They may enjoy
looking after their children while their wives go out to work.
But house husbands
may pay a high price for their modern take on marriage.
Research shows that
couples are more likely to divorce when the man does not work full-time.
The US researchers
say that while the gender stereotyping of women has relaxed, men still suffer
from the expectation that they should be the breadwinner.
The finding comes
from Harvard University researcher Professor Alexandra Killewald, who analysed
data on the lives, marriages and finances of 6,300 couples, including 1,700 who
had divorced.
To look at the
effect of women's increasing entry into the workforce from the mid-1970s, the
professor split the couples into two groups, based on whether they were married
before or after 1974.
Her analysis
revealed division of labour to be key to marriages in both periods.
However, the type
of labour changed.
Before 1974, the
more housework a woman did, the more solid her marriage, conforming to the
traditional expectation that a wife's place is in the home.
So, a wife who did
three-quarters of the housework in 1968 had a 1.1 per cent chance of her
marriage ending in the next year.
But if she only did
half, her odds of divorce rose to 1.5 per cent.
In more recent
years, expectations of women's role in society have changed, plus men have
started to muck in more.
As a result, the
time spent on chores has stopped being a factor in a couple's happiness.
Professor Killewald
said: 'For couples married more recently, expectations for the division of
housework between spouses appear to have changed, so that men are expected to
contribute at least somewhat to household labour.
'In general, men
seem to be contributing a little more than they used to and these contributions
may now be expected and appreciated by wives.'
The study also
revealed that while a woman having a full-time job doesn't raise her odds of
going to the divorce courts, easing off at work can be costly for men.
The risk of divorce
is higher for men who are not employed full-time, the American Sociological
Review reports.
This means that, a
typical couple married after 1974, has a 2.5 per cent chance of divorcing in
the next year, if the husband works full-time.
However, if he
works part-time or does not work at all, the odds rise to 3.3 per cent.
Professor Killewald
said that while our expectations of women's roles have changed, the stereotype
of men being the breadwinners persists.
As a result, those
who don't work full-time may be perceived as breaking a 'central component' of
the marital contract for husbands'.
It is also possible
that men take unemployment harder than women, which puts a bigger strain on the
marriage.
Interestingly, the
results weren't driven by finances.
The study found
despite what we might think, money worries don't generally increase the risk of
divorce.
Similarly, the
prospect of the woman being financially stable after a divorce doesn't seem to
raise the odds of the marriage ending.
This suggests that
the psychological strain of a man not working a 40-hour week is more important
than any financial pressure that might come with it.
Professor Killewald
said: 'While contemporary wives need not embrace the traditional homemaker role
to stay married, contemporary husbands face a higher risk of divorce when they
do not fulfil the stereotypical breadwinner role by being employed fulltime.
'Often when
scholars or the media talk about work-family policies or work-family balance, they
focus mostly on the experiences of women.
'Although much of
the responsibility for negotiating that balance falls to women, my results
suggest one way that expectations about gender and family roles and
responsibilities affect men's lives, too: men who aren't able to sustain
full-time work face heightened risk of divorce.
'Expectations of
wives' homemaking may have eroded but the husband breadwinner norm persists.'
SOURCE: DAILYMAIL
No comments:
Post a Comment