‘tend to’ sort of stops having meaning when its how the society is set up

scientific-women:

biodiverseed:

stunnybee:

biodiverseed:

I often think of that study about stereotypes, wherein children are asked to draw a scientist, and they almost unilaterally draw a bearded white man.

I think if you asked most children to “Draw a Farmer,” you would by-and-large get the same result.

It’s odd, because globally, women are about half of the formal agricultural workforce, and we produce (and cook!) the majority of the world’s food.

I remember my grandmother had a vegetable garden that was about half an acre large. She produced, canned, and prepared the vegetables the family actually ate, whereas my grandfather farmed barley and wheat and took care of the animals. They were both doing intensive agricultural labour, but the difference is he had the chance and to earn money for his work. It’s more than a mere division of labour: it’s a division of capital and freedom that squarely favoured my grandfather. He was “the farmer,” and she was “the farmer’s wife.”

That historical barrier between informal and formal work–and the perceptions of the relative value of both–is a huge part of why women are lagging far behind in factors like property and equipment ownership.

It was a division of labor and frankly every family has that in one form or another. It doesn’t mean women are being put down, it just means that more women tend to devote themselves to caring for the home and family while more men work to provide financial stability to the family. I’m sure your grandfather did not force your grandmother to do what she did.

Maybe he didn’t (I mean, he did, because he’s extremely traditionally religious), but the law sure did.

“British law [in Canada] gave a husband wide authority over his wife’s property and
made no provision for division of assets. Although Married Women’s
Property Acts were passed in the late 19th century in most common-law
provinces, giving women the right to control their own property, the laws
made no provision for the equitable division of property held by the
spouses in case of marriage breakdown or death. Nor did they improve the
economic situation of women and children (see WOMEN IN THE LABOUR FORCE).

Accordingly, the Matrimonial Property Acts passed in most provinces near
the end of the 1970s provided for equal division of property on
dissolution of marriage. Passage of these acts followed the uproar
caused by the MURDOCH CASE,
whereby Mrs Murdoch was awarded very little following 25 years of
marriage as an Alberta farm wife. This case exemplifies the impression
that in the area of family law women have been treated most clearly as
dependants.”

– The Canadian Encyclopedia: Women and the Law

The fact that early in her life she couldn’t get a bank loan without her husband’s signature makes me wonder what her life would have been like if she were single, or gay, or even if she wanted a divorce.

I find it awfully convenient that so many women have only ever wanted to do housework/care for the family.