Children's roles in revolutionary movements

Children and the Revolution: A Critical Analysis

It has been said that the sexual revolution that began in the 1960s is complete and women now have equality in the work place. However, Lyn Craig argues that the transformation is not complete and that women now share more of the workload, as compared to men. She argues that this is especially true for couples that have children. According to Craig, equality in the workplace has price, but only for women. She argues that men do not share an equal portion of the workload, particularly when it comes to household tasks and child rearing activities. The topic of the article has a decidedly feminist slant. However, regardless of the feminist slant to her work, this analysis will demonstrate that Craig's work is not only valid, but that it demonstrates an overlooked social problem.

Lyn Craig took a long, hard look at a situation that has become a part of modern life; the mother must often go outside of the home for employment. This social trend slowly developed from social changes and out of financial necessity for many. Craig's research questions reflect motherhood in terms of additional workload in the day. She compared the number of hours worked by single persons and married persons, both with and without children. Her hypothesis was that childcare adds a significant measurable workload to the days of men and women with children, as compared to those without children.

Summary of Craig's Work

One of the key criticisms of Craig's study is that is uses data obtained from a study previously conducted by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The study data is over 10 years old. It used a time-diary methodology where participants were asked to track the number of hours that they spent in several categories of activities. Craig's study did not account for the possibility that significant social changes might have occurred during this time that may change the study results. For instance, since the data was collected use of the Internet has increased efficiency of the workforce. There are many more opportunities for working mothers to do their work remotely from home than there were at the time the data was collected.

Craig justifies her use of this particular data set by citing other studies that attest to its reliability. However, Craig does not give any other reasons than this for her use of the study. The study surveys 4000 Australian households, which adds credibility to the statistical data, but does not guarantee that bias is not present. Glezer (1991) conducted a study using a similar data set to Craig's, only from an earlier time period. This study examined how people balance their working and family lives. This is considered to be a credible statistical source by authors other than Craig.

There are several sources of bias that could be present in the study. For example, the study is self-reporting. Craig assumes that the couples kept their activities accurately. However, their might be social biases that were not accounted for in the bias. For instance, women might have over or under reported their childcare tasks. The study asked the study participants to record their activities for two days at 5-minute intervals. The task of recording the activities takes up a considerable amount of time during the study period. These factors are not accounted for in Craig's analysis.

Craig successfully isolates the dependent and independent variables in the study. She held several factors, such as family configuration constant in order to isolate the dependent variable, parenthood. The statistical treatment of the regression analysis was adequate to make conclusions based on this sample population. Craig concluded that, on average, working people with children work approximately 4 hours longer than those that are childless. In addition, working mothers pull a bigger portion of the load than men with children do. Craig presents her conclusions in a graphic format that is easy to understand.

What Do Others Have to Say?

In a similar study, Gjerdingen (2000) found that workload increased disproportionately for women after the birth of a first child. She found that this was true, even when a plan was developed for the division of labor so that it was distributed more evenly between both partners. Gjerdingen's study used a time study analysis similar to that used by Craig. Gjerdingen discussed the possibility that cultural differences could have influenced the results. Cultural differences might have influenced Craig's study in a similar manner, but this factor was not mentioned as a potential limitation of the study either.

New Zealand study supports the potential for cultural bias regarding work related gender differences. Else (1997) addressed the same division of labor issue in New Zealand. They found that the gendered division of labor was prevalent in New Zealand society, with the women's work outside of the home having less importance than the men's as far as "breadwinning" is concerned. Else's study found that men's transfer of "household" wages is still considered payment for women's "unpaid" care giving work.

Else's study supports Craig's study in an obscure way. Craig did not address attitudes towards working outside of the home, only the number of hours spent. Else's study found that traditional gender roles were still valid during the time of the sampling of Craig's population. Craig's study found that women were still largely responsible for the childcare responsibilities, whether they worked or not. Working men with children took on a disproportionate amount of the domestic activities. This could be interpreted as a reflection of the attitude that domestic responsibilities are still largely considered women's work.

However, a similar study in the UK found that social conditions were changing to reflect an acceptance of men's need to increase domestic tasks in order to free their wives and alleviate workload stress. Joshi (1998) found that men's attitudes regarding their need to redefine roles and responsibilities regarding household activities and child rearing were changing. When one juxtaposes Joshi's study against that of Else and Craig, cultural bias may enter into the analysis. The differences between these two studies could indicate more progressive attitudes towards gender roles in the UK, as opposed to in Australia and New Zealand.