if men do more of certain tasks, women do much more overall. The justifications often trotted out — men do not notice the mess, women are better at multitasking — have been proven wrong time and again.
But there is one common explanation that seems to be right: On average women feel impelled to maintain higher standards of cleanliness. We have been taught that being a good wife and mother — a good woman — requires us to be clean. To do household tasks the “right” way. Perhaps that is one reason why, even as US men have slowly stepped up their game, women have not stepped back.
“Our sense of who we are is so bound up in notions of what society deems to be the right kind of femininity,” said Allison Daminger, a sociologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, “It becomes part of our sense of self.”
A woman living alone might spend more time cleaning because we are taught to find it gratifying. Then when a male partner moves in, she is often dismayed by and resentful of his lower standards. As I was mulling this column, three different women spontaneously and energetically complained to me that their male partners — the horror — do not fold the laundry immediately upon hearing the dryer complete its cycle. Others mentioned boyfriends whose idea of cleaning the kitchen does not include wiping counters or husbands who have never dusted a baseboard.
There is no innate reason for women to associate household tasks with inner worth, experts say. Yet the usual explanation — that if a house is messy, it is the woman who will be judged for it — has always left me a bit unsatisfied. To be clear, research does support that. Yet if it is only the judgement of others we fear, then should the chore wars not have taken a break in 2020, when COVID-19 fears kept many visitors away? Instead, conflict only seemed to intensify as couples spent more time at home.
Perhaps a more complete explanation is that women have internalized society’s judgements — after all, is that not what socialization is? — so that messes bother us even when no one is looking. When I see scattered crumbs, it is as if some sort of internal referee blows a whistle; I simply feel compelled to wipe them up.
Eve Rodsky, author of Fair Play, said that women she has interviewed consistently tell her they feel they only have three socially sanctioned roles: employee, wife and mother. Household tasks are such an integral part of the last two that they can easily fill any waking hours that are not filled by paid work. It becomes almost impossible to make time for anything else — passion projects, hobbies, friendships or even moments of glorious idleness.
Men are socialized differently. They of course could (and I would argue, should) do more around the house, but they have not been taught to see household chores in moral terms; masculine worth is measured differently, according to salary, stoicism or physical strength. They feel more entitled to their own time, Rodsky said. They protect it — and women help them do so.
When we do, “we are complicit in our own oppression,” she said.
That is one of the reasons that any attempt to fix the imbalance requires more than clearer communication and a better system. It requires a third element: boundaries. That means tolerating the conflict that renegotiating the household load inevitably entails. It means learning to distance ourselves from the internal referee shouting “Flag on the field!” at the sink full of dishes.
How do we do that? By “understanding that my time is not worthless, even though we have been conditioned since birth to believe that it is,” Rodsky said.
It is worth a try. After all, we have already done our share.
Sarah Green Carmichael is a Bloomberg Opinion editor. Previously, she was managing editor of ideas and commentary at Barron’s and an executive editor at Harvard Business Review, where she hosted HBR IdeaCast.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS