Difference between revisions of "426--Week 4 Questions/Comments--Tuesday"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Boydston) |
|||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
I the statement that the made the most sense to me was that the reason industrial capitalism grew was because of the denial of the economic value of housework. This really seemed to make a lot of sense to me. It seemed that as long as men had control over the family's income women would never truly be considered able to contribute to the family's economic growth. While they do accept the fact that women do work at home, such as, caring for the children or cooking and cleaning, they still hold the belief that their work had little to no economic value. -- Kellye Sorber | I the statement that the made the most sense to me was that the reason industrial capitalism grew was because of the denial of the economic value of housework. This really seemed to make a lot of sense to me. It seemed that as long as men had control over the family's income women would never truly be considered able to contribute to the family's economic growth. While they do accept the fact that women do work at home, such as, caring for the children or cooking and cleaning, they still hold the belief that their work had little to no economic value. -- Kellye Sorber | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Interesting''': I thought that this article concerning the value of housework was fascinating. The process Boydston used to approximate the monetary value of women's housework and labor was something that I had never contemplated doing. However, I am not terribly familiar with what the average wage would have been for a working male laborer so it was hard for me to understand exactly how much she was bringing in compared to her husband. It is unfortunate that women were not recognized by their husbands, or by society, for their work in providing for themselves and their families. --Sarah Gardner | ||
== Mintz & Kellogg == | == Mintz & Kellogg == | ||
