Scan barcode
lizinthelibrary's review against another edition
5.0
I've been meaning to read this book forever and I am so glad it was feminist book club pick during the last month of my maternity leave with my second child. As the book repeatedly says the first child is a challenge, the second is a crisis. It was hard to discuss this book on a societal level because it seems so personal. I was born in 1982, my parents were the couples in this book, and I see in them some of the choices they made and didn't make. And now a generation later, we are both farther and still fighting some of these same battles. More men seem to take for granted that they will share the second shift, though not always equitably. However we still lack family friendly policies that would really help working parents. A group of 80s babies had a ton to discuss when we read together this book as we start to have our own babies.
Everyone should read this.
Everyone should read this.
alexpghayes's review against another edition
3.0
i read the 2012 edition, which was confusing as hell; a large portion of the book is narrated in first person but it's impossible to tell if it's set in the 1980s or the aughts since most of the narrative is from the 80s study, but many of the statistics are much more recent. the ethnography in here is great; hearing married couples talk about how they split labor is really interesting. the theoretical explanation laid over these accounts is less satisfying; a large portion of the book feels more pop than science. at times, this is really frustrating, especially when hochschild reiterates the shallow talking points about the "stalled revolution", the "patriarchy", or the "changing economy" for the 20th time. i understood this to be a foundational piece of work in the sociological canon, but i would probably read something more modern instead--perhaps 'all the rage', which is next on my list
aksharathejaswi's review against another edition
5.0
Within the space of gender economics/sociology, I struggle to name a book as current and comprehensive as The Second Shift. What I particularly liked about it was that it wasn't simply a neatly organized compilation of statistics, studies, and occasional historical references; this went a step further by opening some interesting (and, at times, upsetting) dialogue about the subjects' beliefs compared to their realities, and highlighting common instances of cognitive dissonance that affects relationships.
The Second Shift explores something most women already know or have experienced - although we are told we can have both a career and a family, we are at a huge disadvantage when it comes to sharing housework and child-rearing responsibilities, at least when it comes to heterosexual relationships. Although heterosexual dual-career couples were the primary focus in this book, it would be interesting to eventually see these studies extended out to same-sex dual-career couples, both with and without kids.
Some things that stuck out in this book:
- Rather than confronting the reality of their imbalanced relationships, an astounding amount of couples resorted to telling themselves varying "marriage myths" in order to keep the peace (disproportionately shifting labor distribution in favor of the men). Some of the anecdotes here were horrifying, and so was the finding that many marriages end in divorce rather than compromise when men are urged to contribute more equally to the household. Marriage currently benefits men more than it benefits women, and men also enjoy far better outcomes after divorce.
- Even in relationships that were more equally balanced, external forces (differing workplace expectations for men and women, societal norms around masculinity, and other cultural/social expectations) created significant tension.
- When it comes to embracing changing social norms, women have adapted at a much faster rate than men have.
A lot of this boils down to one question: why are men rarely part of the equation when discussing how the working woman can "have it all" even though it ultimately affects them negatively as well? The conversation is so centered around how individual women can work within the existing system and how they can cope with the increasing demands on their time and energy.
What we don't talk enough about the other side of the coin: 1) the biggest issue is that current system isn't built to support women who prefer to focus on their career, or men who prefer to stay at home (e.g. maternity leave laws, the pay gap, the leisure gap); 2) in order for women to manage both a fulfilling career and family life, men need to step up and take on a bigger role inside the home, especially since doing so directly benefits them and their family unit as a whole. Before we can do this, we need to change how we socialize these roles and make them less gender-specific to remove any associated stigma or pressure.
Without first addressing cultural attitudes towards what roles women and men should hold, any meaningful systemic change through legislation will likely be slow-moving and unsuccessful.
The Second Shift explores something most women already know or have experienced - although we are told we can have both a career and a family, we are at a huge disadvantage when it comes to sharing housework and child-rearing responsibilities, at least when it comes to heterosexual relationships. Although heterosexual dual-career couples were the primary focus in this book, it would be interesting to eventually see these studies extended out to same-sex dual-career couples, both with and without kids.
