I’ve seen the article “Women Aren’t Nags – We’re Just Fed Up,” by Gemma Hartley, circulating a bunch online. Posted and shared from various female connections of mine. Many of whom have offered their high praise and given nearly an “I told you so!” reaction around the content discussed.
And then there’s me: So. Many. Mixed. Feelings.
At its core, I like the intention of what the author wants to suggest. Part of her mission truly resonates with me. I agree to reshaping the norms of egalitarian roles/tasks within relationships. I agree, that is, provided the egalitarian roles/tasks are optimally defined by every couple. Which is to say, that the bounds of such division of labor are unique for every pairing. No two of us are exactly alike.
I also know the article was not written as a dissertation. My following comments are strictly given from a place of curiosity and personal reflection, as I saw the piece so vastly redistributed. From my own heart, my own defined role within my relationship (or at least how I perceive it in this moment), and my own views on “emotional labor” as Therapist, there are a few things I would like to say …
IMAGERY
The chosen image featured on the article’s page seems to deflect any opportunity in working through open dialogue with said partners. I might be on my own here, but I guess I view giving the middle finger an overtly aggressive pass at the (generally valid) frustrations around the share of emotional labor. While in other areas of my own feminist, activist-oriented frame of reference, I honor the blatant outcry in other instances: such as the Women’s March on D.C., which promoted a cutting symbol (re: pink pussy hats) in order to get their point across. A person’s bodily and reproductive rights as a human being deserve such a representation that is powerful enough, even crude enough, to spark the fire and demand change. Same with nationally-pertinent issues such as gun control and the Black Lives Matter movement. In this case, as the article was written around relational and social injustice, pertaining to multigenerational oppression of patriarchally-informed gender roles, I find that it would have felt more appropriate had the initial picture presented more of a welcoming illustration of engagement in the topic – while maintaining non-violent, and compassionate communication among all parties.
REPRESENTATION
As I stated before, the intention behind the essay is one which makes positive sense to me. Though, based on what I have found out about Hartley, you can’t help but notice that it was written from the perspective of a cisgender, Caucasian, middle-class woman, married in a heterosexual, monogamous relationship (*please submit to me any and all corrections to items listed*). I do realize there are many other women who share identical parameters – including yours truly – and thus they relate to Hartley. And while I do not list the author’s identifiers here so as to indicate that she would at all be unqualified to write a piece around this important topic, I can’t help but ask: What about the countless others outside of these markers? What does the display of egalitarianism look like within a gay relationship? With two women? With two men? What of the polyamorous couple? What of the biracial couple? Would the expressed frustrations of deeply oppressive societal expectations be as evident? And if not: does that imply that another couple outside of Hartley’s experiential lens does not endure similar kinds of exhaustion from deciding who is presumed to be “household manager?”
LINGUISTICS
Intention: Check.
Tone: Hmm ….
Hartley explores her own annoyance as she continues “having to ask” her husband about a box left in the middle of the floor, and that being “manager of the household was a lot of thankless work.” My question is: What kind of communication style has been established (perhaps subconsciously) with her spouse? Has it changed as their roles developed over time? Does she suggest that their marital discord is due strictly to rarely offered Feminism within her husband’s family of origin?
Consider this: As a couple and their status develops, i.e. shifting from boyfriend/girlfriend –> husband/wife –> mother/father, the relationship becomes increasingly intense and complicated as more years go by, more responsibilities occur, and more people (enter children) become a part of it. And so, I would argue, that our words and tone with one another also must develop. Hartley writes, “I tried to tell him that I noticed the box at least 20 times…” Well, having been someone who has experienced miscommunication in my own marriage (but of course), I can say honestly, that it has taken several years for me not only to acknowledge, but also how to better understand that the language styles between myself and husband are innately quite different. And thus, words and tone I use with him will presumably be different than words and tone I use with friends/sisters/coworkers/strangers, etc. Not better, not worse, but different. Kind, but different.
Point being, that if I “try” to tell him something over and over again, of course I become be agitated. I mean, I have 2 young kids – I repeat myself enough as it is.
And, just like with other children, sometimes the repeating of oneself to kids is due to distraction, peers, and other developmental stage issues. Clinically, we may also explore with families and school administration the repetition issue is by way of a learning disability in comprehension and responding back (or not responding). Not just because the difficulty happens with a son over a daughter. I cannot surmise that the only reasons for my husband’s differences of opinion or structure of parenting are due to his childhood upbringing, compounded by an engrained societal protection of being a man in America. Sounds fairly limited to me – even as I recognize that there is likely some of that happening! But, what if instead, I can recognize the incredible possibility that he and I simply have our own ways of expressing, parenting, cleaning, etc – out of preference? Especially as our relationship dynamics have shifted?
