6 ms·

This is an interesting point of view. I don't know enough about their relationship to know whether that's what was going on. But, I do want to point out somethi

• jacobolus 5y ago
  > It's coming from an expectation of femininity that she's internalized. This is a sexist assumption which denies the woman individual agency. One person in a relationship having a higher standard for cleanliness than the other isn’t necessarily the result of some society-wide conditioning. There are plenty of very tidy men and more relaxed women out there in the wide world. And plenty of relationships where both partners are very neat or very messy. When people have different standards, they need to communicate and work together to solve problems in a mutually acceptable way. Both “I don’t care if we live in a pigsty so it’s all your fault for caring about it” and “everything needs to be perfectly spotless and you need to contribute equal time to maintaining the space to my exacting specification” are one-sided cop outs.
  • k0k0r0 5y ago
    Wow. I never considered this before: Explaining certain kinds of behavior as the result of society-wide (patriarchaic) conditioning may be sexist itself, because it denies the womans individual agancy.
    • uoaei 5y ago
      It is generally rude in Western cultures to assume that someone is being controlled by something outside of their own volition, ie, to imply that they have less than full agency. This is most likely borne out of the Enlightenment era and its emphasis on the ideal of individuals carving out their own destinies as the highest moral pursuit. I personally think we will have to contend with the present and future of neuroscience research that investigates the distinction between which wills are truly free and which are conditioned on past experiences. All that to say, however, that 'sexist is as sexist does'. If such language as in GP is used to denigrate the position of the woman in this disagreement by casting her as a nuisance to be managed externally, then that is sexist, because she is no longer afforded a voice in the discussion but is instead reduced to an object to be manipulated, the primary reason for this being her gender. But I wouldn't recommend trying to close an argument by saying "Hey honey, I think you've been brainwashed by patriarchy. Don't you think we should try to challenge established hygiene and gender norms with this dirty glass standing as act of protest?"
    • jacobolus 5y ago
      You can point out / criticize trends and large-scale causes without stereotyping people or turning a trend into inescapable destiny.
    • tsol 5y ago
      In general by explaining behavior by societal trends you're removing agency. To say women are making their choices because of the way they're influenced is to say women cannot make independent choices without being swayed by outside influences. It's kind of a paradoxical thing
      • agota 5y ago
        What human being on the planet can make choices without being swayed by outside influences?
  • pbhjpbhj 5y ago
    I've never heard of men complaining about their female partners being untidy with household things except in the case where they simply do nothing (and that's rare), is that common where you are. My father did all the washing up in our house growing up, and mum did most of the cooking, but he never once annotated me for leaving dirty dishes whilst my mother regularly would complain. Almost every married woman I know fits the stereotype of being more houseproud than their husbands (I'm in the UK). You call it sexist, but it seems to reflect a genuine sex-based divide.
    • weldedtogether 5y ago
      Anecdotal evidence as it is, I'd like to vouch for the fact that I am usually the "mother" in this scenario. Dirty dishes being left out drives me nuts, especially if it's overnight. When I wake up and come out of the bedroom to a clean house, I'm relaxed. Waking up to a house with dishes still around from the night before can set a baseline stressed (need to do this still) mood for a hefty chunk of my day. On the other end, my girlfriend doesn't seem to mind at all. She does when it gets very messy, but the minor ones don't bother her like it does me. The author's mindset regarding dishes in the above article does remind a bit of her as well.
      • deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      • op00to 5y ago
        My anxiety manifests in similar ways. I "do the dishes" (or whatever annoying task it is that tweaks my anxiety in the morning) before I wind down for the night. I take control of my own happiness.
        • ikr678 5y ago
          I finished work around two hours before my ex. I'd get home, clean the house to my standards, declutter and only then be able to relax after work when the space was in order. They'd get home from work later, and to relax immediately discard laptop, jacket, shoes, mail around the house, get changed and leave work clothes on the floor, start making a snack and leave plates in the kitchen before I was about to make dinner. We contributed equally towards costs of living, so there was no 'breadwinner' power imbalance, just a fundamentally different expectation of how our living space should be used. I never found a way to reconcile this.
  • a_puppy 5y ago
    > When people have different standards, they need to communicate and work together to solve problems in a mutually acceptable way. I agree! I don't mean to imply that the "relaxed" standard is better than the "tidy" standard. But my point is that the husband was not being hypocritical. He was not expecting his wife to keep the house to the "tidy" standard while himself only meeting the "relaxed" standard (which is what rhacker implicitly accused). > This is a sexist assumption which denies the woman individual agency. Yes, I made a generalization. I've never met the man or the woman involved, so I don't know their specific circumstances. It would have been more accurate for me to say something like "it's probably coming from an expectation of femininity that she's internalized", or "many women in the US today internalize an expectation of femininity that prioritizes tidiness". Obviously not every woman is tidy and not every man is relaxed, but there's a definite trend towards women being tidier than men, and that trend comes from internalized gender norms. This kind of generalization is very common in discussions about gender on the Internet. For example, rhacker's parent comment made a similar generalization, as did your comment about "rich middle-aged white men" a few days ago. [1] I don't think my generalization was any worse than those; I just flipped the genders by making a generalization about women instead of a generalization about men. I think there's a deeper discussion here about "if personal preferences arise from internalized gender norms, does that mean the preferences are invalid?" You seemed to interpret my comment as saying that her preference for tidiness was somehow invalid because it came from internalized femininity. I didn't intend that; I think that personal preferences arising from internalized femininity (_and internalized masculinity_) are perfectly valid. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30977147&p=3#30979367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30977147&p=3#30979367
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
• avidiax 5y ago
  > it's not that the husband expects his wife to do all the chores, it's that he doesn't actually believe the chores need to be done. This is a specific example of a general disagreement on values. Disagreeing on values is really difficult to resolve, since people rarely change them, so agreement is often impossible. It's not entirely satisfactory, but if both partners can recognize the difference in values, respect the other's position, and act in a way that accommodates but doesn't acquiesce to one side or the other, then they can live with the disagreement. So for the glass, the husband's position that a glass on the counter doesn't matter is valid, as is the idea that a clean counter has aesthetic value. So a compromise might be that the wife learns to accept that the counter will be dirty during the day, and they take turns cleaning it at night before bed.
