Last week the Times' David Brooks reiterated the man problem discussed by Reihan Salam and others last year. The problem is this: men have been hit hardest during this recession because for years now they have acquired less education, training, and skills than their female counterparts, and have focused on industries with declining employment opportunities.
Brooks noted that we are about to reach a historical marker wherein, for the first time in history, there will be more women in the work force than men.
Enter the case for the househusband. In a weekly "Conversation," Collins and Brooks discuss and debate the issues of the week. Last week, Collins held that men (especially of the unemployed persuasion) should woman up and spend some time at home with the kids. Brooks argued that evolutionary psychology dictates that women are "just more nurturing."
This article in New Statesman took a look at the rise of the househusband back in December. Although it is a British publication and reflects a culture across-the-seas, the article asks questions that are present in the U.S. cultural consciousness as well - just with cuter spelling and vocab: for instance, "does she who earns the pay cheque call the shots? Should he who changes nappies get custody of the children after a divorce?" Will fathers who have enjoyed raising the kiddies be reluctant to return full-time to work? And working moms to diaper duty?
The reorganization of family responsibilities that has arisen from the economic slump may certainly become a lasting trend. To be certain, the househusband, at least to some extent, is here to stay!
Wrong. First, men haven't been hit hardest during the recession because they have less education, training and skills. Instead it's because men predominate in the sectors that have been have been hit hardest.
ReplyDeleteAs far as your rather bizarre declaration that the househusband is here to stay, do you also think the housewife is here to stay? When Betty Friedan and subsequent feminists discussed housewives beginning in the '60s, they did not say that housewives were here to stay, instead they said the very idea of a person being at home all day was outdated, an anachronism, and called for a future in which all women were employed outside the home.
As for the question of whether men "who have enjoyed raising the kiddies be reluctant to return full-time to work?" Have women found it so enjoyable that they wouldn't return to work? That's certainly not what feminists have been saying. Instead it's said that women who stay at home are universally depressed, frustrated, and unfulfilled. So why would it be different for men.
Do you also encourage women who are unable to find work to stay at home instead? When can we expect to see your "Homage to the Housewife"?
Do you encourage women to stay at home also?
Do you tell women that having a career, and being independent is not necessary, because that is what you are telling men?