This could almost be dismissed as a hangover from traditional values or the result of still-prominent stay-at-home mothers, except that it remains true when both members are working full-time, and even in some cases where only the woman is in employment. One explanation given for the unwillingness of men to take part is that the male gender role has not been challenged as strongly as its female counterpart, so many men feel threatened on a primal level by the prospect of child-rearing and domestic labour. This is backed up by the fact that it is even more pronounced when the man is unemployed, suggesting he has a greater reason to feel insecure in his masculinity. Whatever the cause, all signs point to women suffering a dual-burden; having to hold
For example, women now go out to work, just as men now help with housework and childcare. However Feminists reject the ‘March of Progress’ theory, and argue that women remain unequal within the family. Anne Oakley argues that we still live in a patriarchal (male dominated) society, and therefore women occupy a subordinate and dependant role within the family and wider society. In addition in Mary Boulton’s research backed this, she found that fewer than 20% of husbands had a majority role in childcare. Overall it could therefore be argued that rather than partners becoming more equal, women now have to carry a ‘dual burden’, whereby she is responsible for two jobs of unpaid or paid labour.
Women’s restriction in the workforce was also because of their forced dependency on men and poor socio-economic status of women. Women were seen to have no intelligence; their higher education was not seen as needed. Only those women who had higher social standings and wealth had a right to higher education. Along with Christian woman’s lack of higher of education, they were highly subordinate to men, meaning their father, brothers, and husband. They were not a loud to own land and also had to pass on their inheritance to their husband.
For example, women now go out to work and become wage earners, just as men now help with housework and childcare. However Feminists reject this theory, and argue that women remain unequal within the family. Anne Oakley argues that we still live in a patriarchal (male dominated) society, and that children are being taught from an early age that the traditional roles are the norm. She also rejects Parsons Theory of saying that it is controlled by biology she believes it is controlled by society. Overall it could therefore be
Stereotypically, men are the masters and women are housewives. This is discrimination to the other sex because they basically see them as slaves, but with better treatment. Unlimited power is unacceptable for women because the men take advantage of this power and use it in many ways. For example, wars, ruling, and even in the household to their wives. Education is needed weather you’re a male or female because gender doesn’t play the role in the education life.
However, when the 1990’s began a lot of feminist movements began that spoke out to the fact that women should have more of a role in society than just to cook and clean. This is when women started competing with men for jobs and education like they never had before. “Young men…have been challenged by women in areas that our fathers and grandfathers never were—in education, the workplace, business, the professions” (Katz 17). For a lot of men, this is a difficult thing to deal with. Being in a position where a male is not the dominant sex can really make one begin to doubt their masculinity.
One of the reasons women are leaving their careers is because of the inflexible scheduling for the working women who are also mothers, making it impossible for some to manage both. The questions I have regarding this is that if the workforce was in some way more flexible for the working mothers, would they still be considered equal among the men? Would men see weakness among a woman if she has to be given a little more slack at work because she has children at home? Or could men see it as unequal and unfair that they do not have the option to minimize their work load for the same title and pay as his female co-worker? The thing is, working women risk losing respect from men if they can’t “do it all”, all the time, without complaining.
About 80% of female Baby Boomers worked which was also a contribution to the two income family. The higher percentage of two income families contributes to the simulation of the economy from purchases. Based on the financial planning literature provided by, The Social Security Bulletin (2003/2004), a fifty percent replacement rate represents a shortfall that could create economic challenges and necessitate lifestyle adjustments. The fifty percent replacement will not only have an effect on benefits but also the simulation of the economy. A little over a third of the current retirees but over two-fifths of near term and Baby Boomer retirees will replace less the three-quarters of their preretirement income.
The only things women were “good for” was taking care of their children and husband. Women has many obligations and very few choices, it was a women’s obligation to take care of her family as well as, clean, cook, sew, knit, and basically do anything and everything her husband asked or demanded. Women were more salves than actual wives. They were owned by men, whether it was her father, brothers, cousins, and/or husbands, they were viewed more as property than actual humans. Girls had to learn this life style at a very early age, if their mothers were busy gathering food; the daughter was to maintain the household.
Some women went on to work in the factories. Others embraced the new job of sustaining the new no market values like love, friendship, and providing men with a shelter from the competitive market place. But ideas of gender roles had little to do with those women who worked the market place. They did the job even though they were not eligible for higher paying jobs. Not until after the civil war were they able to control their wages instead of their husbands.