The Lie Society 's Living

Ehrenreich demonstrates how men have suffered from being the family breadwinner. Men are less healthy than women, from both physical and mental standpoints, because they bare the majority of economic responsibility for their family. Despite the growing number of women who have joined the labor force in recent years, men are paid almost forty percent more, which makes their salary more valuable to a family than a woman's. A family must retain a man as their beast of burden because America places increasing emphasis on the value of its citizens through their material possessions. This makes many men feel that their role unduly taxes their resources. "Perhaps men will live longer (and more enjoyable lives) in America when women carry more of the burden of the battle with the world, instead of being a burden themselves" (102).

In this satirical article, Brady expresses the difference between the roles of women and men in the 1970’s by stating men’s point of view on women and women’s roles in society. Throughout her article, Brady emphasizes the roles of women. For example, women could now “work and...takes care of the children when they are sick”. Comparing the 1880’s to the 1970’s, there has been a big improvement. Many women had jobs outside their home, but still were responsible for most housework and childcare while their husband’s only responsibility in a marriage was to go to work and earn money to support the family. Society’s expectations allowed women to work outside the home to support college education for husbands; however,women had to know how to balance their time between their children and their jobs, making sure that their husbands “cannot miss classes at school.” During the 1970’s, women were still oppressed in many ways and had to follow society's expectations in order to live up to the men’s view of women’s roles in society. Even though society’s expectations of women had improved since The Awakening, most of women’s roles had stayed the same. In the article, Brady specifies how once a husband is “through with school and has a job, [he expects the] wife to quit working and remain at home so that [she] can more fully and completely take

In life we are told to “have it all” by raising a perfect family, getting a beautiful house, and having a high paying job; but is it possible to have it all? How many people can honestly have it all, when so many are just trying to survive? In the articles, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” and “Why Men Still Can’t Have It All,” Anne-Marie Slaughter and Richard Dorment, discuss how women function in the workplace and the different expectant outcomes for each, mainly focusing on the upper class. The primary objective of Slaughter’s passage was to show how women are treated poorly and how they are held to a different standard than their male counterparts. Dorment focused mostly on how neither women nor men should strive to “have it all” because nobody can. Together they consider the subjects of workplace discrimination, housework standards, family involvement, and striving to “have it all.”

“Look at us! We’re just like everyone else. We’ve bought into the same ridiculous delusion; this idea that you have to settle down and resign from life.” (April Wheeler, Revolutionary Road). It has become a society norm that women are meant to serve housewives; to cook, clean, garden, and nurture children, even though they are much more capable of other things. The role of women is greatly overseen, as they are not perceived to be of their full potential, rather than as societies idealistic expectation. This is because men and those who are wealthy are unable to look past gender and accept women as of equal significance.

In, “Halving the Double Day” by Dorothy Sue Cobble, she realizes that women get the bitter end of having a poor socio-economic status. Women are more burdened than men with balancing activities. Cobble states, “But none feel the pressure more than those juggling full-time employment with what can seem like a second shift at home” (Cobble, 1). Cobble believes that women, especially in lower income households face more stress and have less time to do things they want in life because they are burdened with finding and working in jobs as well as balancing house hold duties. Unlike men, who’s primary role in the household is to go out and work, women now who are in lower income families have to take on both roles assisting in income and doing house work. Furthermore, Cobble emphasizes that only those who are rich can benefit from the vast benefits that outsiders see in living in America. Cobble states, “Similarly the highly touted family-friendly workplace-the coveted market nook with flexible work schedules, job sharing, child care assistance, and comprehensive health and welfare coverage-is not yet a reality for the majority of salaried workers, let alone hourly workers”

Stephanie Coontz started off her article about the 50th anniversary of the publication of Betty Friedan’s international best seller, “The Feminine Mystique”, which was written about the women’s movement of the 1960s. What Coontz is trying to explain is that gender equality is not stalled, but “It has hit a wall”. Her title is the opposite of what she is trying to write about in the article. At first she talked about women’s rights back when the book was written. Instead of blaming the beliefs of gender roles from individuals, she points the finger at the economy and the work-family policies as the major problems to gender equality. She explains the gender equality stalled during 1990s and the first few years of the 2000s. She brought into text the usual statics, “the percentage of Americans preferring the male breadwinner/female homemaker family model actually rose to 40 percent from 34 percent. Between 1997 and 2007, the number of full-time working mothers who said they would prefer to work part time increased to 60 percent from 48 percent. In 1997, a quarter of stay-at-home mothers said full-time work would be ideal. By 2007, only 16 percent of stay-at-home mothers wanted to work full time.”(Coontz) She also talked about how 70 percent of men and women want an egalitarian relationship and how the demand of work has intensified.

