In her essay, The Case against Chores, Jane Smiley shows her contempt for chores by giving some opinions that I simply do not agree with. She makes it sound like chores are beneath children and parents should cater to their children. Maybe it’s the fact that I grew up in a “lower-middle” class family, or it could be the fact that I had a daily chore list, but I find Jane’s essay to be for the most part presumptuous, patronizing, and a bit judgmental. I feel like she is trying to give parenting advice based on outlandish notions that parents should be the sole caretakers of a home. My grandmother raised me and my little brother and sister.
* Parents that have a child with a chronic illness will need access to different resources like health professionals and therapists. * Other services may include legal aid, financial services and women’s refuge. Education: * The age at which a person becomes a sole parent will influence their education and the child’s education. * For young sole parents it is important that they complete their education in order to get a well paid job. * Some schools have programs for pregnant students- Plumpton High School in Western Sydney and Dale School for young mothers in Newcastle.
Whereas the wife’s role was called expressive, this is when the wife is expected to look after the house and to raise the children emotionally and cook. However with increasing numbers of married women working in paid employment sociologists have looked more carefully at the division of labour and weather the increasing numbers of women working has caused the renegotiation of the traditional domestic roles. Whether a family live in a symmetrical family or not will have an effect on the divisions of labour. Theorists such as Young and Willmott argue that family life is gradually improving for all its members, becoming more equal and democratic. For example, women now go out to work and become wage earners, just as men now help with housework and childcare.
Welfare will no longer be needed if the welfare office can train mothers to value work and self-sufficiency and former recipients of welfare will become respectable, “mainstream” workers (2003). Along with self-sufficiency this model seems to highly regard independence, which has become “associated with the values of citizenship, self-governance, and full social membership in the Western culture” (2003). The principles of self-sufficiency and independence in this model are simply transformed into paid labor for the women on welfare (2003). In order to become self-sufficient and independent these women are supposed to find paying jobs to support their families even if they are low paying jobs. There are a few problems with the rationale of the Work Plan.
Her idea of co-parenting was “If I’m going to contribute half of the income, then he’ll contribute half of the housework and child care” (Edelman 284). In other words, she “didn’t want to be the dominant parent in the house” (Edelman 284). It doesn’t take Edelman long to realize this wasn’t going to happen like she thought. She began to see that as her husband’s work hours “exponentially increased”
Natasha Owens Nancy Baumann Literary Analysis 27 October 2010 Alienated Labor in “The Case against Chores” In “The Case against Chores,” by Jane Smiley, the author talks about chores, and the effect they have on children into adulthood. Jane states “good work is not the work we assign children, but the work they want to do. In this essay, Jane argues against the two points parents give for assigning chores. The first one being that it develops good working habits for children, and the second being it teaches the child how to maintain a family. Jane uses an exemplification, and illustration in this essay to prove her point, Jane gives the reader examples of ways chores work against these two points.
Another aspect of the Depression affecting life of women was the moral argument against working-women. There was the social movement toward the defeminizing of public and private jobs for married or unmarried women in these days, because such social current brought by
Women were looked at has being less than men during the 1890s.Soceity believed women were raised to get married, bare children, cook and clean (James, 2008). Raising their family’s was considered their jobs their career. If a woman was not married it was accepted of then to take care of their elders. At one point it was even believed that if women learned it could cause harm. In the late 80s women could not receive a doctorates degree in psychology, it was extremely
Obama mention how he sighed the Lily Led better Bill, which purpose was to give a big impact on women's future. As mention by Romney, he stated that in the last 4 years women have lost 580,000 jobs and how he wants to help women. Their plan now is, hoping Lily Led better would help in someway and make a decrease on women unemployment. In my belief Obama and Romney had a good point by wanting to help women in finding a good job in which they can adapt. But in this case, for me it seem Obama won the debate.
To be blunt, if a woman is not capable or does not want to carry and raise a child, then she should not be forced to by any governmental doctrines. There are many reasons why one can take a stand and be pro-choice. One of these reasons can be the inability of a mother to care for a child if she does have it. Womanscenter.com states, “Nearly half of all pregnancies among American women are unintended…”1 Taking this into consideration, you can assume that a great number of these women may not be doing well, especially in this economy. If a mother is single, jobless, and barely getting by while just taking care of herself, why would you force her to have to raise a child in that situation?