Housework

Glazer-Malbin, Nona

doi:10.1086/493308

Cited by 28 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…During the 1960s, when American women increased their participation in the labor force, the participation of men in household tasks actually decreased (Robinson, 1977, p. 15). Men usually do much less household and family-related work than their employed wives (Glazer-Malbin, 1976) and this pattern appears whether the men themselves are employed or not, and regardless of the presence of young children in the household (Pinch and Storey, 1992). Women entering the labor market make changes in their daily activity patterns and divide their activities between home and work, but these changes do not affect men's daily activity patterns, which remain the same whether their wives are employed or not (Hanson and Hanson, 1980;Michelson, 1988).…”

Section: The Dual Role Of Womenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Differences in the Journey to Work

Blumen

1994

Urban Geography

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is now well established in geographic research that women commute shorter distances to work than men. This paper attempts to explore the common features that have emerged from the last two decades of research in various places within a metropolitan context. Three main sets of factors that may cause women to commute shorter distances are recognized: residence, employment, and transportation-each containing both social and spatial aspects. The analysis is centered around the spatial aspect. Most research on employed women seems to be characterized by distinguishing between the central city and the suburbs and thus the conclusions focus mostly upon this. An international comparison of different places shows that gender differences in commuting almost always are greater in the suburbs, from the point of view of both residential and employment dispersions. Directions for future research are suggested. Comparable methodologies will enable the inclusion of additional cities and will broaden the comparison. The examination of gender differences from the perspective of the dispersion of workplaces in metropolitan space should be further developed and analyzed according to a finer spatial scale than that used in looking at the central city vs. the suburbs. It also is suggested that factors of employment and residence should be analyzed differently so that qualitative methods may generate a greater significance for the factors associated with the domestic context. Finally, the investigation of gender differences in commuting and in the location of both residence and employment could lead to consideration of new conceptual frameworks for possible interaction between land used for both purposes within urban space.Gender differences in commuting patterns have been a focal point of study in feminist geography for almost 15 years, although there is even earlier documentation on this subject in geographic research. There currently is a vast accumulation of findings, and a review and comparison of those findings is needed. US. studies make up the preponderance of this literature, whereas studies from other Western societies provide only a modest amount of material. This paper examines the English-language literature on gender differences in the journey-to-work at the intraurban scale, and offers new directions and goals for future research within this subfield.A major spatial principle of feminist thought is coping with the separation between private and public spheres as feminine and masculine (Bondi, 1992). It has been argued that urban planning and urban landscapes reflect an "old" gender division of labor in which women function as housewives only, while men are mainly responsible for the economic needs of the family. The spatial expression of this division of labor is 223 224 ORNA BLUMEN seen in the growing separation between home and work, i.e., between land used for residence and land used for employment. This spatial organization ignores the needs of working women, who usually continue to take full responsibility for ho...

show abstract

Section: The Dual Role Of Womenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender Differences in the Journey to Work

Blumen

1994

Urban Geography

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…to precisely on the grounds that it suggests that efficiency is the main or the only distributive principle (Glazer, 1980;Glazer-Malbin, 1976). That objection seems reasonable.…”

Section: Features Of Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Children's household work: Its nature and functions.

Goodnow¹

1988

Psychological Bulletin

188

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children's household work presents a challenging research history, marked by promise and long standing and also by unfinished questions and studies more isolated from useful theoretical frameworks than they need be. Interest in the topic stems from the usefulness of children's work as a way of exploring a variety of issues: the development of prosocial or cooperative behavior, the fostering of responsibility, the nature of parental control or adult-guided learning, the acquisition of gender roles, and-more sociologically-the relation of children's household work to a family's socioeconomic status, a mother's paid work outside the home, and changes in concepts of childhood or child labor. Despite the extent of interest, questions still remain about why household work is expected at all, why it varies within and across families, how one form of work varies from another, and what positive or negative consequences flow from children's household work. Research on any of these issues and questions would benefit from an awareness of the range of data and conceptualizations available. With this benefit in mind, in this review I (a) draw together a literature scattered across several fields; (b) link past research to concepts used in some analyses of socialization, family functioning, and adults' household work; and (c) highlight issues that cut across studies and could be the focus of further research.For psychologists and sociologists, children's work around the house has long been a topic of considerable interest. The questions explored range from why work is done to who does it; how it is rewarded; how it affects later development; and how such conditions as family composition, socioeconomic status, or the prevailing concepts of children affect it. This article has three goals. The first is to pull together a literature that is scattered across several fields. The second is to provide research that is often descriptive with some useful theoretical frameworks, largely by linking studies of children's work to concepts used in general analyses of socialization, family relationships, and work (adults' household work in particular). The third is to point to a number of unfinished questions and research possibilities that could extend our understanding of children's work and feed back into our understanding of these general areas.The article opens with some topics that cut across the range of studies. These are the sources of interest in children's work, the features of activities given the label work, and some general aspects to the literature (e.g., the concern with both theoretical and social issues).The middle and largest part of the article is a review of base-My debts are several. Financial support came from the Australian Research Grants Committee and-during time at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford-from the Spencer Foundation. Two people in particular have expanded my knowledge: Joan Grusec in the area of prosocial behavior and Joan Hollinger in the area of legal studies of contrac...

show abstract

“…In some societies, households play an important role in local politics (Bowser and Patton 2004). While it may sound like households are made up of folks who work for the greater good of the group, this doesn't mean that conflicts don't arise and that everyone in a household is on equal footing (Blanton 1995;Glazer-Malbin 1976;Stewart-Abernathy 2004;Trocolli 1992).…”

Section: The Role Of Gender In African American Householdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whether for payment or not, these acts collectively represented the household economy. Household production was a central component of the household economy in that domestic labor resulted in products such as food, clothing, and home maintenance that ensured a family's well being (e.g., Glazer-Malbin 1976;Hagstrum 2001;Hendon 2006;Trocolli 1992;Wilk and Netting 1984).…”

Section: The Household Economy: Domestic Labormentioning

confidence: 99%