"Because Americans spend more hours at the office than Europeans, they spend fewer hours on tasks in the home: things like cooking, cleaning, and child care. This is especially true of American women, who... spend ten fewer hours a week on household jobs than European women do. Instead of doing these jobs themselves, Americans pay other people to do them.
In the American model, then, you work more hours and use the money you make to pay for the things you can’t do because you’re working…."
James Surowiecki in November's New Yorker
That James Surowiecki is a clever fellow.
I'm in the middle of his The Wisdom of Crowds right now.
There is a third way, though it's not pretty. It's where you spend more hours in the office and just let many things in the home go.
I'm sure that stuff is true for many, many people. However, for your Uncle Curtis, for instance, I just can't make myself spend $8 worth of quarters and 2 or 3 hours worth of my life to wash clothes (waiting for a washer, waiting for a dryer, etc.).
Because the folks across the street do it for, say, $12 or so while I'm at working making more than that $2/hour that I would be paying myself to do wash them myself.
Curtis, you have nailed the basic problem with the typical paean to Simpler Life. The tasks one is delegating are always defined as goodies like baking bread, embroidering smocks for the darling tots, and taking long hikes by the shore (instead of going to the gym).
Because I freelance and then teach in evening/weekend programs, I find it convenient to do my own housework. It's difficult to wax rhapsodic about scrubbing the kitchen floor, and most household upkeep tasks are about that exciting.
I am this close to getting a maid. Do I work too much? Probably. Would I rather spend my time scrubbing the toilet than working? Hell no!
MSN has a time value calculator
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/calcs/n_time/main.asp
I'd be curious as to whether this is really true (that Europeans do more of their own chores than Americans) and even if it is, the argument seems a bit reductive to me. (Granted, I haven't read the article.)
First, childcare: Europeans probably do spend more of their time caring for their own children, and why? Many countries give a year or more of maternity leave, and in some countries, that's full or partially paid leave. Paternity leave is also far more generous.
Second, there seems to be an inherent fallacy in the logic. *Most* people do not work to pay for help as their primary motive. Most people work because they need to, and part of their salary goes for some sort of help because their time is consumed by working. Also, most people who do not need to work hire help anyway. (At least all the non-working mothers of kids I went to school with did.)
And third, this premise just kind of rubs me the wrong way. What's the implication? Straight men used to count on their wives to take care of household chores. Now that most women work, that model doesn't really come into play as much.
Society is not very forgiving about men who do not work, and who stay home and tend to the house. Therefore, the only direction this argument seems to be going in is that women should work less and tend to their house more. Perhaps the article doesn't go there, but this snippet seems to imply that the European model is somehow better and more authentic.
Does the fulfillment that some people receive some work even factor in? Sure, if I could do anything, I probably wouldn't chose my job as my ideal. However, I'd choose my job over scrubbing floors everyday. I don't think there's any expectation for men to choose scrubbing floors.
It always amuses me how americans automatically bristle at comparisons to europeans. And yet, when one goes to europe, it seems they have a pretty nice lifestyle over there.
I think the comment about euros spending more time on "household" chores is not just a measurement of the maid's task, but instead a bread-basket of non-work tasks that are about quality of home life. I think a european mommy spending a little more time cooking for (and, presumably, eating with)her family has far greater worth than the US mommy stopping at Boston Chicken on the way home, tossing it to the kids and then running upstairs to catch up on her blackberry. Same for Euro dads who leave the office promptly at 5 and can get home to participate in family activities.
When I was a kid in Western Mass, all the dads except mine (who was a cook) left for home at 4:30pm, and lots of them were available to coach, run Boy Scouts, etc etc. I don't know who manages to do this in the NY suburbs when all the dads AND moms have to stay late to win the rat race.
Europe, of course, is struggling with the economic policies that have been in place since WW2, but it seems the people strongly desire to maintain their current quality of life and work-life balance. As our domestic diva would put it, "it's a good thing"!
I'm amused by the vision of the European mommy lovingly cooking for her family rather than getting takeout. In Paris, there were more numerous, more various, and more tempting takeaway stalls than I've seen here or in NYC. And they were all jammed with buyers in the hour or so between the end of the work day and dinner. Whatever Parisian Mommy is doing, she's not making dinner from scratch.
touche Wendy -- yes, food in Paris is fantastic (I am munching a a chicken provencal sandwich from a wonderful little place here in NYC called Musette -- the owner is from Paris -- delicieux!!!)
Obviously we are speaking in generalities (and, in general, europe is not all like Paris...) But I do feel it is safe to say the Europeans appreciate their time AWAY from the office. We, however, seem a bit neurotic on that point. Plus "we" eat scarey food.
Frank, I'm not sure who you think is "bristling" because I don't see any of that in this thread.
I agree that Europeans have a nicer lifestyle (although I think there's a danger of idealizing--go into European pubs after work and you'll meet some moms and dads not rushing home to coach soccer). All I'm saying is that the European setup is more conducive to working less, and we seem to agree about that. I think that's true throughout the US, too, although obviously, NYC is particularly bad.
more importantly: who knew james surowiecki was a hottie?
i love his column but always pictured him as the james kirkpatrick of economics.
not that jk isn't cute, just . . . very avuncular.
Sensing some bitterness here.
Scrub it you want...make millions if you want...just don't judge.
K, I just think it's interesting to discuss how different cultures have different approaches to family life. I would assume that, since this is posted here, discussion is invited (but I'm going to stop posting after this, because apparently, I'm coming off the wrong way).
Everyone can choose to do whatever they'd like (although, quite honestly, in this culture, I don't think men have the opportunity to opt out of the work force and still be respected). The point I'm trying to make is that we don't examine how different cultures facilitate family life with different support systems (or lack of support systems). I'm just saying that the excerpt here (which may be totally out of context) doesn't seem to examine the causes for this differences, and the premise seems superficial. *shrug*
I find this all very interesting, but like I said, perhaps this isn't the forum for it.
I have a friend who used to work at the Air and Space Museum; museum work is her career. She would work at Frager's Hardware on Capitol Hill on Saturdays so that she could pay her "housekeeper" to clean her apartment. She did *not* want to clean.
Working at Frager's on a Saturday is a *lot* harder than cleaning, but she just wanted *someone else* to clean.
Right on Fiona.
The Annie Proulx story that inspired Brokeback Mountain is at the top of that New Yorker link!
Jean, Your friend probably also got a great employee discount working at Frager's (a great hardware store)! And probably learned a lot too about all sorts of housey stuff too. Not that I'd want to spend my weekends that way. I'll just let me Roomba loose around the place while I go online...
Went to the newyorker to read the article and it's gone. Don't really understand why apartmenttherapy is quoting an article a month late anyhow, but whatever.
Me, it's not missing. It's right here.
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/051128ta_talk_surowiecki
OOOR, you can work all that time just to make ends meet, you bourgeois twats, sacrificing sleep and sanity to try and just pay bills on time or keep the trash from becoming mountainous.
I also find it interesting that the quote was not indicative of the tone of the entire article, for xample the conclusion:
"...part of the problem is that voluntary leisure for some Europeans has helped lead to involuntary leisure for others. The less work that gets done, the less work there is to do."
Regarding stay at home fathers, I think the "bias" is fairly nonexistent at least in Seattle. I work in an profession (nursing) where very few people, male or female, seem to work full time. I wouldn't want to associate with people who would be disdainful of that choice anyway, as it is a PERSONAL choice and we don't all have the same (money and stuff worshipping) values.
And speaking of bristling, Daniel, I'm disappointed that someone would choose to call others "twats" on our friendly forum. I believe that you've insulted my "twat", which I happen to be rather fond of.
I wouldn't be surprised if we see the endless workweek model that has been prominant in the American workplace begin to melt away in the coming decade. As a Human Resources professional, I follow trends in what workers value.
The generation that is entering the workplace right now (the so-called generation Y) in general has different values than the generation before them (the so-called generation x, which despite their initial billing as slackers has led the charge in the elongated workweek). The emerging workforce has put a higher value on quality of life than quality of salary. They are looking for jobs with flexible schedules, work-life balance, and unusual perks, and they seem to be willing to sacrifice a bit in the salary dept to get it.
I sure hope this trend continues.
Caitlin: sorry I didn't mean to come off so...well now I can't think of a good descriptor since they all do seem to have originated as a name for a body part or what is done with said body parts. I was going for a certain tone and obviously missed.
As for this anthropomorphized vagina, is it offended that I would associate it with "bourgeois [pick your colorful noun]," or because it thought I was referring directly to it with a derogatory name? If the latter, please assure it that I would never dream of doing so, and had in my ignorance actually forgotten the origin of the word I originally used to denounce what I perceived as upper-class Americans. Next time I will describe them simply as so.
well then, why don't the American men help with some of the cooking and cleaning so the American women don't have to hire people?