4 ms·

Coddles some men. You know statistics better than this. Care to poll a coal mine or oil rig?

by judk 12y ago

rayiner 12y ago
The fact that men overall are coddled does not mean that every man is coddled. The societal expectation is that men do hard/dangerous work, while women do housework and childcare. Technology has automated away most of the former jobs, such that only a tiny minority of men are working in a coal mine or oil rig. Technology has yet to do much to automate childcare. The result has been a windfall for men--they have five more hours of leisure time per week than women.[1] Judging by these statistics of the non-employed, I imagine such trends will only be magnified with increased automation, and under policies like guaranteed minimum income. [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/10/another-gender-gap-men-spend-more-time-in-leisure-activities/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/10/another-gend...
- Camillo 12y ago
  Did you read your own link? It adds up paid work, housework and child care, and shows that the total is 45.6 hours for men and 45.2 hours for women. It doesn't say what women are doing in those five hours they don't spend on leisure (personal care? sleeping?), but we do know that it is not childcare or housework, which invalidates your entire argument.
  - rayiner 12y ago
    If you click through to the Pew study and look at the definitions of the categories, housework + childcare isn't all-inclusive of things that women do disproportionately. E.g. it doesn't include shopping, which shows up in the un-employed article significantly, and among working class people is mostly a chore (grocery shopping, kids' clothes, etc). The definition of "childcare" also doesn't include "the kid is sleeping, but I can't leave a toddler in the house alone and have lunch with my friends." Indeed, if you add up work + leisure, and subtract out 8 hours a day of sleep, there's 32 hours a week left over for men, and 38 left over for women. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of this time precludes leisure activities because of the "on call" nature of being the primary care-giver. Moreover, simply adding up housework + childcare time doesn't quite capture the situation. Spending a day taking care of a kid is much more exhausting than working at a typical white-collar job. It's blue-collar work that cuts across the economic classes in a world where most men aren't doing blue-collar work. Last year I had a 9-5, while my wife had a busier schedule. So I'd cook and watch our daughter until she got home. At 8:00 when my wife got home, she had much more energy for leisure activity. I'm a guy who regularly works 70-80 hour weeks, but a day taking care of our toddler puts me right out.

Coddles some men. You know statistics better than this. Care to poll a coal mine or oil rig?

by judk 12y ago

Coddles some men. You know statistics better than this. Care to poll a coal mine or oil rig?

The fact that men overall are coddled does not mean that every man is coddled. The societal expectation is that men do hard/dangerous work, while women do housework and childcare. Technology has automated away most of the former jobs, such that only a tiny minority of men are working in a coal mine or oil rig. Technology has yet to do much to automate childcare. The result has been a windfall for men--they have five more hours of leisure time per week than women.[1] Judging by these statistics of the non-employed, I imagine such trends will only be magnified with increased automation, and under policies like guaranteed minimum income. [1] http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/10/another-gender-gap-men-spend-more-time-in-leisure-activities/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/10/another-gend...

Camillo 12y ago
Did you read your own link? It adds up paid work, housework and child care, and shows that the total is 45.6 hours for men and 45.2 hours for women. It doesn't say what women are doing in those five hours they don't spend on leisure (personal care? sleeping?), but we do know that it is not childcare or housework, which invalidates your entire argument.
- rayiner 12y ago
  If you click through to the Pew study and look at the definitions of the categories, housework + childcare isn't all-inclusive of things that women do disproportionately. E.g. it doesn't include shopping, which shows up in the un-employed article significantly, and among working class people is mostly a chore (grocery shopping, kids' clothes, etc). The definition of "childcare" also doesn't include "the kid is sleeping, but I can't leave a toddler in the house alone and have lunch with my friends." Indeed, if you add up work + leisure, and subtract out 8 hours a day of sleep, there's 32 hours a week left over for men, and 38 left over for women. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of this time precludes leisure activities because of the "on call" nature of being the primary care-giver. Moreover, simply adding up housework + childcare time doesn't quite capture the situation. Spending a day taking care of a kid is much more exhausting than working at a typical white-collar job. It's blue-collar work that cuts across the economic classes in a world where most men aren't doing blue-collar work. Last year I had a 9-5, while my wife had a busier schedule. So I'd cook and watch our daughter until she got home. At 8:00 when my wife got home, she had much more energy for leisure activity. I'm a guy who regularly works 70-80 hour weeks, but a day taking care of our toddler puts me right out.