Initially I thought little of Crikey’s query as to why fewer women than men subscribe and read the daily newsletter — a 70/30 split didn’t seem that bad.
Then I read Liz Gunder’s comments on women still having to work double shifts (paid work followed by unpaid running of a household — providing a catering, laundry and personal assistant service rolled into one — oh, and raising children as well …) and it really rang true.
The thing these observations always neglect to mention, and what is more relevant in this case, is that it’s not just the physical time and energy spent doing these things, but the head space required to take in, remember, organise, plan and act on information about kids’ sports, excursions, plays and parent-teacher nights, what the family is going to eat for the next three nights and what groceries need to be purchased to accommodate this, which family member is having a birthday in the next fortnight and has a card been bought, did anyone pay the power bill, and the all-important how many rolls of toilet paper are left in the cupboard?
By the time this sort of life administrivia is committed to memory and the planning done, then a day job is completed in which similar levels of detailed information needed to be taken in, processed and acted on, is it any wonder that women have little head space left to think about bigger picture issues such as politics, climate change, analysis of the media and the like?
This phenomenon is not limited to mothers, either. As a single, childless female, I still find myself doing more of these sorts of things than any of my single, childless male peers. They seem to have no trouble eschewing grocery shopping, cooking and cleaning in favour of eating take-away, living in squalor (or more commonly finding a female flatmate to do the cleaning), missing people’s birthdays (ahem!) all the while taking their careers to new heights while having female personal assistants (the workplace equivalent to a wife) to make their working lives easier, leaving more head space for the bigger picture.
What is equally striking is the gender difference in relation to caring for older relatives. Some years ago, when my elderly father spent a year fighting a losing battle with cancer, I spent the year running ragged after him and my mother, who was providing full-time care. My mother, being of a generation where it was unusual for women to learn to drive, needed me to provide grocery deliveries, pharmacy runs, a taxi service to doctor’s appointments as well as emotional support. At the time I was employed three days a week and working for myself the rest of the time. For that year, I had to all but put my business on hold and run it at a loss as family responsibilities had to take priority.
What was my brother doing during this period? Nothing. He left home at 16 and lived interstate from then on. His children had grown up and left home by this stage, but it still did not occur to him to fly home to put in some time and effort to support our mother or dying father — nor was he expected to.
When we were left joint executors (did you know the legal word for a female executor is ‘executrix’?) of our father’s will, it was I who did 99% of the work as I was in the same state and my brother was not — he just received things in the mail to sign. Not being legally trained, the process of applying for probate and the associated financial and property dealings, was intellectually and logistically challenging, not to mention the emotional strain of my own grieving process combined with supporting my mother — having lost not only her life partner but sadly her only sibling, my aunt, only three months later.
As with many women who have been in similar situations, I was running around supporting everyone else but was anyone supporting me? No.
Did I have time to think about politics, media, public affairs and world events during this time? Ha! I barely knew the rest of the world existed. I most certainly would not have had time to read a daily email such as Crikey.
I was reminded of this recently when reflecting on how a good friend of mine, a woman in her 50s, is in a time of life when her adult children have only recently left home to live independent lives, when her father-in-law recently passed away, requiring her to provide practical and emotional support to her partner, and now her own father has a debilitating chronic illness, and she is one of a few (female) siblings providing care and support.
Unlike me, she married and had children early in life, thus her education was delayed until later in life. She is still studying part-time, working full-time and has all these caring responsibilities on top of this.
So if Crikey aims for a 50/50 gender split in readership, perhaps encourage more feminist (note, not the same as, or limited to, female) writers to explore these political and social issues of why women have less time to be involved in public life and how we can get men to take on a greater share of the second-shift load.
I also read a few comments on the blog about having more “girly” topics. Please spare me. The reason I subscribe to Crikey is for a gender-neutral and intelligent analysis of the world — if I want the latest in hair care or how to give a good blow job I’ll consult Cleo.
A female-only blog is a nice idea but doesn’t the idea of 90% of Crikey for men and a blog for women seem a teensy bit tokenistic?
I say tinker by all means but only by getting more columns written from a female/feminist perspective will you win over more female subscribers.
At the end of the day, please remain focused on what is more important to society as a whole, whether for men or women, old or young, gay or straight, family or childless, rich or poor, Aussie-born or recently arrived. Major issues affecting society affect us all.
I have been trying to explain to my partner for some time that it is not the cooking of the dinner that is stressful (he helps), but planning the meal and the necessary shopping to produce it; add to this the toilet paper and other miscellaneous administrivia mentioned in this article and running a household is a stressful business. This has been the subject of numerous discussions with my own mother whose husband and son who again, will pitch in with household chores (when coerced) but wouldn’t ever think to check whether they’ve run out of toilet cleaner.
I am just lucky that reading crikey is relevant enough to my work that I can get away with skimming it at lunch time – if I don’t get a chance to do that, it doesn’t get read.
There is no need to dumb down or ‘girlify’ Crikey. More contributions from female and feminist writers would be welcome. I also agree with previous comments that a digestible highlights version on a Friday would be great.
Agree with both Erika and Gunder’s contributions. Women are “doing” rather “pondering”. I don’t want gendered journalism- just the gender neutral-version.
I agree with the sentiment of this article.
I have recently decided to not renew my subscription because I will be having a baby, continuing to do my PhD part time whilst taking a cut in a basic scholarship income. I know that the time to read crikey will disappear and with a drop in income every penny counts. I have enjoyed reading crikey and only occasionally got frustrated with the reporting.
I am also not interested in Crikey doing ‘girly stuff’ or ‘boy’s stuff’ for that matter. Women’s issues are of course of interest to us all and should be included and there is a real need to increase people’s awareness of them. So many people I come into contact with (male or female) think that sex equality has been achieved and feminism redundant. However, I know that having a family will penalise me in the workforce and as a result my income and level of career achievement will be impacted. This will be for many reasons but the simplest is that my CV will have a bit less time in the workforce than someone who has not taken time out to care for others.
I hope that one day the experience gained outside of work will be recognised as valuable. I also hope that one day people applying for leadership positions will not be considered as favourably if they don’t have this kind of experience. I often wonder if more of our corporate heads had spent time in touch with community, in caring for others, that perhaps they’d be less inclined to make decisions that destroy communities and the environment.
For Crikey more articles like Eva Cox’s and Jenny Ejlak’s is a good start. Also when reporting on highly political and emotive women’s issues like birth make sure you do your homework and approach the topic with a care. Birth is a minefield for women that I had no idea about until I got pregnant. And yes I am refering to Bernard Keane’s article on homebirth which I found very disapointing.
I agree with the article as well. I am young, single and without anyone depending on me, but I hear about these issues. I think in the area of caring for older relatives, women seem to feel more of an obligation in some families. If women didn’t feel this obligation, then either men would have to pull their weight more or there would have to be more paid services.
Ruby, I don’t agree with your hope that one day people applying for leadership positions will not be considered as favourably if they don’t have experience of caring for others. If you’re in a position like I am where your parents are still in reasonably good health and you’re single, the issue of caring for others does not arise. To make this a disadvantage in the workplace is just as discriminatory as penalising people for having spent less time in the workplace.
When it comes to reporting politics (particularly events from Parliament House), a good start would be to concentrate more on the substance of issues discussed and less on the “biff”. Articles referring to various MPs as “attack dogs” or “head kickers” is a huge turn-off for many women.
I know politics is set up as an adversarial business, but the fourth estate has an opportunity here to lead from the front; to shape public perceptions about politics and politicians and, in turn, maybe even lead to politicians themselves adhering to the new paradigm.
You have nothing to lose and we all have everything to gain.