Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



J. Crew Guy ([info]j_crew_guy) wrote in [info]unfunnybusiness,
@ 2009-03-10 12:36:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
According to the Vatican, the washing machine has done more to liberate women.
On International Women's Day, the Vatican's newspaper observed: "Some say the pill, some say abortion rights and some the right to work outside the home. Some, however, dare to go further: the washing machine."

"What in the 20th century did more to liberate Western women?," asks the article, which was written by a woman.

I understand why they don't consider birth control to be liberating for women, but seriously?? The goddamn washing machine?

Edit: The comments are full of good points as to why the washing machine was key in helping to liberate women. I stand corrected.


(Post a new comment)


[info]notjo
2009-03-10 06:07 pm UTC (link)
I could make an argument for it, but I'm not sure it's the one the Catholic Church would appreciate.

Did you ever watch Mad About You? Remember when Jamie & Paul were trying to get pregnant, and thus putting off having sex until she was ovulating? And then she spent half the episode sitting on the washing machine rolling her eyes into the back of her head?

....

Yeah, perhaps not what they were going for.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]lady7jane
2009-03-10 10:55 pm UTC (link)
If I remember right, Betty Draper from Mad Men was also liberated by a washing machine.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]skijg, 2009-03-11 05:29 am UTC

[info]ellensmithee
2009-03-10 06:09 pm UTC (link)
That's not a terribly revolutionary idea, though. It's been over 20 years since I read the Feminine Mystique, but I think Betty Friedan discusses how the mass production and proliferation of household appliances in the 50s freed up women to do other things with their time and was a factor that helped lay the basis for the women's movement in the 60s.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]adevyish
2009-03-11 08:25 am UTC (link)
And that's how long it takes the Vatican to even consider an idea.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]liz_marcs
2009-03-10 06:42 pm UTC (link)
As an ex-Catholic, I'm willing to bitch slap the Vatican for a lot.

But not this one. This one I think is definitely a legitimate argument.

I remember back in 2000 PBS had a "reality show" called 1900 House which basically required a family to live in this house exactly like a family from 1900s would. (Once they left the house for school and/or work they could go back into "modern mode.")

Once thing that completely floored me was how much of what we take for granted today as "automatic" were basically back-breaking work 100 years ago.

The big thing that floored me? Laundry was basically a sun-up to sun-down chore requiring more than one person (the mother and her two youngest basically had to do the chore). And laundry was done twice a week.

And that's just washing. Drying was the great outdoors, including in winter.

So, yeah. I'd vote washing machine as the A-number 1 appliance that gave women freedom. Followed closely by water heaters because then all that water didn't have to be heated on the stove to wash dishes/take a bath.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]persona
2009-03-10 07:07 pm UTC (link)
Okay, I take back the WTF. It makes sense now to some degree; thanks.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]liz_marcs, 2009-03-10 07:30 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2009-03-11 01:05 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]violetsquirrel, 2009-03-11 08:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]amadi, 2009-03-11 01:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2009-03-11 03:22 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]violetsquirrel, 2009-03-11 03:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]snarkhunter, 2009-03-11 04:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bolboreta, 2009-03-11 10:57 am UTC

[info]sarracenia
2009-03-10 07:59 pm UTC (link)
Oh yeah. I handwash a small percentage of my clothing (mostly because I'm too cheap to dry clean), and even with running water and not exactly going to tons of effort to make everything perfect, that takes me at least an hour, more likely two. When women were basically stuck hauling either the clothes to the river or the water to their house, it's very easy to see why it'd be an all-day chore.

Not to mention the physical labor of cooking before there were gas ranges and pre-plucked chickens and all that jazz. I mean, I love my mortar and pestle for the occasional spice grinding and making the occasional loaf of bread from scratch, but I also love my food processor and pre-bought bread.

And the cost of clothing is just....man can you imagine the amount of time it would take to make clothing if all you had to start with was the original wool/linen/cotton? I'm always a little bugged in most the fantasy novels I read when they just toss off homespun like it was nothing. Even if there is premade cloth available (which you'll note was the first major industry of the Industrial Revolution, though I'd guess that the savings in manpower were very quickly nullified by how much better everyone was expected to dress), think of how much time sewing all your family's clothing by hand would take. There's a reason historically letting kids run around naked was fairly common. Can you imagine trying to keep kids dressed when you're weaving all the cloth for their clothing by hand?

The sheer amount of labor that pre-modern chores involve makes the amount of work "women's work" entailed before appliances made the jobs relatively easy and quick is just mindboggling.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]white_serpent
2009-03-10 08:54 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, my grandmother used to tell stories about her mother doing the laundry and these three massive tubs of hot water (and you had to boil water so it would be hot), etc., etc. (I last heard those stories maybe 18 years ago, so I no longer remember why there were three tubs. Also bluing.)

