{"title":"机会还是剥削?弹性工作制与性别家庭劳动不平等的纵向二元分析","authors":"Senhu Wang, Cheng Cheng","doi":"10.1093/sf/soad125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It has been extensively debated over whether the rise of flexible working arrangements (FWAs) may be an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian gender division of household labor or reinforce the “exploitation” of women in the traditional gender division. Drawing on a linked-lives perspective, this study contributes to the literature by using longitudinal couple-level dyadic data in the UK (2010–2020) to examine how couple-level arrangements of flexible working affect within-couple inequality in time and different types of household labor. The results show that among heterosexual couples, women’s use of FWAs significantly intensifies their disproportionate share of housework and maintains their heavy childcare burden regardless of whether their husbands use FWAs. In contrast, men’s use of FWAs does not change the unequal gendered division of housework and childcare, even when their wives do not use any FWAs. These patterns of intensified gender inequalities are more pronounced in routine housework tasks (e.g., cooking, washing, and cleaning), and among the reduced hours and teleworking arrangements. Overall, rather than providing an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian division of household labor, the use of FWAs maintains or even exacerbates the “exploitation” of women under the existing traditional gender norms.","PeriodicalId":48400,"journal":{"name":"Social Forces","volume":"10 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Opportunity or Exploitation? A Longitudinal Dyadic Analysis of Flexible Working Arrangements and Gender Household Labor Inequality\",\"authors\":\"Senhu Wang, Cheng Cheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/sf/soad125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It has been extensively debated over whether the rise of flexible working arrangements (FWAs) may be an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian gender division of household labor or reinforce the “exploitation” of women in the traditional gender division. Drawing on a linked-lives perspective, this study contributes to the literature by using longitudinal couple-level dyadic data in the UK (2010–2020) to examine how couple-level arrangements of flexible working affect within-couple inequality in time and different types of household labor. The results show that among heterosexual couples, women’s use of FWAs significantly intensifies their disproportionate share of housework and maintains their heavy childcare burden regardless of whether their husbands use FWAs. In contrast, men’s use of FWAs does not change the unequal gendered division of housework and childcare, even when their wives do not use any FWAs. These patterns of intensified gender inequalities are more pronounced in routine housework tasks (e.g., cooking, washing, and cleaning), and among the reduced hours and teleworking arrangements. Overall, rather than providing an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian division of household labor, the use of FWAs maintains or even exacerbates the “exploitation” of women under the existing traditional gender norms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48400,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Forces\",\"volume\":\"10 7\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Forces\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soad125\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Forces","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soad125","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Opportunity or Exploitation? A Longitudinal Dyadic Analysis of Flexible Working Arrangements and Gender Household Labor Inequality
It has been extensively debated over whether the rise of flexible working arrangements (FWAs) may be an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian gender division of household labor or reinforce the “exploitation” of women in the traditional gender division. Drawing on a linked-lives perspective, this study contributes to the literature by using longitudinal couple-level dyadic data in the UK (2010–2020) to examine how couple-level arrangements of flexible working affect within-couple inequality in time and different types of household labor. The results show that among heterosexual couples, women’s use of FWAs significantly intensifies their disproportionate share of housework and maintains their heavy childcare burden regardless of whether their husbands use FWAs. In contrast, men’s use of FWAs does not change the unequal gendered division of housework and childcare, even when their wives do not use any FWAs. These patterns of intensified gender inequalities are more pronounced in routine housework tasks (e.g., cooking, washing, and cleaning), and among the reduced hours and teleworking arrangements. Overall, rather than providing an “opportunity” for a more egalitarian division of household labor, the use of FWAs maintains or even exacerbates the “exploitation” of women under the existing traditional gender norms.
期刊介绍:
Established in 1922, Social Forces is recognized as a global leader among social research journals. Social Forces publishes articles of interest to a general social science audience and emphasizes cutting-edge sociological inquiry as well as explores realms the discipline shares with psychology, anthropology, political science, history, and economics. Social Forces is published by Oxford University Press in partnership with the Department of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.