It's Not Just Biology | Feminist Economics Part 1

[@Zygote245]

Unrecognised labour provided by women in private households is such an important discussion to have. Part of the reason why it has gone unrecognized for so long I think can be attributed to the naturalization of the patriarchal family structures as developed in the nineteenth-century colonial context as an organizing trope for marshaling a bewildering array of cultures into a single, global narrative ordered and managed by Europeans. For a critical critique of this naturalization of this all pervasive narrative, I suggest reading the book by Angela Willey with the provocative title "Undoing monogamy : the politics of science and the possibilities of biology".

[@poppysunsettlingstories]

Too bad the comments are so bad on this one. I enjoyed. Fascinating and intelligent. No wonder the trolls came grumping.

[@Homcomru]

Fam, anyone who calls out “the trolls” is the bigger idiot and troll. I’m sorry for your difficulties in life that make you unable to understand even that.

[@iamheasyouareheas]

Yes. An indicator of quality material these days, unfortunately.

[@iamheasyouareheas]

@@Homcomru smells like you're afraid of something

[@Homcomru]

@@iamheasyouareheas The heck are you on about? But to answer your question... “Maybe of heights?” It is a NATURAL fear after all. That people can have.

[@prabinkarki4157]

Giving a counter argument and being a troll are different things. Just because someone other than you comes from a different perspective or has a counter argument doesn't mean that they are trolls.

[@abid31788]

I am here while doing literature review about a prospective topic around gender inequality and economic development This is mind boggling

[@michelleblair506]

Interesting concepts I will try to learn more about because of this video: “time poverty” and “unpaid labor” as components of the economic outcomes we observe. And I am pleased to hear a non-Western economic voice in such an important conversation. Thanks Prof. Ghosh and iNet.

[@Thesupidchannel]

I am super interested in the subject of unpaid labor and have recently discovered the book, "Caliban and the Witch" by Silvia Federici. It explains how primitive accumulation actually used the witch hunts to scare women into domestication.. because unpaid labor was needed for capitalism to take root. It's very fascinating.

[@vansonthewall]

@@Thesupidchannel How interesting! Thanks for the recommendation.

[@mereonichung5580]

Brilliant! thank you very much Professor Jayati for this series. great insights into feminist economics for a newbie like me. fully appreciate the direct, relatable examples, especially from the global south experiences. Really thought-provoking and empowering!!

[@khaimgulkovich3368]

Self-care, offspring care, community care-are all labor. Therefore, they ought to be officially recognized as such and institutionalized. For instance, motherhood ought to be recognized as profession.

[@tumbleweed5660]

I'm getting chills on how much wisdom the women in this video have. LET HER COOK

[@tumbleweed5660]

i just realized my statement might have come off as sexist if ur not gen z its meant to be a compliment ie (LETHIMCOOK)

[@cunninghamia1127]

Thank you for sharing this video which provides clearly feminist economics perspectives. It's really helpful.

[@T-ta-tu]

Thank you, professor Jayati. This is eye-opening. Just came across this series and love it.

[@Norascats]

Her insights are much needed in the world.

[@claudiaochoacruz]

So interesting!! I fully agree, it is very important to carry out egalitarian social constructions of gender and also to construct new epistemologies with an egalitarian point of view. The difference in earnings between women and men is just the tip of the iceberg. It is necessary to develop epistemological proposals from philosophy to economics!! Thank you for sharing it!!

[@2istedanimator]

Ready to die at war?

[@claudiaochoacruz]

@@2istedanimator The war is over and you have lost the contest, Babyboy!!

[@claudiaochoacruz]

@@2istedanimator 🤣🤣🤣

[@vansonthewall]

Glad to see care work coming into mainstream economics, Federici's work deserves more attention! Really great video, with unfortunately a lot of comments from folks who clearly misunderstood or haven't engaged with feminist economics in good faith.

[@mouseutopiadystopia24601]

Care work has always been “in” mainstream economics, e.g. teacher, nurse, chef, maid. However, one does not deserve compensation for taking care of one’s own family. There is no such thing as feminist economics; you mean Marxist economics, which even Marxists conceded is worse for the proletariat than capitalism. I am engaging in good faith; rebut my points in good faith.

