In another breathtakingly stupid article, devoid of any analysis other than the progressive cant, taught apparently at every journalism school in America, The NY Times beclowns itself with this:
In countries around the world, the ways in which men and women spend their time are unbalanced. Men spend more time working for money. Women do the bulk of the unpaid work — cooking, cleaning and child care.
This unpaid work is essential for households and societies to function. But it is also valued less than paid work, and when it is women’s responsibility, it prevents them from doing other things.
Well yes, unpaid work is, by definition, valued less than paid work. But so what? Had they really followed this to its logical conclusion, they would have discovered that women do other things that are often unpaid, like giving birth to children. Or for that matter, having intercourse with their husbands. Should that be considered unpaid work?
The reporter’s penetrating analysis didn’t address the fact that the work day is longer in some countries, that cultural norms drive division of labor independent of the brutal patriarchy, that some countries have more automation available because of wealth, that some quantity of labor is linked to home size, family size, and a host of other variables that make this facile article a worthless attempt at promoting the concept that women are the victims of just about everything.
One day these people will realize that men and women are different. Until then, we will get grade-school level analysis of complex economic exchanges, and ignorant assumptions that people aren’t just equal, they are fungible.