American Househusbands: New Time Use Evidence of Gender Display, 2003–2016
The traditional gendered division of household labor, where women did the bulk of all domestic labor, is eroding. The literature on housework, however, does not discuss the ways how to test for the non-traditional gender performances. Using the American Time Use Survey (2003–2016), the present study fills in this research gap and re-tests the relationship between relative earnings and the performance of housework. The analysis of women’s time spent on domestic work shows that the traditional gender display explanation still applies to women’s participation in routine tasks such as cooking and cleaning. Thus, breadwinning wives display gender neutralizing behavior and ‘do’ gender. On the other hand, American men show non-normative gender behavior in cooking and cleaning, but not in maintenance, where they still ‘do’ gender. This paper unveils a persistent traditional gender performance of women in housework and a new pattern for men’s involvement in indoor routine housework.
KeywordsGender inequality in unpaid labor Gender Housework Gendered division of labor Gender display Doing gender
- Baxter, J., & Hewitt, B. (2013). Negotiating domestic labor: Women’s earnings and housework time in Australia. Feminist Economics, 19(1), 29–53.Google Scholar
- Blood, R. O., & Wolfe, D. M. (1960). Husbands and wives, the dynamics of married living. Marriage and family living (Vol. 23). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
- Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016a). American Time Use Survey, Washington, DC. http://www.bls.gov/tus/. Accessed August 15, 2016.
- Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016b). Regional and state employment and unemployment archived news releases. http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/laus_nr.htm#2003. Accessed September 9, 2016.
- Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hartmann, H. I., & Reskin, B. F. (Eds.). (1986). Women’s work, men’s work: Sex segregation on the job. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
- Hofferth, S. L., & Casper, L. M. (2007). Handbook of measurement issues in family research. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hofferth, S. L., Flood, S. M., & Sobek, M. (2015). American Time Use Survey Data Extract System: Version 2.5 [machine-readable database]. College Park, MD: Maryland Population Research Center, University of Maryland and Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Population Center, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
- Neuman, N., Gottzén, L., & Fjellström, C. (2015). Narratives of progress: Cooking and gender equality among Swedish men. Journal of Gender Studies, 9236(January), 1–13.Google Scholar
- Robinson, J. P. (1985). The validity and reliability of diaries versus alternative time use measures. In F. T. Juster & F. P. Stafford (Eds.), Time, goods, and well-being (pp. 33–62). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
- Roth, J. (2016). Reading Current Population Survey (CPS) data with SAS, SPSS, or Stata. National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/data/cps_progs.html. Accessed August 10, 2016.
- Scanzoni, J. (1980). Family decision-making: A developmental sex-role model. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar