“Second wave feminism was initially focused on the boredom and isolation experienced by middle and upper-middle class stay at home mothers” --> I wonder how much this was also a response to geographic mobility and technology. In earlier societies, people moved around less. They were more socially connected, with all of their childhood fr…
“Second wave feminism was initially focused on the boredom and isolation experienced by middle and upper-middle class stay at home mothers” --> I wonder how much this was also a response to geographic mobility and technology. In earlier societies, people moved around less. They were more socially connected, with all of their childhood friends nearby. Thus, stay at home mothers likely spent much more time with friends. Hence, less boredom. Also, without modern technology, house work was much more taxing: washing clothes was not a 2 second chore of pressing a button, but a 45-minute chore of hand washing. Hence, less boredom.
However, in my opinion, the feminist movement is BEST explained by the rising value of intellectual labor with technology. With the rise of automation, the most valuable jobs became jobs which involved thinking (rather than physical labor), something men and women are equally good at. Thus, the culture evolved toward that which maximized productivity: having both genders work.
Yes, I think the increased mobility likely contributed to that isolation as well.
You're right that the opportunity cost to women staying out of the labor market increased as a higher percentage of well compensated jobs became either "thinking oriented" or "service oriented". I'm definitely not against women working and there are lots of highly productive ambitious women that wouldn't be satisfied staying home with kids who we want to contribute economically. But some women are most satisfied staying home with kids and that choice should be respected. I think most women I know would ideally take several years off of working while they have young kids (or at least work less) and then return at some point.
Agree that choice is ideal. Unfortunately, I think people are quite status oriented. And status is zero sum: if someone is high, another must be low. The cultural shift which drove women to work branded working as high status and empowered (in liberal areas, at least). This inevitably branded non-working women as low status and unempowered. Thus, I think it is quite difficult to achieve a culture which encourages and celebrates female labor while not denigrating its inverse (stay-at-home moms).
“Second wave feminism was initially focused on the boredom and isolation experienced by middle and upper-middle class stay at home mothers” --> I wonder how much this was also a response to geographic mobility and technology. In earlier societies, people moved around less. They were more socially connected, with all of their childhood friends nearby. Thus, stay at home mothers likely spent much more time with friends. Hence, less boredom. Also, without modern technology, house work was much more taxing: washing clothes was not a 2 second chore of pressing a button, but a 45-minute chore of hand washing. Hence, less boredom.
However, in my opinion, the feminist movement is BEST explained by the rising value of intellectual labor with technology. With the rise of automation, the most valuable jobs became jobs which involved thinking (rather than physical labor), something men and women are equally good at. Thus, the culture evolved toward that which maximized productivity: having both genders work.
Yes, I think the increased mobility likely contributed to that isolation as well.
You're right that the opportunity cost to women staying out of the labor market increased as a higher percentage of well compensated jobs became either "thinking oriented" or "service oriented". I'm definitely not against women working and there are lots of highly productive ambitious women that wouldn't be satisfied staying home with kids who we want to contribute economically. But some women are most satisfied staying home with kids and that choice should be respected. I think most women I know would ideally take several years off of working while they have young kids (or at least work less) and then return at some point.
Agree that choice is ideal. Unfortunately, I think people are quite status oriented. And status is zero sum: if someone is high, another must be low. The cultural shift which drove women to work branded working as high status and empowered (in liberal areas, at least). This inevitably branded non-working women as low status and unempowered. Thus, I think it is quite difficult to achieve a culture which encourages and celebrates female labor while not denigrating its inverse (stay-at-home moms).