[@vansonthewall]

@@mouseutopiadystopia24601 Feminist economics is just economics through the sociogical lens of feminism, it's mainstream enough that it's a module in some University courses now, so idk what you mean

[@mouseutopiadystopia24601]

@@vansonthewall Feminist economics is fake economics. It represents only ideological (Marxist) institutional capture of what was previously the most objective of social sciences. This entire video, and all texts on feminist economics, misrepresent reality to make women appear to be oppressed victims, when they are not. Many schools of economics assert that feminist/Marxist economics is not a serious field of inquiry; rather, it is just activism.

[@vansonthewall]

@@mouseutopiadystopia24601 Seems like you don't read feminist econ or even Marxist econ, because this is just a bad and uninformed take.

[@mouseutopiadystopia24601]

@@vansonthewall First, Marx literally was not an economist. He talked about things related to economics (“political economic philosophy”), but not economics per se. Nothing he ever said attempted to model value/scarcity flow, neither empirically nor rationally. He gave no detailed prescriptions about how to organize a Marxist economy (or any economy). Subsequent “Marxist economists” either were ideologically driven activists or hijacked the work of Keynes/Krugman. Just because your university added a module to the curriculum about “Marxist economics” does not mean “Marxist economics” is real economics. Second, feminist economics is not economics; it is just activism. Most specifically, it is women nagging. The Austrians, the Chicago school, even the Keynesians/Krugmanites provide a (mostly) internally consistent rational model of the mechanics of value and scarcity, though the Krugmanites continue to get everything wrong, despite the Nobel prize. Feminist economics does not do that. Instead, they just nag. Present to me ONE major contribution feminists made to the field of ECONOMICS. I will then show how it is wrong, hijacked from non-feminist economists, ideological bafflegab, and/or nagging.

[@mionanik7508]

Wow! What a great explanation of gender roles in the economy! How insightful.

[@tumwizukyejosephssekide5474]

It's quite interesting to regard the home chores as leisure for women then the men leisure activities be games,!Unfair

[@SwarnaSVepa]

Very good video and makes it easy to understand gendered distribution of Income and burden

[@Prodouchede]

What a gold mine.

[@abid31788]

I am working on gender economics and wish to get in touch with her !

[@darshanpatil.2003.x.1]

Love it ❤

[@takahashiryouhei1977]

すごく分かりやすかったです。 大変勉強になりました。 また我が身を振り返り深く絶望を感じました。 製作者に感謝申し上げます。

[@saidijela2663]

I miss my home country Syria

[@harrisjm62]

So what is the big picture here? Whats the solution? Is it to have everything unpaid become paid, commodify everything? So should we only shop, cook, clean, fuck, and take care of others when its our specialized profession? Is that the future Ghosh is getting at? Or is it the opposite where we get rid of money and payments altogether? Some of these things I can see solutions for. If women are being taken advantage of in solo bargaining sessions, we should have industry wide unions like Sweden where wages are set through unionized collective bargaining. But I don't get the overall end game here if there is one.

[@fatpotatoe6039]

This is why this conversation is meaningless nonsense.

[@vansonthewall]

One example of an outcome of feminist economics is the rise of the concept of wages for housewives (something that was proposed in the recent election in my city in India!), to recognize and empower the majority of women. Furthermore, economists have started using things like Time Use Statistics to survey women's household work and provide policy interventions according to their needs (eg. If it was found that majority of housework involved childcare, the govt would propose setting up childcare facilities to ease this burden. Eg 2. It was found that women in rural households take up most of the day to day purchasing decisions, but were still denied access to savings accounts or personal allowances. Thus, targeting housewives to educate them on this can improve that). These are just some outcomes! But the broader goal of feminist economic analysis is to expand and explore traditional economic models and how a gendered viewpoint not just challenges older norms but opens up the discipline to new ways of understanding work, pay and social life. This is something several fields in economics already do and this is one branch of it. For instance, understanding that most work in the economy is unpaid helped expand the notion of GDP and what it means - currently, economists are proposing we revise these estimates. The most important point, imo, and one that Prof. Gosh brought up as well, is that simply identifying a problem and documenting it is the first step in addressing and changing it. I hope that clarifies your question!

