Shouldn’t housework be gender agnostic?
Recently, a picture of a young woman in a frilly apron and high heels vacuuming the house while a man sat on the sofa reading a book was shared on social media with the caption “What’s wrong with this picture?”. There were apparently 21 mistakes in the picture, most of which people found- books stored under the kitchen sink, vacuum cleaner not plugged in, 31 days in June, a night sky in one window and a day sky in the other, a clock with numbers arranged counter clockwise, brooms stored in the refrigerator, man wearing one shoe and one slipper, and many more.
However almost nobody commented on the most fundamental thing that was wrong in the picture- the man was relaxing with a book while the woman was cleaning their house. In an equitable partnership, both should share the load of housework, but the role of women as housekeeper has been normalised to such an extent that it seemed perfectly acceptable for the man to not contribute to the housework at all.
The picture shared is clearly a vintage one- the lady’s clothes and the model of the vacuum cleaner place it somewhere in the late 1950s/ early 1960s. This is the period when society and the media actively promoted what Betty Friedan called the “Feminine Mystique”. It is conceivable that this picture too was created and used to perpetrate the assumption that women could find fulfilment only through housework, caregiving and childrearing.
During the years of World War II when the men were away fighting, women had been forced to step out of their homes to earn a living. They were employed in farms, factories, laboratories and other industries previously deemed unsuitable for women. When the men returned home at the end of the war, they not only wanted their old jobs back, they also wanted the women to look up to them as providers like they used to earlier. This was when the media, the church and society as a whole started pushing the narrative that the natural role of a woman was that of a mother, a housekeeper and a caregiver, and that women could only seek fulfilment by performing those roles to perfection. The old German slogan “Kinder, Küche, Kirche” was revived in a new context and women were told that their primary responsibilities were threefold- children, kitchen, church.
Gradually, the freedoms which were won during the War years were eroded. Higher education was seen as a means to snare a good husband, and an engagement (or wedding) ring became as precious as the graduation degree awarded during Convocation. Women were expected not to have careers outside the home. The worth of a woman started being measured in terms of how well she performed her domestic duties, and her greatest aspiration was to own the latest gadgets that would help in cooking and cleaning.
Not only were entire generations of women denied the opportunity to evolve to their full capacity, the “feminine mystique” clearly placed caregiving, housekeeping and child rearing as the sole responsibility of women. As Betty Friedan laments-
“Why should anyone raise an eyebrow because a latter-day Einstein’s wife expects her husband to put aside that lifeless theory of relativity and help her with the work that is supposed to be the essence of life itself: diaper the baby and don’t forget to rinse the soiled diaper in the toilet paper before putting it in the diaper pail, and then wax the kitchen floor.”
The situation in India was not very different. Women participated in large numbers in the freedom movement- not just women from upper class, educated, liberal families, but also regular women. Jawaharlal Nehru even mentioned it in Discovery of India-
“Most of us menfolk were in prison. And then a remarkable thing happened. Our women came to the front and took charge of the struggle. Women had always been there of course, but now there was an avalanche of them….. Here were these women, women of the upper or middle classes, leading sheltered lives in their homes- peasant women, working- class women, rich women- pouring out in their tens of thousands in defiance of government order and police lathi.”
Once India attained independence, however, most of these women retreated back into their homes. Though there were a few women who continued in public life and had professional careers, labour force participation of women remained significantly lower than that of men.
Even after the second wave of feminism took women out of their homes, and opened up professional opportunities for them, housework, caregiving and child rearing was deemed to be the sole responsibility of women. Society decided that these roles were best performed by women for biological and instinctive reasons, even though research has proved that the only reason women gravitate towards these roles is cultural conditioning. This has, essentially, been a double whammy for women, because the women who work outside the home in paid jobs, continue to perform the major share of housekeeping, caregiving and childrearing, which ends up with them having to shoulder double burdens. It is important that there be a rethink around gender roles, in order to ensure that people of both genders are able to attain their full potential. It is not enough to empower women to think of making an impact beyond the home, it is equally important to educate men to enable such women.
The fact that a picture like that one remains in circulation, and not too many people think there is anything fundamentally wrong in a relationship where the woman cleans the house while the man relaxes proves that iniquitous domestic relationships are the norm. True freedom will only come when society recognises that housework, caregiving and child rearing are all gender agnostic roles, and that both partners should shoulder the burden in an equitable relationship.
Disclaimer: the article speaks of the second wave of feminism in the West, which to a large extent ignored the specific challenges of racial and ethnic minorities and women from lower income groups. In the Indian context, while a renegotiation of gender roles is important, it is equally important to be aware of intersectionalities and how they play out.
