Major study reveals why men never do housework

Philosophers argue that men may not “perceive” household chores as having to be done in the same way that women do. (CREDIT: Creative Commons)

Philosophers trying to answer questions about inequality in domestic work and the invisibility of female domestic work have proposed a new theory that men and women are educated by society to see different opportunities for action in the same domestic environment.

They say a view called “possibility theory”—that we perceive objects and situations as actions implicitly related to them—confirms age-old gender inequalities when it comes to the countless mundane tasks of daily home maintenance.

For example, women may look at a surface and see the implied action of “wiping off,” while men may simply watch a table top covered in crumbs.

Philosophers believe that these deep-seated gender differences in domestic perceptions can be reversed through social interventions, such as extended parental leave, which will encourage men to create mental associations for doing household chores.

Similar stories

I write in a magazine Philosophy and phenomenological researchthey argue that the available data, especially data collected during the pandemic, suggest that two issues require explanation.

One is “inequality”: why, despite economic and cultural advances, do women continue to take on the vast majority of household and childcare work? The other is “invisibility”: why do so many men feel that homework is more evenly distributed than it really is?

“Many point to the fulfillment of traditional gender roles, along with various economic factors, such as women taking up flexible work to care for children,” said Dr Tom McClelland from the Faculty of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge.

“However, the fact that stark disparities in household chores persisted during the pandemic when most couples were locked inside, and that many men still didn’t notice this imbalance, means that’s not the whole story.”

McClelland and co-author Professor Paulina Sliva argue that the unequal division of labor in the home and the inability of men to identify this labor is best explained by the psychological notion of “opportunity”: the idea that we perceive things as attractive or “attractive”. “providing” certain actions.

“It’s not just looking at the shape and size of a tree and then assuming that you can climb it, but actually seeing a particular tree as an object to climb on, or seeing a cup as a drink to drink from,” recently said Plum about the philosophy of Cambridge. faculty, and now at the University of Vienna.

“Neurology has shown that the perception of affordance can trigger neural processes that prepare you for physical action. It can range from a mild urge to an overwhelming compulsion, but it often takes mental effort not to act on the affordance.”

There are significant differences in “opportunity perception” between individuals. One person sees the tree as climbable, and the other does not. Objects offer a wide range of affordances—a spatula can be thought of as an egg frying tool or a rhythmic instrument—and a spectrum of sensitivity to them.

“If we apply the perception of affordance to the home environment and assume that it is gendered, it helps answer questions about inequality and invisibility,” McClelland said.

According to philosophers, when a woman enters the kitchen, she most likely perceives “opportunities” for doing specific household chores – she sees the dishes as “needs to be washed” or the refrigerator as “needs to stock up.”

A person can simply watch the dishes in the sink or a half-empty refrigerator, but without perceiving the affordance and without experiencing the corresponding mental “twitch”. Over time, these small differences lead to significant differences in who does what.

“Offers get your attention,” Sliva said. “Tasks can annoy the perceiver until they are completed, or distract them from other plans. If resisted, it can create palpable tension.”

“This puts women in Trap 22: either work inequality or cognitive load inequality.”

Philosophers say there may be several underlying reasons for this gender division in the perception of affordances. Social cues prompt actions under certain conditions, which are often given by adults when we are still very young children. Our visual systems are updated depending on what we encounter most often.

“Social norms shape the opportunities we perceive, so it would be surprising if gender norms didn’t do the same,” McClelland said.

“Some skills are clearly gender-specific, such as cleaning or grooming, and girls are expected to do more housework than boys. This trains their view of the home environment so that they perceive the counter as an item that “needs to be wiped down.”

According to Slieve and McClelland, the “gender perception of affordance hypothesis” does not address the justification of men. Despite the lack of perception of opportunities at home, a man can easily notice what needs to be done by thinking, not seeing. Women’s receptivity to domestic duties should not be equated with a natural attachment to housework.

“We can change the way we perceive the world through constant conscious effort and cultivating habits,” McClelland said. “Men should be encouraged to resist gender norms by making them more sensitive to opportunities to do household chores.

“A man may decide to sweep up the crumbs every time he waits for the kettle to boil, for example. Not only will this help them complete tasks they can’t see, but it will gradually retrain their perceptions so that they begin to see opportunities in the future.”

Philosophers argue that collective efforts to change social norms require intervention at the political level. For example, joint parental leave gives fathers the opportunity to become more sensitive to opportunities to perform caregiving tasks.

Sliva added: “Our focus has been on physical activities such as sweeping or wiping, but gender empowerment perceptions can also apply to mental activities such as planning and memorizing.”

For more science news, visit our New Discoveries section at The bright side of the news.

Note: Materials provided above by the University of Cambridge. Content can be edited for style and length.

Do you like such pleasant stories? Receive Brighter Side of News Newsletter.