3 ms·

I think you are missing the forest for the trees a bit here by focusing just on cleaning standards. As the author said, part of the emotional labor is the manag

I think you are missing the forest for the trees a bit here by focusing just on cleaning standards. As the author said, part of the emotional labor is the management of the household but also the management of relationships within the house. This isn't about forcing a man "to fully adopt her perspective." This is about the idea that women are more often expected to be the ones to suggest a compromise, or to be the ones which have to point out these rifts in the relationship. More generally, to do the actual work of being in a relationship and keeping it healthy. To flip around what you just said a bit: Why doesn't the husband notice that his wife is always picking up after him, or that she is not recieving acknowledgement of the work she has done, work that he feels should be acknowledged when he does it? Why must the woman be the one to notice there is a problem, to articulate it and to come up with a solution, as if the problem is her problem to solve and not a problem with the relationship, which consists of two people who are supposed to be partners?

dozzie 9y ago
I think you didn't understand parent's point. It's not women that are expected to put effort, it's the party that's not satisfied with current state that is expected to put effort. > Why doesn't the husband notice that his wife is always picking up after him, or that she is not recieving acknowledgement of the work she has done, work that he feels should be acknowledged when he does it? Blind spots of attention. When she does it, the (unconscious) reaction would be "I didn't need it, I'd be fine either way". When he does it, the (unconscious) reaction would be "I didn't need it, so I wouldn't do it, but I did anyway". > Why must the woman be the one to notice there is a problem, It's not that woman must notice a problem, it's that woman did notice it. > [...] to [do all the work with problem], as if the problem is her problem to solve and not a problem with the relationship, which consists of two people who are supposed to be partners? Again, it's the attention and its blind spots. The problem didn't get noticed and acknowledged as such in the mind of man. If you want me to do something, it's you who normally should put effort, not me, because I don't care if you will have it done or not. This is how interaction between two people works. It's silly to expect me to look around for the ways to please you out of the blue. Why would you suddenly expect this mechanics to work differetnly in a relationship? -- [Clarification]: The description above is about how things work between people, not a praise of man's passiveness. If a couple wants to change how this mechanics, they need to put continuous effort in working against it, and this means they need to notice it and decide to do so.
- DanHulton 9y ago
  I mean - I'm always looking for ways to please my partner, and to a lesser degree, my friends, family and co-workers. Little trinkets I think she might like, a surprise dinner, doing some dishes that we've been letting slide, making tea, refilling water, whatever. And she does the same for me. And my friends, family, and co-workers tend to do the same as well. It's not silly. It's called kindness, and it's part of emotional labour. Which seems to bring us back around to the first point again.
  - dozzie 9y ago
    > It's not silly. It's called kindness [...] Yes, but it needs conscious effort, which means that you need to realize you need or want to do it. It's very difficult to do something if you never even thought you could think of doing.
  - lmm 9y ago
    Is she having to do a disproportionate amount of pleasing her partner though? We don't get that perspective, only that she's putting more effort than him into the parts she cares about - which might go both ways.
    - showmetherec 9y ago
      Yes, but that’s not because she’s a woman (as she appears to claim), it’s because she hasn’t come to some sort of agreement about how to run the house. She’s talking past her husband to millions of people. Had the gender roles been swapped, it would have been a very hard to stomach article for a lot of people.
      - TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
        Which is why it's sexist. The implication is that if her husband were a better feminist he would be perfectly able to anticipate and provide everything she wanted in a friction-free and effortless way. The fact that he doesn't proves he's still mired in patriarchy, which of course he needs to be educated out of. Assuming your partner is sort of okay, I guess, but essentially ideologically defective is not a particularly healthy basis for a relationship. Aside from chores, it's not as it men - feminist or not - never provide emotional support to women. I would be astonished if the husband never listened to problems, provided cuddles and backrubs, and all the other emotional maintenance that men give their partners. I sometimes think this culture has a very poor record of educating people how adult relationships are supposed to work. Unfortunately this article seems to be an example of that.
greedo 9y ago
Why must she? Because she's the one who has issues with it. A relationship needs communication, since mind-reading doesn't work yet. I'll try to avoid using he/she since the article itself is very sexist, as is your post. Partner's have different expectations, and one partner may not see an issue until it's brought to their attention. It has nothing to do with gender, or emotional labor or any other drivel. It has to do with accepting that a relationship requires communication, and from the communication, understanding and compassion. And a relationship where one person feels such an emotional burden is not healthy. I have to point out this as well: "This is about the idea that women are more often expected to be the ones to suggest a compromise, or to be the ones which have to point out these rifts in the relationship. More generally, to do the actual work of being in a relationship and keeping it healthy." This is outrageously sexist. In my relationship, I'm continually suggesting compromises, and "doing the actual work of being in a relationship and keeping it healthy." The idea that women are the caretakers of relationships is silly. In a healthy relationship, both partners have responsibility and the ability to keep things operating on an even keel.
- TFortunato 9y ago
  You caught me off-guard a bit saying my post is sexist. To be clear I am NOT saying that this is how things are in all relationships, or how things should be. I'm very much in the camp of partners needing to be full partners, and for open and health communication. I'm also not blind to the fact that there are still some deeply ingrained stereotypes, however subtle, about gender roles in our society, and I'm trying, perhaps poorly, to rephrase some points from the article (and others like it), in which the author very clearly names this: "the mental load bore almost exclusively by women." This isn't a personal attack on you or your relationship. On the contrary, it sounds like you have a pretty healthy relationship, and I'm happy for you! But the fact that this concept resonates with many people though, men and women, probably means there is something here that warrants more conversation for a lot of people, even if it isn't something that is a problem in your particular relationship.
  - mercer 9y ago
    I can definitely confirm that despite my many readings of articles and studyings of psychology, this article describes some of the most common issues I've run into in romantic relationships with women on a day to day level, but in some cases relationship-ending. I don't think the point of the article is, or the point of our discussions should be whether this is the way things just are, or should be. Rather, it's about acknowledging that this is very often the case, whether by nature or nurture or whatever. Just that 'common ground' might be essential to developing ways to improve things.
Quarrelsome 9y ago
I still think like this stinks of "i'm a grown up and they're not" when the parent comment here is more correct, its more different standards. There are equivalent reasons various members of the household get pissed about stuff which always boil down to: > why isn't anyone paying attention to what I do? Q. Why does my flatmate leave his freaking tools every bloody where? A. 'cause he is the house handyman and when stuff is broken he fixes it. Q. Why am I constantly tidying up my flatmate's mess? A. Because he's a bit careless but ultimately its flatmate B that's requiring the clear table so its in deference to them. Q. Why does flatmate B always leave the damn hoover plugged in like a freaking tripwire around the house? A. 'cause when they've done the hoovering they can't be bothered to tidy up that part of the tidy up. Everyone has their foibles and everyone can do better but to expect everyone else to magically assume your perspective and notice you all the freaking time is a selfish position. To be exasperated that you have to communicate your discomfort is a laziness of its own. If you fail to communicate then that's on you. Sure you shouldn't "have to" but part of accepting other people into your life is accepting their imperfections. Anyway, pushing this into some genderised codshit is bollocks.

