‘There's a huge gulf between me as a male carer and women': Gender, domestic responsibility, and the community as an institutional arena
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the persistent link between women and domestic responsibility, a link that has been heavily documented and yet much less frequently theorised. Drawing on a qualitative research project with a 'critical case' study sample of couples trying to share housework and childcare in Britain in the early 1990s the paper argues that part of this puzzle linking women and domestic responsibility can be addressed by adopting wider definitions of domestic responsibility and of community. While domestic responsibility is often conceived as family labour that occurs within families/households, it also has inter-household, inter-institutional and community dimensions. With regard to a wider conceptualisation of the community, the paper argues that the community is more than a social institution; it is an institutional arena within which families/households, inter-household relations, community-based social networks and a wide array of community activities occur. The overall findings and implications of the research presented in this paper are three-fold. First, gendered socially constructed norms and gendered community-based social networks are highlighted as important factors that help to account for the persistent link between women and domestic responsibility. Second, taking cues from research carried out in Third World and low-income Western communities, it is important to shift research agendas on domestic divisions of labour to focus not only on intra-household divisions but also inter-household and intra-community relations. Third, the need is highlighted for greater attention to the links between socially constructed norms on masculinities, men's friendships and domestic responsibility. Este articulo explora la conexión persistente entre las mujeres y la responsabilidad doméstica. Se ha documentado mucho veces esta conexión pero se ha teorizado muy pocas veces. Se hace uso de una investigación cualitativa con un estudio tipo 'caso crítico' del cual proviene una muestra de parejas que intentan compartir las tareas domésticas y el cuidado de los niños, y se sostiene que se puede tratar parte de este enigma que une a las mujeres con la responsabilidad doméstica si se adoptan unas definiciones mas amplias de la responsabilidad doméstica y de la comunidad. Mientras que a menudo se suele concebir la responsabilidad doméstica como trabajo familiar que tiene lugar dentro de las familias/los hogares, también tiene dimensiones inter-hogares, inter-institucionales y comunitarias. Con respecto a una conceptualización mas amplia de la comunidad, este artículo sostiene que la comunidad es más que una institución social; es un ruedo institucional (Goetz, 1997) dentro del cual se encuentran las familias/los hogares, las relaciones inter-hogares, las redes sociales basadas en la comunidad y una amplia gama de actividades comunitarias. Tienen tres aspectos las conclusiones e implicaciones globales que se presentan en este artículo. Primero, se ponen de relieve las connotaciones de género, que se evidencian en las normas sociales y en las redes sociales basadas en la comunidad, como factores importantes que ayudan a explicar la conexión persistente entre las mujeres y la responsabilidad doméstica. Segundo, es importante seguir el ejemplo de investigaciones realizadas en el tercer mundo y en las comunidades occidentales de bajos ingresos, y cambiar el enfoque de las investigaciones de las divisiones domésticas del labor para centrarse no sólo en las divisiones entre el hogar sino también en las relaciones entre los hogares y entre la comunidad. Tercero, realzo la necesidad de prestar mas atencion a los vínculos entre las normas sociales sobre las masculinidades, las amistades entre los hombres y la responsabilidad doméstica.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".