  • mhaymo 5y ago
    I agree with your general point, but I have to add that that example "compromise" sounds highly unsatisfactory for the wife. Not only does she have to accept the dirty dishes, but the simple task of putting them in the dishwasher immediately has been replaced by the fraught emotional labour of managing and enforcing a cleanup rota. I think the OP is right that he should have just taken the L on this issue, and perhaps on some other standard of cleanliness she should be the one to compromise.
• Goronmon 5y ago
  No she doesn't. She can just leave it there. She can leave her own glasses there, too. I'm having a hard time following the logic here. You agree that at some point someone has to do the dishes, correct? We can assume based on the article that the wife is the one doing the dishes. So, that means every time the husband leaves dishes out he is making more work for his wife than if he just put his dishes in the dishwasher.
  • scarby2 5y ago
    > We can assume based on the article that the wife is the one doing the dishes. So, that means every time the husband leaves dishes out he is making more work for his wife than if he just put his dishes in the dishwasher. Not necessarily the reasoning that it may be re-used is valid, also it may be that he would eventually put it in the dishwasher when the dishwasher is ready to be run. They could probably have come to an agreement that there was a specific spot that one singular glass can chill out (maybe not even in the kitchen).
    • makeitdouble 5y ago
      > the dishwasher is ready to be run This might be difficult if he actually doesn’t understand when the dishwasher is ready to be run. As you say there are solutions accommodating both viewpoints, but it requires either good communication, so one side’s “expertise” is conveyed and internalized by the other. Or both sides being competent enough at all the parts involved in the discussion, but for that they’d need to take turns doing the task so they both have the same understanding of the situation (it also gives more credibility to each other’s claims). The article author choosing to put 100% of the efforts on the communication part was pretty convincing.
  • avidiax 5y ago
    I think the logic here is that it does not: A) Need to be done now B) Need to be done by the husband C) A & B If it's just a water glass, I'd not be surprised if the husband intends to (or would) reuse it from its position on the counter, hence the entire dishwasher->cupboard cycle is superfluous from the husband's point of view.
• scarby2 5y ago
  > it's not that the husband expects his wife to do all the chores, it's that he doesn't actually believe the chores need to be done. This doesn't get said enough. It also not just wife vs husband - we all have different standards and it's a lesson that needs to be learned that usually someone isn't being malicious it's just not easy to force yourself to notice something if it's fine by your standards but not by your partner's.
  • biomcgary 5y ago
    I have certain expectations how our home should function, but I don't expect my partner to do the work of meeting those expectations. I put them on myself. My partner has certain expectations of how the home should function. They should put those expectations on themselves. Work toward shared expectations should be shared. I would assert that when one partner works disproportionately toward meeting the unshared expectations of the other partner (than vice versa), they are being exploited by that partner. Society frequently privileges some expectations over others. Consequently, one partner often feels disproportionately entitled to work from the other partner to fulfill their expectations.
    • op00to 5y ago
      > My partner has certain expectations of how the home should function. They should put those expectations on themselves. Work toward shared expectations should be shared. Three excellent rules for a successful marriage.
    • StillBored 5y ago
      Yah, this might be the most succinct summary of I've seen so far of the entire argument too. And I might add, there isn't really a solution to that entitled attitude as long as it exists. The desired outcome, of the other partner trying to meet the expectations long term is likely just going to create resentment, or vise versa when the they don't try. So your right, if you can't match expectations its going to be a lose-lose scenario if people aren't willing to do the work themselves.
• k0k0r0 5y ago
  I don't entirely agree with the framing of this comment, but I'd like to share an expierience which is related. A couple of years into our relationship my significant other finally realized, that if she wants me to do specific tasks in our household, then thats her desire and not mine. I.e. that I for example leave "a mess behind in the kitchen" since I am totally fine with that, and its only her desire to have a cleaner kitchen, and not some general rule I had broken. This lead to a huge change in our relationship. Since then she mostly starts negotiating rules that we both can agree upon instead of starting a fight. I am very thankful for that.
  • 0xbadcafebee 5y ago
    > she mostly starts negotiating rules that we both can agree upon instead of starting a fight If only more people did this in all walks of life. Rather than get angry at teammates when they do something that annoys us, we can negotiate a mutually beneficial working agreement. We need to have the courage and self-control to approach these conversations when we see friction, and ask for compromise rather than demand change. And we need to have good faith.
• throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  >it's that he doesn't actually believe the chores need to be done. This is an age old pattern. Pick any ten presidential biographies and I bet you eight of them have some passage about "my wife cared a lot about <household standard of cleanliness/orderliness/presentation thing> but I thought it was excessive" I'm sure someone familiar with ancient literature can find a few ancient Romans saying the same things.