,
15 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
I was going to stick w sarcasm but as an actual gender studies prof, there's just so much to unpack here, I can't help myself. THREAD! 1/
Care work (for children, infirm, elderly) is necessary for human flourishing & has been traditionally performed by women for free, which 2/
contributes to women's lesser financial & politics power. As care work has moved into the market, it remains poorly paid & overwhelmingly 3/
female, which again makes women more vulnerable. We ❤️to laud a woman "cradling her child" but don't provide paid maternity leave or 5/
support quality childcare & good pay/benefits for childcare workers (women, immigrants). But wait! There's more! 6/
As budgets for care work (mental health, health care) have been cut, a lot of that work has shifted to agencies like police & fire, who 7/
often lack training & capacity, and result in troubling outcomes. At same time, economists note that a central challenge to male workers 8/
is skills mismatch - men reluctant to take jobs in expanding care sector, partly bc jobs are "female", partly bc they are low paying, low 9/
prestige (bc their "women's jobs"). IN SUM your rigid and illogical sexual division of labor, & related hierarchy of value, hurts both 10/
women & men, the US economy, & the flourishing of society as a whole. The value of work - holding the baby or carrying the mother - 11/
should be recognized & rewarded, no matter who performs it. Given how much care is needed, all hands on deck. /end for now
Ugh, "they're." Disregard all my opinions, I can't spell on line.
For the record I realize the poster (who I won't tag) is a provacatuer. I don't intend to engage or convince him. This is for everyone else.
On the point about policing & care work see jratcliffe.net/blog/policing-…
On the point about the growth of care sector work and men's employment, follow economist @BetseyStevenson
