Throughout all of written history, women have been relegated to being an afterthought. Women ultimately have been either forgotten about by the vast majority of political discourse, or worse, forced into a role of subservience to men. This has only harmed women, as the gender roles imposed upon them have been disastrous for their autonomy in both body and spirit. Simone de Beauvoir once stated that socialism is ultimately achieved “when there would no longer be men and women but only workers equal with one another”. Without this material androgyny, women will be subject to men’s, and in a grander scale, Capitalism’s, whims.
Women’s labor is often in the domestic field, which places them in a disadvantageous position economically compared to men. Domestic work is any work done to facilitate the proper running of the family or home life. This isn’t to say that domestic work should be completely disregarded. Domestic work is, in essence, the most vital work done for society. Without parenting, homemaking, and other unsung home labor, the very makeup of society would crumble. It’s undeniable that women make up the vast majority of this often forgotten labor sector, from childcare to household affairs. There is, however, a false dichotomy present. This work isn’t women’s work, its domestic work, and women who find fulfillment in these roles should not be told that they aren’t doing something extremely important. However, it would only reinforce the gender roles established by Capitalism and other, older forms of production to relegate this work to the role of a woman.
Domestic work is almost always unpaid, as it supports the interior household, but that isn’t to say that it’s less important than industrial work. Without this realm of work, the family structure would fall apart. Again, this isn’t to say that the nuclear family is paramount, but without child rearing and other household work, there would be no future generation. We as a society should both celebrate domestic work while also emphatically state that this work is domestic, and not women’s work.
Women who enjoy these gender roles shouldn’t be forced into the industrial world, however. Some women do enjoy homemaking and child rearing, and they should be allowed and encouraged to take up those roles, if they so choose. Socialism is not where women don’t do housework, instead, it is where anyone, woman or man, is allowed to follow their own path to work. This includes domestic work, and to state otherwise is not only anti-women, but anti-proletariat. The domestic realm is just as important as the industrial realm, and women who choose to work domestically are not inherently reactionary. To think so emulates the same thinking as the capitalist mindset, which would relegate anyone to industrial work, as opposed to whatever work is seen as right for them.
We should, instead, focus on facilitating domestic work for all those who find the work fulfilling. Men and women are both capable of raising children, cleaning, and facilitating a functioning household. To place a two-tiered system on labor, where industrial work is considered more important than domestic, all those who choose to support their families would be forsaken. Without the recognition of domestic work, we only harm those who take stock in a functioning household, and in turn, create a system of industrial and domestic slavery, split between the already blurry gender lines.
Gender itself is a construct reinforced by the capitalist regime. Without gender roles, the capitalist agenda would be unable to stratify “men’s work” and “women’s work”, and, in turn, force the system to recognize that all work is labor, whether it is paid or unpaid. If there were no gender roles, especially in the context of work, we would have total freedom to do whatever we find fulfilling. We need to recognize that gender roles, especially the roles assigned to women, are dangerous to the autonomy of everyone, not just women.
Men who work in traditionally female professions are also harmed by this stigma. There is an unspoken rule in Capitalism that men should work back-breaking, industrial jobs while women should work nurturing service jobs. This leads to countless men forgoing jobs that aren’t seen as manly enough, whether it be due to the pay gap between traditionally female-worked jobs and traditionally male-worked jobs or due to the internalization of traditional gender roles, which keeps men from working jobs that might be seen as womanly. Men will, under Capitalism, work more difficult, dangerous jobs due to this stratification, and that only reinforces the gender binary in labor.
We can and should forget these gender roles in the context of labor. Not only would the productive capacity of the world be more equal if these roles were gone, but the happiness of all involved would be raised. If any woman could work any job they wanted to, and vice versa for men, with no limitation on gender, people would generally be happier. Generally, people want to contribute to the wider society, and by limiting what they can do based on their gender, the general happiness of society is harmed. Women can be engineers, and men can be nurses. There is no difference in labor as far as gender is concerned. In fact, labor itself is androgynous, just as Simone De Beauvoir said in the above quote. This androgynous nature of labor should be celebrated, and not feared. Men can and should do nurturing work, just as women can and should do industrial labor, if they so choose.
Women are, in essence, the same as men. Men and women breathe the same air, and can do the same work. Women’s traditional roles are not exclusively the domain of women. Men can and should be involved in domestic work, just as women can and should be involved in the industrial world. Especially in the age of automation, women are just as capable as men to do any work. To force women into the role of either domestic or industrial work would forsake the obvious conclusion that men and women are equal as workers in society.