In response to the incompatible demands of work and motherhood, many mothers seek out part-time work schedules. Although many mothers consider this option "the best of both worlds," scholars are divided about whether part-time work is in women's best interest because it is linked to the gender division of labor in the home, and hence, to gender inequality. In this paper, we investigate the mostly unintended consequences of parttime work on the gender division of labor within the household. Drawing on 54 in-depth interviews with mothers who voluntarily work part-time, we explore how mothers experience household work and child care arrangements when they work part-time. Three factors emerged as most important in understanding how part-time work can shape mothers' experiences of the gender division of labor: pathway to part-time work, work location, and work schedule. Depending on these factors, part-time work may be experienced as either enhancing or undermining of the gender division of labor, and thus, as promoting or undermining gender equality in their families.Keywords Part-time work . Division of household labor . Motherhood . Gender equality Mothers work fewer paid hours than fathers do. This gender gap is especially large when young children are in the household. Among mothers with children under the age of six, about 40% are not in the paid labor force; another 40% are working full-time; and 17% are working part-time (defined as usually less than 35 hours a week at all jobs). In contrast, fewer than four percent of comparable fathers work part-time (US Department of Labor 2006).

Part-time work schedules are a popular option for many women struggling to reconcile the competing demands of employment and motherhood. They are controversial among feminists because they are associated with job penalties that promote gender inequality. Previous research on this topic has focused on issues confronting women workers in professional and managerial jobs. In this article, we compare and contrast the experiences of women in professional and secondary part-time jobs, drawing on 60 in-depth interviews with mothers working in such “good” and “bad” jobs. We find that mothers at the top and at the bottom of the employment hierarchy face unique disadvantages from their part-time employment to which they respond in different ways. Yet in both instances, mothers assume responsibility for their “choices,” which absolves organizations of blame for exploitation and discrimination against part-time workers. We suggest alternative possibilities for the organization of work in the conclusion.

Voluminous scholarship documents the wage gap, occupational segregation, sexual harassment, and other forms of gender inequality at work. Few sociological studies explore women's work relationships with other women. Our article summarizes existing research from several disciplines on women's working relationships with other women. Specifically, three themes about the conditions of work emerge that discourage women's support for other women: (a) negative stereotypes about women, (b) lack of recognition of gender inequality, and (c) the devaluation of women's relationships, groups, and networks. We assert that these conditions reinforce essentialized notions of women, ignore larger structural inequalities at work, and cast women as the primary culprit in perpetuating gender inequality at work. We conclude with promising areas for future research on women's working relationships with other women.

“Hooking up,” a popular type of sexual behavior among college students, has become a pathway to dating relationships. Based on open-ended narratives written by 273 undergraduates, we analyze how students interpreted a vignette describing a heterosexual hookup followed by a sexless first date. In contrast to the sexual script which holds that women want relationships more than sex and men care about sex more than relationships, students generally accorded women sexual agency and desire in the hookup and validated men’s post-hookup relationship interest. However, in explaining the sexless date, students typically reasoned the woman was being chaste and withholding sex to redeem her reputation whereas they often characterized the man’s abstinence in terms of a pity date. The findings underscore the tenacity of gendered sexual scripts around heterosexual dates and hookups but also reveal fissures and contradictions that suggest some changes to the sexual double standard.

No abstract