dozzie 9y ago

I think you didn't understand parent's point. It's not women that are expected to put effort, it's the party that's not satisfied with current state that is expected to put effort. > Why doesn't the husband notice that his wife is always picking up after him, or that she is not recieving acknowledgement of the work she has done, work that he feels should be acknowledged when he does it? Blind spots of attention. When she does it, the (unconscious) reaction would be "I didn't need it, I'd be fine either way". When he does it, the (unconscious) reaction would be "I didn't need it, so I wouldn't do it, but I did anyway". > Why must the woman be the one to notice there is a problem, It's not that woman must notice a problem, it's that woman did notice it. > [...] to [do all the work with problem], as if the problem is her problem to solve and not a problem with the relationship, which consists of two people who are supposed to be partners? Again, it's the attention and its blind spots. The problem didn't get noticed and acknowledged as such in the mind of man. If you want me to do something, it's you who normally should put effort, not me, because I don't care if you will have it done or not. This is how interaction between two people works. It's silly to expect me to look around for the ways to please you out of the blue. Why would you suddenly expect this mechanics to work differetnly in a relationship? -- [Clarification]: The description above is about how things work between people, not a praise of man's passiveness. If a couple wants to change how this mechanics, they need to put continuous effort in working against it, and this means they need to notice it and decide to do so.