As this essay has shown so far, there is inequality in who does what in the home but there is also inequality in decision-making; in deciding who gets what and how the family resources are shared out between them. Barrett and McIntosh note that mean usually make the most important decisions, the financial support from men is often unpredictable and they usually gain more from women’s domestic labour than they give back in return. Feminist sociologists Pahl and Vogler suggest that because of men’s higher earnings women have more financial dependence on their husbands and this is why men take more control over major decisions. Edgell agrees with this view and states that women only exert some control on less important decisions such as home décor. Finch argues that wives’ lives are generally structured around the husbands’, such as if the husband had to move for work, the wives would pick up and go with them, whereas it is unlikely that the husband would follow their wife for work.

Women for years have been automatically given the role of the domestic housewife, where their only job is to cook, clean, and take care of the children. Men have usually taken the primary responsibility for economic support and contact with the rest of society, while women have traditionally taken the role of providing love, nurturing, emotional support, and maintenance of the home. However, in today’s society women over the age of sixteen work outside of the home, and there are more single parent households that are headed by women than at any other time in the history of the United States (Thompson 301.)

Whether it is the past or the present, there have always been gender roles in society. In most homes, it is the woman’s responsibility to take care of the house. This includes cleaning, meal preparations, raising and taking care of the children as well as the husband. Compared to the men who take care of the more physical activities, such as yard work. It was known throughout many years that it was a woman’s responsibility to stay in the house while the man would go out and look for work to provide money for his family. Although the intensity of gender roles has changed, it still exists.

In life people are told to “have it all” by raising a perfect family, getting a beautiful house, and having a high paying job; but is it possible to have it all? How many people can honestly have it all, when so many are just trying to survive? In the articles, “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” and “Why Men Still Can’t Have It All,” Anne-Marie Slaughter and Richard Dorment, discuss how women function in the workplace and the different expectant outcomes for each; mainly focusing on the upper class. The primary objective of Slaughter’s passage was to show how women are treated poorly and how they are held to a different standard than their male counterparts. While Dorment focused mostly on how neither women nor men should strive to “have it all” because nobody can. Together they consider the subjects of workplace discrimination, housework standards, family involvement, and striving to “have it all.”

Women’s role within the household has changed considerably over a period of time. In the later days in the United States women were to attend to the children and to the house and not do much more than that. Children are now being raised by stay at home dads instead of the stereotypical stay at home moms. According to Gardner, "Real-life families have changed considerably since 'Mr. Mom ' appeared, with more men sharing child-rearing and household chores." (Gardner 2010) This is occurring because women’s jobs are no longer labeled as being just for women. Men have gotten a lot of criticism for being stay at

Foremost, the familial image has undertaken significant changes in regards to the ‘breadwinner’ and ‘homemaker’ roles within the family. In the latter of the 20th century, women’s participation in the labour force had been very little to non-existent, primarily because time allocations had been perceived as gender specific, that is, men were seen as the ‘breadwinner’, while women were viewed as the ‘homemaker’ (Seltzer, Bachrach, Bianchi, Bledsoe, Casper, Chase-Lansdale, Diprete, Hotz, Morgan, Sanders, & Thomas, 2005, pp.20). The ‘breadwinner’ role was to secure financial stability, while the

Long gone are the days when women were expected to stay at home and play “housewife”, cooking, cleaning, and making sure the kids got off to school, while their husbands worked a 9 to 5 in order to make ends meet. Today, women are no longer viewed as weak and incapable. A “superwoman” is the new woman. Men as the “breadwinners” have been replaced by “Ms. Independent.” The traditional male role has diminished as women fulfill bigger roles in society and exceed the expectations of their male counterparts in the household, workforce, and within social settings. We have abandoned old rules; no longer is it a “man’s world,” we now live in a shared world.

Conventionally, females played a very insignificant role in the paid work force of a society as many times they were expected to be home taking care of their family. Their roles at home can often include grocery shopping, meeting all the needs of her children and husband. As time moved on, our society became more accepted of sharing housework between the couples, but even so, the traditionally more feminine housework such as cooking, caring for sick children, and shopping for the entire family are mostly done by the females of the house. It is argued in a research journal Work and Occupations (Witkowski & Leicht, 1995) that in an average North American family, females take on roughly three-quarters of the housework. Even though we are in a democratic society, parenting roles in the household are assigned based on gender rather than in a democratic fashion (Winslow-Bowe, 2009). Because of the many responsibilities and obligations that are associated with the female gender, their career paths are eventually affected for the worse. According to Statistics Canada (2001), for every dollar a man earns, a single woman earns 93 cents and a married woman earns 69 cents. These statistics

This economic contribution, argues Baxter (2002:406) essentially translates to an increase in bargaining power within the household, which is actualised by decreased involvement in domestic duties. Curtis (1986:180, as cited in Brines, 1994:657) suggests that the power differential occurs because women are expecting an ‘unspecified benefaction’ to be decided, and provided by their partners at a future date. This use of housework as a ‘social exchange’ (Brines, 1994:657) is problematic, in that the amount of accumulated housework performed by a wife outweighs the monetary benefit provided to the household by the husband (Sullivan, 2000:442).