You had to wring it, hang it to dry... When for some reason her mother was no longer healthy enough to carry on with this, my grandmother did laundry with her automatic washer, which was a huge disappointment to her mother.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]rosehiptea, 2009-03-10 09:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]eleutheria, 2009-03-10 11:01 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]magnolia_mama, 2009-03-11 04:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]somnambulicious, 2009-03-11 04:21 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mary_mac, 2009-03-11 08:14 pm UTC

[info]persona
2009-03-10 07:04 pm UTC (link)
... well, that's a new one. I got nothing but a good long 'wtfff?'

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]persona
2009-03-10 07:11 pm UTC (link)
... Or you know, not. :|; Which, you know, if I stopped to think about it for a second I would have realised. Fail on my part.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sandglass
2009-03-10 07:08 pm UTC (link)
I heard the same argument for vaccines: when we needed someone to be home to take care of sick spawn, or unsick spawn during quarantine, women couldn't work.

It's sad, but it's the truth. Nobody was going to convince men to do half the household work until we reduced that to a few hours.

(Reply to this)


[info]amadi
2009-03-10 07:18 pm UTC (link)
The problem with this argument is that all of these things work together. The fully automatic washer is astounding in that a.) it turns doing a load of laundry into a ten minute chore rather than the hour+ chore it was with wringer washers or the all day chore it was when there were no washers at all.

Automatic appliances could (but haven't) balanced the household workload between domestic partners. They certainly paved the way for women to more easily work outside of the home, and for the higher education of women to be seen as viable and reasonable and there's no question that this is crucial.

But the ability to absolutely control the size of one's family and the timing of pregnancies has made it possible for women to do much more than work outside the home, or to have more time away from drudgery tasks. Being able to stop having children when you want no more (or not have them at all) has saved women's lives. A washing machine, not so much lifesaving. I'm sure there are probably documented cases of women who fell into the river while pounding clothes on rocks and were swept downstream never to be seen again, but there's no comparison on the numbers between clothes washing deaths and childbirth deaths.

So while I appreciate the importance of home automation, I think it's crucial that we not overlook the fact of this tidbit coming from the Vatican. This is a bald-faced attempt at belittling the value of women having autonomy over our own bodies. I'd get into a "which means more to the greater number of women" debate if this were an academic endeavor, but this article isn't about academic inspection, it's about trying to put all those uppity Pill-popping women in their place.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]snarkhunter
2009-03-11 04:04 pm UTC (link)
THIS. Thank you.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

(no subject) - ariadne484, 2009-03-11 06:29 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]alexielnet, 2009-03-11 11:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]hobbitsexual, 2009-03-13 08:40 am UTC

[info]ashenmote
2009-03-10 07:26 pm UTC (link)
I definitely remember anecdotes about the last pope refusing to install washing machines and having all his garb cleaned manually, by nuns. Only the current pope broke with that tradition. Make out of that what you will.

At any rate, it's no wonder the Vatican newspaper is still dazzled by this brand new technology. :P

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]caito, 2009-03-11 12:41 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2009-03-11 12:53 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]caito, 2009-03-11 05:02 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]adevyish, 2009-03-11 08:26 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2009-03-11 08:28 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rachelmap, 2009-03-11 10:07 am UTC

[info]mistal
2009-03-10 08:42 pm UTC (link)
Home automatization and easier ways to do chores gave us (women) more time for ourself, which lead to getting the pills,voting rights, etc. And I wonder if this is what the article was trying to get at.

(Reply to this)


[info]inalasahl
2009-03-10 09:18 pm UTC (link)
I was listening to our local Catholic radio station the other day, and the woman speaking said that having sex while using birth control is like telling your partner, "I love everything about you except your fertility."

I still don't get where she was going with that.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]ashenmote, 2009-03-10 09:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]inalasahl, 2009-03-11 04:44 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]velvet_mace, 2009-03-10 10:33 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]funwithrage, 2009-03-11 02:51 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2009-03-12 01:39 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]galletas, 2009-03-12 10:56 pm UTC

[info]fevered_ego
2009-03-11 12:10 am UTC (link)
I prefer to think of women sitting on washing machines with unbalanced loads. Nothing like a little midday liberation! Especially when hubby got a Church education and couldn't find a grape in a wet ziplock bag.

(Reply to this)


[info]kagutaba
2009-03-11 12:19 am UTC (link)
One of my dad's favorite talking heads was going off about this. They were going on about how feminists, apparently, think life was cushy and awesome before the washing machine.

