Women: at universities, in the kitchens, and identity issues ....

Came across two interesting essays, both about women and housework.  And both come at if from very different perspectives.

The first one is by Sandra Tsing Loh.  Loh, whose writings I have followed for a while, went to extent of even writing about her divorce, which included discussing her indiscretion.  In an essay in the Atlantic a few months ago, Loh wrote:

I am divorcing. This was a 20-year partnership. My husband is a good man, though he did travel 20 weeks a year for work. I am a 47-year-old woman whose commitment to monogamy, at the very end, came unglued. This turn of events was a surprise.

Anyway, that is now old news.  In her latest essay, in the NY Times, which is the one that caught my attention today, it appears that she is continuing with that story after all.  Loh writes, this time, about her identity at home and about housework and a "recurring 1950s housewife fantasy" as she calls it of Nancy and her husband Brad.  She notes that:

Nancy arrives at the end of her day so fully socialized with, she is ready to glaze over amiably during her husband’s evening Work Monologue, and perhaps even later, during their customary five minutes of intimate relations. Being mistress of her own domain much as Brad is master of his, Nancy enjoys total domestic authority and the job satisfaction that comes with it. Even more important, as Brad unambiguously earns all the money, Nancy has the relational contract of sheer gratitude to pull on, due to his clearly measurable value. If the mortgage weren’t paid, Nancy would have to live in the same house as, God forbid, her mother! By contrast, Brad is relatively low maintenance.

Yes, Stepford Wives indeed!  But, then I wonder to what extent such a fantasy is a reality--what percentage of working women dream about this and how intensely .... To what extent are working women "jealous" of the stay-at-home women who are their own bosses from the time the husband leaves for work until he returns?  Loh wraps it up with:

[As] the breadwinner, I wish to be the husband, and hence what I’m looking for is a wife — a loyal helpmeet who keeps the home fires burning and offers uncritical emotional support when I, the gladiator, return exhausted from the arena. Who are the (actively listening!) men without money who can adapt to such a role? ...

In the end, we all want a wife. But the home has become increasingly invaded by the ethos of work, work, work, with twin sets of external clocks imposed on a household’s natural rhythms. And in the transformation of men and women into domestic co-laborers, the Art of the Wife is fast disappearing.

I read this earlier in the day. Now, after a cup of coffee late in the afternoon, it was another essay (ht) with a different perspective about housework but with the focus on "How to keep talented women scientists in the lab, where they belong."  In this essay in Academe, the authors write:

based on data collected in 2006–07, show that despite women’s considerable gains in science in recent decades, female scientists do nearly twice as much housework as their male counterparts. Partnered women scientists at places like Stanford University do 54 percent of the cooking, cleaning, and laundry in their households; partnered men scientists do just 28 percent. This translates to more than ten hours a week for women— in addition to the nearly sixty hours a week they are already working as scientists—and to just five hours for men. When the call came from Stockholm early one October morning, Nobel Prize– winner Carol W. Greider was not working in her lab or sleeping. She was doing laundry. She is far from alone. Highly talented women scientists are investing substantial time in housework.

I loved their observation that Greider was doing laundry when the Nobel people called.  It might have been a coincidence, after all, but a coincidence that is consistent with the statistical data.  So what can be done about this, you ask?  They have the most innovative proposal I have ever come across, and I think it has great value:

Many universities already offer retirement, health-care, and child-care supplements; some even support housing and tuition benefits. We recommend that institutions provide a package of flexible benefits that employees can customize to support aspects of their private lives in ways that save time and enhance professional productivity. Institutions need to think of housework benefits as part of the structural cost of doing business. With lab costs running into the millions of dollars, supporting the human resource involved—scientists’ ability to be more productive—takes full advantage of investments in space and equipment.

And, I really like this point they make:

Employee needs can change over the course of a lifetime. Younger people, for example, may need assistance with household labor when salaries are low. Those who have children may choose to put resources into child care and later into college tuition. Some employees may need help with elder care. A flexible benefits package—providing a specific yearly dollar amount—could be used for any aspect of private life that saves employee time and hence enhances productivity. One appealing aspect of this benefit proposal is its inclusivity—one need not be partnered or have children to gain access to the full range of services under its umbrella.

You read until here? Really? Then, here is a bonus for you :)