On The Absurdity of Domestic Labor

Some people have all the luck…  The conjuring trick that is domestic labor!

But the brouhaha over Hilary Rosen’s injudicious remarks is not really about whether what stay-home mothers do is work.  Because we know the answer to that: it depends. When performed by married women in their own homes, domestic labor is work—difficult, sacred, noble work.  Ann says Mitt called it more important work than his own, which does make you wonder why he didn’t stay home with the boys himself.  When performed for pay, however, this supremely important, difficult job becomes low-wage labor that almost anyone can do—teenagers, elderly women, even despised illegal immigrants.  But here’s the real magic: when performed by low-income single mothers in their own homes, those same exact tasks—changing diapers, going to the playground and the store, making dinner, washing the dishes, giving a bath—are not only not work; they are idleness itself.  Just ask Mitt Romney.

[…]

So there it is: the difference between a stay-home mother and a welfare mother is money and a wedding ring.  Unlike any other kind of labor I can think of, domestic labor is productive or not, depending on who performs it.