Some things that stuck out in this book:
- Rather than confronting the reality of their imbalanced relationships, an astounding amount of couples resorted to telling themselves varying "marriage myths" in order to keep the peace (disproportionately shifting labor distribution in favor of the men). Some of the anecdotes here were horrifying, and so was the finding that many marriages end in divorce rather than compromise when men are urged to contribute more equally to the household. Marriage currently benefits men more than it benefits women, and men also enjoy far better outcomes after divorce.
- Even in relationships that were more equally balanced, external forces (differing workplace expectations for men and women, societal norms around masculinity, and other cultural/social expectations) created significant tension.
- When it comes to embracing changing social norms, women have adapted at a much faster rate than men have.
A lot of this boils down to one question: why are men rarely part of the equation when discussing how the working woman can "have it all" even though it ultimately affects them negatively as well? The conversation is so centered around how individual women can work within the existing system and how they can cope with the increasing demands on their time and energy.
What we don't talk enough about the other side of the coin: 1) the biggest issue is that current system isn't built to support women who prefer to focus on their career, or men who prefer to stay at home (e.g. maternity leave laws, the pay gap, the leisure gap); 2) in order for women to manage both a fulfilling career and family life, men need to step up and take on a bigger role inside the home, especially since doing so directly benefits them and their family unit as a whole. Before we can do this, we need to change how we socialize these roles and make them less gender-specific to remove any associated stigma or pressure.
Without first addressing cultural attitudes towards what roles women and men should hold, any meaningful systemic change through legislation will likely be slow-moving and unsuccessful.
mothwing's review against another edition
3.0
This makes me feel even sadder for average heterosexual couples and even more confused as to why many of the ones I know are even together. If I was raising children with someone who needed a support staff around at all times to prop up their frail gender ID I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with them, that sounds so incredibly unattractive to me. I prefer a partner who can pull her own weight.
terpjess's review
4.0
I would say every woman needs to read this (and they should), but really every MAN should read this. Infamous research that is still shockingly relevant today, 30 years later. We are in a "stalled revolution" indeed. I both liked and disliked that Hochschild seemed to focus on middle/upper class families, as it was easy for me to relate to but I would've liked a more complete picture.
afterwordsbooks's review
3.0
Hoped to finish this book with a big sigh of relief and a "thank-goodness-we've-come-so-far-since-then". Disappointed to find that no huge strides have been made (based on personal experience and of those close to me) and that we still lag miles behind other countries who benefit from government policies that support families, helping them to find that elusive balance between career, family/marriage.
Hitting hardest, the author reflects on "marital clashes [that] reflect a broader social tension- between faster-changing women and slower-changing men. .... More important, over the last thirty years, men's underlying feelings about taking responsibility at home have changed much less than women's feelings have changed about forging some kind of identity of work." At first publication in 1989, it's pathetic that this still rings woefully true.
Speaking to divorce rates in our country, not surprisingly "Sharing the second shift improved a marriage regardless of what ideas either had about men's and women's roles. Whether they were traditional or egalitarian, couples were happier when the men did more housework and child care."
The author's call to action, "in the era of a stalled revolution, one way to reverse this devaluation is for men to share in that devalued work, [homemaking, child rearing] and thereby help to revalue it. Many working mothers are already doing all they can at home. Now it's time for met to make the move. In an age of divorce, marriage itself can be at stake."
Really? No kidding....
Hitting hardest, the author reflects on "marital clashes [that] reflect a broader social tension- between faster-changing women and slower-changing men. .... More important, over the last thirty years, men's underlying feelings about taking responsibility at home have changed much less than women's feelings have changed about forging some kind of identity of work." At first publication in 1989, it's pathetic that this still rings woefully true.
Speaking to divorce rates in our country, not surprisingly "Sharing the second shift improved a marriage regardless of what ideas either had about men's and women's roles. Whether they were traditional or egalitarian, couples were happier when the men did more housework and child care."
The author's call to action, "in the era of a stalled revolution, one way to reverse this devaluation is for men to share in that devalued work, [homemaking, child rearing] and thereby help to revalue it. Many working mothers are already doing all they can at home. Now it's time for met to make the move. In an age of divorce, marriage itself can be at stake."
Really? No kidding....
wendybird's review against another edition
4.0
http://maybesbooks.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-second-shift-working-families-and.html