Putting the shoe on the other foot
Editorial
Stabroek News
April 22, 2003
When the term gender equality is used it is most often perceived to be a women’s issue. This is because historically women were more disadvantaged, had less access to financial and other resources, did not have much of a say in either the households they ran or in the public arena and generally had their rights trampled upon. Much of this has changed, particularly in the developed world where gender equality programmes have been developed for men with the knowledge that since they are ‘in power’ then they must have a role in the equalising.
According to the International Labour Organisation’s ABC of Women Worker’s Rights and Gender Equality, the term gender analyses the roles, responsibilities, constraints and needs of women and men in any given social context. It is not meant to replace the term sex, which denotes the biological difference between men and women. Gender equality then promotes the fact that men and women are free to develop their personal abilities and make choices without the limitations set by stereotypes, rigid roles and prejudices. Not that women and men have to be alike, but that their rights and any opportunities will not depend on their sex and that their needs and aspirations will be equally considered.
It is because of this that jobs formerly held to be strictly in the male domain have been opened up to women over the years. Young girls, who previously had been told not to consider pursuing studies in engineering and mathematics, suddenly found that their choices were unlimited. ‘You can be anything you want to be’ seemed to be the motto of the new age. In several spheres women celebrated when they were finally allowed to publicly do the jobs they had been doing all along. And privately, many have continued to do their second unpaid job just as cheerfully as they did the first.
Advocacy for paid housework has been vigorous, but it has not really taken off although all the evidence suggests that it would be the just thing to do. The UK 2000 Time Use Survey conducted by the Office for National Statistics found that if unpaid housework were treated like work, it would be valued at more than three-quarters of the paid economy, some £700 billion. It was also noted that although in many cases men were no longer seen as the primary providers, traditional roles in the home still existed with women undertaking the bulk of domestic chores.
Clearly some gender equality is needed here, but would it be possible to put the shoe on the other foot? How many men would willingly step out of their stereotypes to do the housework? How many would apply for jobs as hotel maids, for instance? In her recent film Maid in Manhattan, internationally acclaimed singer and actress Jennifer Lopez portrays a chambermaid who in “an uncharacteristically frivolous moment” tries on a guest’s clothes and is mistaken for one. In the rags to riches tale - a cross between Cinderella and Pretty Woman - she falls in love with a senatorial candidate and in the end lives happily ever after. Real-life London chambermaids interviewed by The Guardian newspaper say this is highly unlikely, as the guests hardly ever noticed them. And after eight hours of making beds and scrubbing bathrooms they were too tired to notice the guests either, much less try on their clothes. Besides, many chambermaids had their families waiting at home along with much of the same work they had just completed. Maybe there are ardent chamber men waiting in the wings. Perhaps they will emerge when the hospitality industry ends the stereotyping by changing the job title.
