Bowsfield, M. L., Cobb, R. J, & Samra, J.

Why did we conduct this study?

There is a high level of consensus among gender and relationship researchers that women in heterosexual partnerships, despite being more educated and more involved in the workforce than ever before, are still completing the vast majority of work within the home (Coltrane, 2000).   Unfortunately, there are negative consequences to household labour inequality; for women in particular, depression, perceptions of unfairness, and declines in marital satisfaction are associated with unequal division of home labour (Coltrane, 2000).
Gender construction theories posit that different socialization of the sexes cause men and women to adhere to certain behaviours to act out or to confirm their appropriate gender role (Greenstein, 2000).  There is evidence suggesting that breadwinning women in heterosexual relationships, who are fulfilling the stereotypically masculine role of income earner, may take on more housework than women who earn incomes comparable to their male partners (Greenstein, 2000).  Similarly, men in relationships with a female breadwinner do less work at home than men who are the sole or primary breadwinners (Greenstein, 2000).  These paradoxical behaviours may be ways that women and men attain gender accountability, or neutralize gender role inconsistency when they do not conform to the societal expectation of their gender (Greenstein, 2000). 

What did we expect to find?

We expected that women with higher femininity and men with higher masculinity would report more traditional beliefs about gender roles within the home than women lower on femininity and men lower on masculinity.  We also expected that if women were high-income earners or highly educated, they would be more likely to endorse a traditional gendered division of labour in the home if they were also high in femininity as a way to reaffirm expectations about their gender role.  Likewise, for men, we expected that masculinity and endorsement of traditional gender roles would be associated more so for men who had relatively lower income and education compared to those with higher education and income. 

What were the results?

To test these predictions, 349 participants (230 women, 119 men) completed a 30-minute online survey called “21st Century Relationships: Who Should Do What?”  The survey included measures of femininity, masculinity, beliefs about division of labour in the home, gender role attitudes, income, and education.  The majority of the participants were students (87.4%) with the remainder were from the general community (12.6%). 
In contrast to our first prediction, women’s femininity and men’s masculinity were generally not related to their beliefs about gender roles in the home.  Some interesting findings emerged in regards to the second prediction.  For women whose income or education was high, femininity predicted less traditional beliefs about roles in the home.  This was not consistent with our original prediction, but may suggest that income and education serve to reduce the effect of femininity on traditional beliefs about roles in the home for women. For men, the findings were consistent with our expectations: For men whose income or education was low, masculinity predicted more traditional beliefs about roles in the home.  This suggests that men who do not fulfill the societal expectation of being an educated income earner may endorse traditional roles within the home in an effort to neutralize their gender inconsistent role. 

What comes next?

Because this study analyzed the attitudes about hypothetical division of labour in a group of individuals, future research assessing questions of how couples actually divide labour within their home will be important.  Studying couples would allow for determination of breadwinner status and each partner’s relative contribution to household income.  With this information, researchers could identify the degree to which partner’s incomes and educations must differ for traditional beliefs or behaviours in the home to emerge as methods for acting out gender.  Furthermore, the attitudes of partners could be assessed to see whether or not attitudinal match (i.e., both partners holding egalitarian or traditional views) plays a role in how home labour is divided and in general relationship outcomes.  It is also possible that there are factors other than income and education that affect the associations between femininity and masculinity and gender roles in the home.  For example, occupation, which can often be classified as “female” (e.g., women are nurses) or “male” (e.g., men are doctors) and can differ in status, may be another variable that serves to determine how femininity and masculinity relate to gendered division of labour.  Perhaps men who are in stereotypically female vocations use traditional roles within the home in an effort to reaffirm their masculinity, regardless of whether they are the primary breadwinner in their family.

If you would like to learn more about gendered division of labour in the home, the resources provided below are highly relevant:

Coltrane, S. (2000). Research on household labor: Modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62, 1208-1233. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.01208.x

Greenstein, T. N. (2000). Economic dependence, gender and the division of labor in the home: A replication and extension. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 322-335. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00322.x

In addition, the Pew Research Center conducts comprehensive research on the home and family; visit the links below for some recent findings:

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/29/breadwinner-moms/
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/03/14/modern-parenthood-roles-of-moms-and-dads-converge-as-they-balance-work-and-family/