Taking out the trash involves lifting something that’s usually heavy, twice. So the person that’s more likely to have the higher upper body strength handling it makes sense.
Which is why, as we all know, doing the laundry is a man’s job.
There’s also the mess factor, and a shit ton of people born before the eighties or so and after maybe 1900-ish definitely had a concept that women shouldn’t have to get dirty on a regular basis.
Oh yeah, that’s why changing baby’s diapers is almost always a man’s job.
I stuck to the topic of the post and didn’t veer off. Anyone wants to start a different branch of the discussion, that’s fine. But that’s not what the comment I responded to did. They complained that I didn’t expand on the topic.
No, the dismissing tone of the message providing this contradiction is the problem.
It does not have the form of simple nuances or counter-arguments. It has the form of an attack on the previous commenter’s credibility.
I’m just saying that it isn’t as single facet as the screen shot tries to make it. It is/was a product of a full cultural shift and it wasn’t as arbitrary as that makes it out to be.
I don’t think trying to provide a more nuanced explanation qualifies as a blanket statement…
My comment had an important follow up, posted only 7 minutes later, that makes your response to me quite silly.
But even if I ignore my follow-up comment, beacause you maybe didn’t even notice its existence… If you don’t know how to read a three-sentences message without ignoring the first two-and-a-half, I don’t know what to tell you.
And to be clear, about the core of these comments, form aside.
I do not fully agree with the explanations given, while I recognise the reasonning as sound. I am just pretty sure there were and still are additional contributing factors, especially when not focusing on the USA.
I do agree with thu counter examples. (Again, not with how these were given.)
If we talkin’ 'bout olden times and origins of tasks here ~ laundry was originally hand washed and scrubbed on a rack, then hung to dry. Tedious, yes; but also you’re doing One Piece of clothing at a time, which isn’t heavy at all.
Women did it because it took like half an entire day to do it. It was practically impossible for someone to work full time and also do this job. Washing machines were considered one of the great feminist liberation landmarks in history for a reason.
But once you bought a washing machine for your wife, then it was still their job… right? Not agreeing with it or anything, and it’s obviously sexist by modern standards; but that was the logic ~ it was sold as a convenience / gift.
“Tired of your wife wasting all day doing clothes? Buy the thing so she can do other stuff instead! Only $7500 (in modern currency)”
Damn, really makes me appreciate how cheap my current washing machine of $150 was…
Which is why, as we all know, doing the laundry is a man’s job.
Oh yeah, that’s why changing baby’s diapers is almost always a man’s job.
The examples in the post didn’t include those, so neither did I. Don’t read into it beyond the examples used
I stuck to the topic of the post and didn’t veer off. Anyone wants to start a different branch of the discussion, that’s fine. But that’s not what the comment I responded to did. They complained that I didn’t expand on the topic.
Ohhh providing examples that conflict with the narrative is complaining. Got it
No, the dismissing tone of the message providing this contradiction is the problem. It does not have the form of simple nuances or counter-arguments. It has the form of an attack on the previous commenter’s credibility.
If counter examples to highlight flaws in blanket statements are an attack to a person’s credibility then idk what to tell you.
I don’t think trying to provide a more nuanced explanation qualifies as a blanket statement…
My comment had an important follow up, posted only 7 minutes later, that makes your response to me quite silly.
But even if I ignore my follow-up comment, beacause you maybe didn’t even notice its existence… If you don’t know how to read a three-sentences message without ignoring the first two-and-a-half, I don’t know what to tell you.
That wasn’t very smart.
Pro-tip: if you don’t reply to a person, a message won’t go to their inbox.
Also your insult falls flat since you clearly don’t know how to edit a comment.
And to be clear, about the core of these comments, form aside. I do not fully agree with the explanations given, while I recognise the reasonning as sound. I am just pretty sure there were and still are additional contributing factors, especially when not focusing on the USA. I do agree with thu counter examples. (Again, not with how these were given.)
If we talkin’ 'bout olden times and origins of tasks here ~ laundry was originally hand washed and scrubbed on a rack, then hung to dry. Tedious, yes; but also you’re doing One Piece of clothing at a time, which isn’t heavy at all.
Women did it because it took like half an entire day to do it. It was practically impossible for someone to work full time and also do this job. Washing machines were considered one of the great feminist liberation landmarks in history for a reason.
But once you bought a washing machine for your wife, then it was still their job… right? Not agreeing with it or anything, and it’s obviously sexist by modern standards; but that was the logic ~ it was sold as a convenience / gift.
Damn, really makes me appreciate how cheap my current washing machine of $150 was…
That’s how we did diapers. The mother handles all the inputs, which is technically more because the baby is growing.
Random advertisement for cloth diapers, it’s less work than it sounds and saves crazy money.