Good job on missing their point, sir. Good job.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]kagutaba, 2009-03-11 12:28 am UTC

[info]caito
2009-03-11 12:43 am UTC (link)
I've heard something similar about the bicycle, how it allowed women more mobility than ever before when it came along.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]scifantasy, 2009-03-11 03:14 pm UTC

[info]darthfi
2009-03-11 01:04 am UTC (link)
It's got a point to a certain extent - definitely the automatic washing machine liberated women (and I'm one of those who does not own a dryer and hangs her clothes out to dry inside) from some drudgery, but a significant proportion sent their washing out anyway, as there were far more laundries around.

Nowadays the washday for poorer women in the UK has been replaced by the trip down to the laundrette, which can take up half a day (I was so glad when I got a place with a washing machine), and if you've got a couple of kids, that likely means half a day at least twice a week.

Interestingly, what the washing machine really did was shift the proportions of household costs - for example, 100 years ago rent was a considerably lower proportion of household expenditure but laundry could cost up to 10% of a household's income.

Personally, I feel far more liberated by having control of my fertility and being able to choose if I want children or not. At least that way it cuts down on the laundry!

(Reply to this)


[info]bobafeis
2009-03-11 02:51 am UTC (link)
Maybe it's true, but goddamn, way to be tactful there. Actually, why is the Vatican commenting on the liberation of women? It's not something that the church proper is generally in favor of.

(Reply to this)


[info]t_boy
2009-03-11 07:53 am UTC (link)
Well, I don't know about women, but if I didn't have a washing machine and a dryer I'd be doing my clothes by hand.

...

Well, okay, I'd be sending them to the laundromat every week and paying them to do it for me.

(Reply to this)


[info]tentoumushi
2009-03-11 08:43 am UTC (link)
All things considered the washing machine is not much of a net gain over hand washing.

According to researchers, the average homemaker in 1924 spent fifty-two hours a week doing her housework. Forty years later, the average American homemaker was spending fifty-five hours a week on housework – even surrounded as she was by "laborsaving" appliances. Why might this be? One reason: higher expectations. As one author noted:

People began to expect more from those who kept the house. For example, whereas once laundry was done once a week and clothes worn several days before being laundered, modern housekeepers may do laundry every day because family members wear an item only once before washing it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]zyna_kat, 2009-03-11 12:17 pm UTC
(no subject) - tree, 2009-03-11 04:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - ariadne484, 2009-03-11 06:32 pm UTC

[info]evilsqueakers
2009-03-12 03:12 am UTC (link)
I'm more impressed with the dishwasher myself. Not having one for the past five months and a single sink...I'm more than willing to sell my first born for one. You waste a lot of time washing dishes.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2009-03-12 01:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]evilsqueakers, 2009-03-12 04:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]aerobot, 2009-03-13 05:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]evilsqueakers, 2009-03-13 06:33 pm UTC
Washing machines DID liberate us
[info]catman
2009-03-13 09:08 pm UTC (link)
Oddly enough, I had a very interesting conversation before this article came out with my 80 year old neighbour. She was born in Scotland, and remembers how tedious and time consuming laundry was, and how it wasn't just for one household, but an entire community event. Her mother had to travel about a half mile to the local laundry, which was basically a very large set of barrels, each of them filled with water and wood from her own home was used to boil the water within. The days would be spent boiling sheets and other assorted laundry with a large stick and scrubbed on washboards. The hardest part of this process was always the wringing, which took arms of steel that Clarke Kent himself would be envious of. To get the irritating soap out of the fabric, they were rinsed, wrung, rinsed, wrung, rinsed, wrung...you get the idea...until there was no soap residue and the fabrics were at worst damp/dry. I can't imagine what my neighbour's mother's hands must have looked like. She said they were hard working hands, covered in callouses and in winter they would crack and bleed.

It didn't matter what the weather was, you had to get the laundry done. Many families of that time were very large, and laundry was a constant chore. There were no disposable diapers. Nappies were boiled and washed at home. It was necessary to keep the bedding and towels, etc. very clean because it kept the lice and other bugs at bay, it also served as preventing infection throughout the families (I wonder if this boiling and sterilizing of the sheets may have had something to do with this, especially with the deadly outbreaks of flu and the risks of it being passed on between family members). Remember, at this time of history, people had just come to understand how germs spread around, and flu outbreaks wiped out entire families. Keeping clean was that generation's version of 'detoxification'. However, the damp environments of these laundry facilities and getting wet in cold weather probably contributed to a lot of pnuemonia cases. My neighbour's mother had a lot of problems with her lungs in later years, and her hands were crippled with arthritis.

Oddly enough, I remember my grandmother's old wringer/washer. Apparently, she was the talk of the town because she'd gotten an automatic one, while most of her neighbours still had the manual roller wringers.


(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map