DanHulton 9y ago
I mean - I'm always looking for ways to please my partner, and to a lesser degree, my friends, family and co-workers. Little trinkets I think she might like, a surprise dinner, doing some dishes that we've been letting slide, making tea, refilling water, whatever. And she does the same for me. And my friends, family, and co-workers tend to do the same as well. It's not silly. It's called kindness, and it's part of emotional labour. Which seems to bring us back around to the first point again.
- dozzie 9y ago
  > It's not silly. It's called kindness [...] Yes, but it needs conscious effort, which means that you need to realize you need or want to do it. It's very difficult to do something if you never even thought you could think of doing.
- lmm 9y ago
  Is she having to do a disproportionate amount of pleasing her partner though? We don't get that perspective, only that she's putting more effort than him into the parts she cares about - which might go both ways.
  - showmetherec 9y ago
    Yes, but that’s not because she’s a woman (as she appears to claim), it’s because she hasn’t come to some sort of agreement about how to run the house. She’s talking past her husband to millions of people. Had the gender roles been swapped, it would have been a very hard to stomach article for a lot of people.
    - TheOtherHobbes 9y ago
      Which is why it's sexist. The implication is that if her husband were a better feminist he would be perfectly able to anticipate and provide everything she wanted in a friction-free and effortless way. The fact that he doesn't proves he's still mired in patriarchy, which of course he needs to be educated out of. Assuming your partner is sort of okay, I guess, but essentially ideologically defective is not a particularly healthy basis for a relationship. Aside from chores, it's not as it men - feminist or not - never provide emotional support to women. I would be astonished if the husband never listened to problems, provided cuddles and backrubs, and all the other emotional maintenance that men give their partners. I sometimes think this culture has a very poor record of educating people how adult relationships are supposed to work. Unfortunately this article seems to be an example of that.

greedo 9y ago

Why must she? Because she's the one who has issues with it. A relationship needs communication, since mind-reading doesn't work yet. I'll try to avoid using he/she since the article itself is very sexist, as is your post. Partner's have different expectations, and one partner may not see an issue until it's brought to their attention. It has nothing to do with gender, or emotional labor or any other drivel. It has to do with accepting that a relationship requires communication, and from the communication, understanding and compassion. And a relationship where one person feels such an emotional burden is not healthy. I have to point out this as well: "This is about the idea that women are more often expected to be the ones to suggest a compromise, or to be the ones which have to point out these rifts in the relationship. More generally, to do the actual work of being in a relationship and keeping it healthy." This is outrageously sexist. In my relationship, I'm continually suggesting compromises, and "doing the actual work of being in a relationship and keeping it healthy." The idea that women are the caretakers of relationships is silly. In a healthy relationship, both partners have responsibility and the ability to keep things operating on an even keel.

TFortunato 9y ago
You caught me off-guard a bit saying my post is sexist. To be clear I am NOT saying that this is how things are in all relationships, or how things should be. I'm very much in the camp of partners needing to be full partners, and for open and health communication. I'm also not blind to the fact that there are still some deeply ingrained stereotypes, however subtle, about gender roles in our society, and I'm trying, perhaps poorly, to rephrase some points from the article (and others like it), in which the author very clearly names this: "the mental load bore almost exclusively by women." This isn't a personal attack on you or your relationship. On the contrary, it sounds like you have a pretty healthy relationship, and I'm happy for you! But the fact that this concept resonates with many people though, men and women, probably means there is something here that warrants more conversation for a lot of people, even if it isn't something that is a problem in your particular relationship.
- mercer 9y ago
  I can definitely confirm that despite my many readings of articles and studyings of psychology, this article describes some of the most common issues I've run into in romantic relationships with women on a day to day level, but in some cases relationship-ending. I don't think the point of the article is, or the point of our discussions should be whether this is the way things just are, or should be. Rather, it's about acknowledging that this is very often the case, whether by nature or nurture or whatever. Just that 'common ground' might be essential to developing ways to improve things.

Quarrelsome 9y ago

I still think like this stinks of "i'm a grown up and they're not" when the parent comment here is more correct, its more different standards. There are equivalent reasons various members of the household get pissed about stuff which always boil down to: > why isn't anyone paying attention to what I do? Q. Why does my flatmate leave his freaking tools every bloody where? A. 'cause he is the house handyman and when stuff is broken he fixes it. Q. Why am I constantly tidying up my flatmate's mess? A. Because he's a bit careless but ultimately its flatmate B that's requiring the clear table so its in deference to them. Q. Why does flatmate B always leave the damn hoover plugged in like a freaking tripwire around the house? A. 'cause when they've done the hoovering they can't be bothered to tidy up that part of the tidy up. Everyone has their foibles and everyone can do better but to expect everyone else to magically assume your perspective and notice you all the freaking time is a selfish position. To be exasperated that you have to communicate your discomfort is a laziness of its own. If you fail to communicate then that's on you. Sure you shouldn't "have to" but part of accepting other people into your life is accepting their imperfections. Anyway, pushing this into some genderised codshit is bollocks.