3 ms·
> It’s a result of the lack of affordability, not a cause. Probably not. If you're familiar at all with the history of women entering the workforce, it was dri
by ch4s3 3y ago
> It’s a result of the lack of affordability, not a cause.
Probably not. If you're familiar at all with the history of women entering the workforce, it was driven largely by women wanting to have careers and professional fulfillment and not financial necessity.
- afavour 3y agoThe history, yes. Today’s reality, no. If it were purely about a desire for career we’d see more stay at home dads, for example. In my social circle there are a great many working parents who would like to be full time carers.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 3y agoMaybe not financial necessity, but certainly economic necessity when the men went off to war. Rosie the Riveter, etc.
- flir 3y agoIt's a tipping point, isn't it. If enough couples jump to dual-income for reasons of self-actualization, the rest have to follow just to keep up. It's a Red Queen's Race.
- pfannkuchen 3y agoAlso that the reality of caring for children in our fragmented society without extended family present being so difficult that working and outsourcing childcare to a non-family third party is much easier than caring for the children yourself. I think this one is under appreciated.
- Amezarak 3y agoDo you have a citation for this? My historical understanding was that throughout the late 18th, 19th and very early 20th centuries the Industrial Revolution and urbanization made it a financial necessity for (non-farming) women to work outside of the home. Then, the enormous wealth gains in the early to mid-20th century made it possible for many to stop working or never join the workforce at all, and they took up that opportunity. I would be interested in reading more. Looking at the labor force participation rate for women, since 1950 it's gone from 1/3 to 2/3.