Gender Issues

, Volume 34, Issue 1, pp 44–66 | Cite as

“This Should be My Responsibility”: Gender, Guilt, Privilege and Paid Domestic Work

Original Article

Abstract

Although women’s presence in the labor force has shown a marked increase, much of the existing research on housework suggests that for heterosexual families men’s and women’s housework contributions remain unequal. Scholars of domestic labor suggest that this influx of privileged women into the labor force, coupled with growing income inequality has caused an increase in the demand for paid domestic labor. This re-delegation of domestic labor may in some ways represent a threat to privileged women’s self image as caring for family has been inextricably part of the ideological construction of what constitutes a good wife and mother. Research demonstrates that even as families hire someone for domestic/cleaning labor women feel “obligated” to retain control of its’ supervision. This is not necessarily challenging the existing gendered division of labor but rather displacing housework along raced and classed lines. Utilizing data from 30 qualitative interviews with white class privileged women who hire domestic workers; this paper explores the motivations for hiring domestic workers, the ways in which participants conceptualized this labor as gendered, and finally how they navigated the guilt that often times accompanied hiring domestic workers.

Keywords

Gender Family Labor Domestic work 

References

  1. 1.
    Amott, T., & Matthaei, J. (1996). Race, gender & work: A multicultural economic history of women in the United States. Boston, MA: South End Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, B. (2001). Just another Job? Paying for domestic work. Gender and Development, 9, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bernard, R. H. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coltrane, S. (2001). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. In R. M. Milardo (Ed.), Understanding families into the new millennium: A decade in review. Minneapolis, MN: National Council on Family Relations.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Douglas, S., & Michaels, M. (2004). The mommy myth: The idealization of motherhood and how it has undermined all women. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ehrenreich, B. (2004). Maid to order: The politics of other women’s work. In A. R. Hochschild & B. Ehrenreich (Eds.), Global women: Nannies, maids, and sex workers in the new economy. New York, NY: Owl Books.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ehrenreich, B., & Hochschild, A. R. (2004). Introduction. In B. Ehrenreich & A. R. Hochschild (Eds.), Global women: Nannies, maids, and sex workers in the new economy. New York, NY: Owl Books.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eisenstein, Z. (1979). Capitalist patriarchy and the case for socialist feminism. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Friedan, B. (1963). The feminine mystique. New York, NY: Dell Publishing Company Incorporated.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Higginbotham, E. (1994). Black professional women: Job ceilings and employment sectors. In M. B. Zinn & B. T. Dill (Eds.), Women of color in USA society. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hill Collins, P. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hill Collins, P. (1986). Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of black feminist thought. Social Problems, 93, 6.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hochschild, A. R. (2004). Love and gold. In A. R. Hochschild & B. Ehrenreich (Eds.), Global women: Nannies, maids, and sex workers in the new economy. New York, NY: Owl Books.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hochschild, A. R. (2003). The second shift: Working parents and the revolution at home. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hochschild, A. R. (2003). The managed hand: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gonalons-Pons, P. (2015). Gender and class housework inequalities in the era of outsourcing hiring domestic workers in Spain. Social Science Research, 52, 208–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hooks, B. (1984) Feminist theory: From margin to center. Boston, MA: South End Press. (1981) A’int I a Woman. Boston, MA: South End Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. (2001). Doméstica: Immigrant workers cleaning and caring in the shadows of affluence. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kang, M. (2003). The managed hand: The commercialization of bodies and emotions in Korean immigrant owned Nail Salons. Gender and Society, 17, 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kroska, A. (2004). Divisions of domestic work: Revising and expanding the theoretical explanations. Journal of Family Issues, 25, 900–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lachance-Grzela, M., & Bouchard, G. (2010). Why do women do the Lion’s share of housework? A decade of research. Sex Roles, 11(12), 767–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lorber, J. (2001). Gender inequality: Feminist theories and politics. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Press.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mattingly, D. J. (2001). The home and the world: Domestic service and international networks of caring labor. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 91, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    McCall, L. (2001). Complex inequality: Gender, class and race in the new economy. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moras, A. (2010). Colour-blind discourses in paid domestic work: Foreignness and the delineation of alternative racial markers. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 33(2), 233–252.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Moras, A. (2013). The role of maternalism in contemporary paid domestic work. Sociology Mind, 3(3), 248.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nakano Glenn, E. (1992). From servitude to service work: Historical continuities in the racial division of paid reproductive labor. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 18, 1–43. Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Perales, F., Baxter, J., & Tai, T-o. (2015). Gender, justice and work: A distributive approach to perceptions of housework fairness. Social Science Research, 51, 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Robinson, J., & Spitze, G. (1992) Whistle while you work? The effect of household task performance on women’s and men’s well-being. Social Science Quarterly, 73, 844–861.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rollins, J. (1986). Between women: Domestics and their employers. Phildelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Romero, M. (2002). Maid in the U.S.A. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Romero, M. (1997). Life as the maid’s daughter. In M. Romero, P. Hondagneu-Sotelo, & V. Ortiz (Eds.), Challenging fronteras: Structuring Latina and Latino lives in the U.S. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Smith, D. (1987). The everyday world as problematic. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Thorton-Dill, B. (1994). Across the boundaries of race and class: An exploration of work and family among black female domestic servants. New York, NY: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    US Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2012). Women in the labor force: A databook. Washington, D.C.: US Department of Labor.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    US Census Bureau. (2000). Neighborhood fact sheets. http://factfinder.census.gov.
  41. 41.
    Vijayasiri, G. (2001). The allocation of housework: Extending the gender display approach. Gender Issues, 28(3), 155–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Walker, A. (1999). Gender and family relationships. In M. Sussman, S. K. Steinmetz, & G. W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 439–474). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sacred Heart UniversityFairfieldUSA

Personalised recommendations