Example: I, for one, have always been neat. I enjoy things in order and put away. I presumed as I took on the role “Mother,” I would let go of that neurosis, and be all ‘casual and free-flying’ with messes. WRONG. I am still just as nit-picky on myself about cleanliness. And this preference influences the way my spouse and kids maintain cleanliness in the home. What if your partner doesn’t mind the mess in the home, because he is simply more ‘casual and free-flying? What if he takes care of kitchen dishes in a different way? The laundry? The yardwork? What if instead, we focus on modeling to our children that even with all of the differences between us, as a couple we can still speak to and with one another, support one another and the household, without condescension or passive-aggressive tendencies?
THIS: “Even having a conversation about the imbalance of emotional labor becomes emotional labor. It gets to a point where I have to weigh the benefits of getting my husband to understand my frustration against the compounded emotional labor of doing so in a way that won’t end in us fighting. Usually I let it slide, reminding myself that I’m lucky to have a partner who willingly complies to any task I decide to assign to him.”
Well, which is it? I don’t feel like “getting” someone to understand me or my feelings either – that is absolutely exhausting. And, truthfully, I don’t believe it’s my husband’s or anyone else’s job to “get and understand” me or my feelings – that’s my job. To build and be at peace with myself. Some will say, “the world is a mirror.” If that’s true, when facing resistance from your partner, where in yourself does that resistance live? I think Hartley attempts to express her disdain for the lack of equality in her household’s chores/emotional effort because of societal oppression – but the message for me gets muddled when the delivery comes off superior and patronizing.
Maybe I’m coming to it ultimately from my background in Marriage and Family Therapy. I guess more than anything, I really want to boil down her expressed dissension to interpersonal and communication barriers between she and her spouse, specifically. And even through counseling, much of a couple’s treatment can be approached through an inherently Feminist lens. In the excerpt provided above, I find that Hartley’s conflicting stance is revealed: she wants egalitarianism, initiative from her spouse, and empowerment – though seems to celebrate a personal identity and honor in being called “Household Manager.” The term shows up a few places in the article, and at times she seems irritated by its very label, including the weight she bears in trying to model otherwise for her children, but early on she writes about a time trying to “gingerly explain” that she is Manager to her husband. So, which is it? Does she ascribe to this term, or want to diminish it? Should we harp on a different woman’s choice in enjoying her sense of character as “Manager?” What if I, as Wife and Mom, feel rather fulfilled by the role Manager, with most of the emotional tasks dependent on me? Hartley herself comments that that there are types of emotional labor that she feels more versed in.
I believe much more change happens, when it’s chunked down into small steps along the way. Perhaps the way you and your significant other (“S.O.” being the hip acronym these days) could engage in this dialogue. The way each of us express/feel love in the literal, physical, intellectual, and emotional ways, varies greatly. Let’s give our partners the benefit of the doubt and include them (not berate them) into our narratives. If I want/need something from my husband, can I find a way to ask without blaming or pointing a finger? In the article, another woman relays, “My partner feels irritated and defensive by the fact that I’m always pointing out what he’s not doing. It shuts him down” and right after, “I haven’t figured out another way to make him aware of all the emotional and mental energy I’m spending to keep the house running.”
Find a way.
Use a therapist or a coach to help build communication practices. Read books on relationships from other specialists, like Gary Chapman’s, “The 5 Love Languages.” From a Self-Care perspective, yes, vent to your friends, that’s partly what they’re around for. Write. Walk in the woods and think on your feelings and experiences. Please do not continue pointing out whatever your partner is “not doing.” Compliment them when something is done to your liking. Express appreciation outright and out of the blue, just because, including in front of other people. If your S.O. shares, “if you tell me, I will help,” explore the possibility that is the way your partner needs to hear that you want help. It can’t always be about laziness or lack of initiative. It can’t always be about the way in which our S.O. was raised.
And I know, not everyone will be on the same side of my response to this piece. But it’s really not about sides at all – even from Hartley. She offers her genuine experience and exposé of her struggles among patriarchy, and seeking equality of parts shared in her home. An undertaking quite honorable. I find it valuable to continue facing difficulties with interpersonal relationships as a mass group, writing and blogging out ideas to which others can relate. This elicits connection and generates good knowledge. But I would venture to say, it is possible that with directness and kindness, we can model to our children, with the same fortitude, stronger and more equivalent levels of duties and love, in heart and home. Raising the next generation to be fiercely independent, driven, open, and mindful takes so much energy. It takes so much knowledge that I haven’t even come across, as my husband and I can only parent one day at a time. But together, as a team – sometimes split as 80/20, sometimes 60/40, sometimes 50/50 – we are 100% committed to doing so.