MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? - Tartu Ãlikool

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GENDER DIFFERENCES IN TIME USE Spain, and the smallest in Bulgaria and Slovenia. There is greater inequality in the division of works in countries with a more traditional role allocation. Men spend at least one hour more than women on employment, while women spend at least one hour more than men on household and family care. Taking both types of work into account, we can see that in Sweden, Norway and the United Kingdom the total committed time is almost equal for males and females. The largest gender differences in total committed time were observed in Bulgaria and Italy, where women work for nearly one and a half hours a day more than men. In Estonia, the total committed time of women in the age group 20–74 is one hour longer than that of men. Division of work and total committed time Gender differences in allocation of time for different types of work can be observed in many countries (Aliaga and Winqvist 2003; McGinnity and Russell 2008, Sayer, England et al. 2004). While men spend on average more time on employment, women are mainly occupied with household and family care. This division of work derives from the past when man as the breadwinner was the predominant model: going to work and earning money was a man’s duty, while women were mainly in charge of home and only a few of them were employed (Wharton 2005). When women entered the labour market en masse after World War II, the duration of time spent by women on employment increased and families with two breadwinners became quite common. Nevertheless, gender roles have not disappeared in the society – men have been significantly less eager in entering traditional ‘female’ areas than women in entering the labour market (McGinnity and Russell 2008). Arguably, this has resulted in a much higher total workload for women – they have a ‘second shift’ at home after paid employment (Hochschild and Machung 1989). However, gender differences in the length of total committed time are unclear. The idea of an additional shift can be interpreted verbally by concluding that women have redoubled their workload. This approach would mean large differences between women and men in the length of total committed time. A more widely accepted view is that due to lengthening of the time spent on employment, women have reduced, but not to an equivalent extent, the time spent by them on household and family care. It means that the total committed time is longer for women than for men, but gender differences are relatively small (McGinnity and Russell 2008; Bittman and Wajcman1999). In Estonia, the division of work between women and men has developed somewhat differently than in western countries. Even though women and men have been in the labour market on a relatively equal basis for lots of years, this has not led to equality in the time spent on household care (Vainu 2010). In part, this is due to historical reasons. There was ostensible equality between sexes during the Soviet period, with both women and men being active in the labour market. However, this equality did not extend to the private sphere. Women were expected to be in charge of all household matters and being a mother was seen as a social obligation of women (Einhorn 1993). There were attempts to reduce women’s workload by socialising some household and childcare tasks (establishment of diners, laundry centres, nursery schools), but this removed only a part of women’s household duties. Women’s employment rate in Estonia remains almost equal with the corresponding indicator for men (57% of men and 54% of women in the age group 15–74 were employed in 2010), but there are large gender differences with regard to household chores. This means that the time spent on different types of work takes up a larger portion of a day for women than for men, which means that women have less leisure time remaining. However, the time spent on household care by men can be lengthened by increased participation of women in employment; as a result, a family has more than one breadwinner and men are able to dedicate more time to home and family. In Estonia, 39% of households have one employed member and a quarter of households have two ore more employed members. There are 37% of households where no one is employed; these are mostly households of pensioners. There have been several explanations for unequal division of work between women and men and differences in the time spent on household care. In literature, gender gap is often explained through various economic and also directly gender-related reasons. According to Becker’s theory, MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? MAN’S HOME IS THE WORLD, WOMAN’S WORLD IS HER HOME? 29
SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GENDER DIFFERENCES IN TIME USE women and men specialise in the kinds of work, where their relative productivity is higher. Consequently, if a man is more productive in the labour market (earns more money than his wife), it is more beneficial, from the household’s perspective, for the man to dedicate more time to employment and for the woman to dedicate more time to household work. Women specialise in household care primarily due to their lower human capital and biological differences (they have a biological advantage over men in caring for children). Specialisation in a certain type of work, however, should not lead to a difference in the total committed time. An explanation similar to Becker’s theory focuses on the time available for partners and the volume of household work that needs to be done. Household care is the responsibility of the partner who has more time available after paid work. In this respect, women are more affected than men by the time spent on employment, as well as by the number and age of children (McGinnity and Russell 2008). According to McGinnity and Russell (2008), unequal division of household tasks can also be related to various power relations in household. Household care, as less desirable type of work, is left to the partner with fewer resources in household (lower education, lower wages or lower occupational position). The difference in division of work can also be explained by predominant gender roles in the society – by engaging in different types of work, women and men express behaviour that complies with social expectations for their sex. Consequently, unequal division of work is not necessarily perceived as unfair if it is in keeping with generally accepted social customs. Gender roles also explain why unemployed or inactive men spend less time on household work than their employed female partners. However, division of work in household also depends on the attitudes of household members towards daily chores, as well as on their sense of fairness. Women and men with more egalitarian views tend to divide household tasks on an equal basis. In households where partners have different views on fair division of work, this can more frequently lead to tensions and disagreements. (McGinnity and Russell 2008) In the following paragraphs, we examine gender differences in total workload and division of work on different weekdays and across different socio-demographic parameters. The imbalance in the time spent on total work by women and men is a reflection of a gender gap in access to unoccupied time. Occupied time is the sum of time spent on employment, study, household and family care. Unoccupied time comprises time spent on personal care, volunteer work, recreation and entertainment. In 2010, women spent a total of 7 hours and 19 minutes on all types of work. For men, different work duties took up 6 hours and 28 minutes of their day. Consequently, the total committed time of women in Estonia is almost an hour longer than that of men, but the structure of this time is different depending on sex. A large portion of women’s occupied time is unpaid time – the time spent on employment and study accounts for only 44% of the total volume of women’s work. Men, conversely, are more engaged in work activities outside home, spending 60% of their occupied time in this manner. The division of work varies greatly between workdays and weekends (see Figure 4). While women and men spend over half of their occupied time during weekdays on employment and studies, the majority of duties during weekends are related to household tasks. The share of household work during weekends is particularly large for women, amounting to 81% of their total occupied time. If hours spent on employment and studies are added to the duration of household care activities, we can see that the total volume of work is always greater for women than for men, irrespective of the day. Gender differences are less noticeable on workdays than at weekends, when women work on average 74 minutes more per day than men. The behaviour of women and men is affected by various factors associated with the persons themselves, with their households and area of residence. The duration and nature of work at home depends on the number and age of children, as well as living conditions of the household. The time spend on household tasks depends on the size of dwelling, existence of a garden, type of heating and other factors associated with dwelling. Certain individual characteristics – age, education and socio-economic status – can influence power relations and the consequent division of work in a household. They can also determine affiliation with a community (or generation) that holds certain views and beliefs, or serve as an indicator of available time. Time 30 MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? MAN’S HOME IS THE WORLD, WOMAN’S WORLD IS HER HOME?
Page 1 and 2: MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM O
Page 3 and 4: Koostanud Statistikaameti rahvastik
Page 5 and 6: SAATESÕNA PREFACE PREFACE Overview
Page 7 and 8: SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GE
Page 29: SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GE
Page 37 and 38: TERVIS JA TÖÖVÕIME HEALTH AND CA
Page 61 and 62: TÖÖ- JA PEREELU ÜHITAMINE RECONC
Page 81 and 82:
TÖÖ- JA PEREELU ÜHITAMINE RECONC
Page 83 and 84:
TÖÖ- JA PEREELU ÜHITAMINE RECONC
Page 85 and 86:
KULTUURIASUTUSTES KÄIMINE VISITING
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
NAISED JA MEHED HARIDUSELUS WOMEN A
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
HARIDUSE PEEGELDUS TÄISKASVANUEAS
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129:
MÄRKIDE SELETUS EXPLANATION OF SYM
show all

MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? - Tartu Ãlikool

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?

MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? - Tartu Ãlikool