[@fatpotatoe6039]

@@vansonthewall Who pays? Household labourers are going to receive reduced wages to pay taxes to pay women for household work. Surely this does nothing tangible except redistribute existing income? Surely it is better to grow the manufacturing sector so that Indian women, like British women in the age of the Industrial Revolution, can gain independence by being employed for work?

[@vansonthewall]

@@fatpotatoe6039 You're not the first one to ask this question. I highly recommend starting with Silvia Federici's 1974 paper "Wages Against Housework" (14 pages and easy to read). Most modern proposals start with perhaps a minimum wage being paid by the government - it could encourage women to save, be independent or start businesses on the side. Many benefits, and many drawbacks too - and today's debate is also considering alternatives to it. I do have to emphasize that in India, agriculture is the biggest sector and not manufacturing, and most agricultural laborers are already women. It has not improved their status.

[@fatpotatoe6039]

@@vansonthewall I cannot argue with the reality of your experience, only point to the precedents throughout the Western world that the faster accumulation of capital raises labour productivity and therefore real wages, ownership of domestic appliances and women's workforce participation such that they gain financial and personal autonomy. I will read the paper.

[@OtherDAS]

I got up this morning and made myself breakfast to be ready for productive work. Society owes me for this massive unpaid labor. I sat myself, placed plates and silverware, took my order, cooked the food, and cleaned the table. Maitre 'd , waiter, cook, and busboy. The food was also only there in the pantry and fridge because I ordered & purchased it. Two more jobs, Supplies and Financing. Had to also cover the real estate to cook and eat in, and make sure there was power not just lights, but power to the stove, and fridge, and Heating/AC. I did SO MANY jobs. Unpaid, to I might add. All so I would be a productive worker for Society. edit: Also I was making and running this whole Enterprise, so I was the CEO AND the COO. So much Labor on my part. Where is my compensation?! Or maybe it's only work when you do it for another's goals... not for your own.

[@rishabhjain613]

As far as the economy is concerned you were at leisure. :)

[@danielakuhn5893]

Great!

[@fabiolas.c.6129]

I'm a 38yo only child, living with my parents for 2 years now. I think I'm privileged to have recognition of my "care work". They pay me monthly to take care of the house, cleaning, shopping, medical appointments. I still work as a freelancer writer, but not full time. Because of the way I was raised, sexism and all, I struggled to understand how important is the care work and my role as a caretaker.

[@pleasantturtle2799]

Interesting how she skipped over the whole hypergamy thing. Seems like a primary Pillar to this whole conversation.

[@mari_arzan]

what kind of trolling is this?..self-contradictory ideological nightmare with deliberate omission of logical steps and whole chunks of evidence - everything to ensure reaching the predermined conclusion... what a shame...

[@sebastiaankruis3006]

11:42 The public often misunderstands what "rationality" means in economics, and I'm a bit sad that even she doesnt quite understand it, even though she seems to have listened to at least a few economy classes. It doesnt have to mean maximizing "material gain or leisure". It can include everything measurable that people want, including free time, the health of the environment, biodiversity, etc. So the notion that "caretaking is not possible" in mainstream economic models is not true. While traditional models that students learn in university often dont include these factors, you can include the utility of other agents in your own utility function. Still an interesting video though.

[@bb-wb8sb]

your definition is a revisionist one, that is so because of the backlash it has gotten. the defined in the video, is the main operative one, even when it is said otherwise. look upon an analysis, and try the two definitions out, and you'll see which one better fits.

[@vibhuvikramaditya4576]

The idea of altrusim which may form the basis of care work is something different from self interest is misgrounded, what is self interest, when the subject identifies something which is going to lead to an improvement in the state of the subject, it acts in its interest and as the subject is the self, it is called self-interest, altrusim is also self-interest as for example, it is only when the mother or father of a child indentifies with the external subject child in relation to its own-self, the distinction between the internal or own self and the external object fades away, thus when a parent acts in its child's interest, it is effectively acting in its own, why else would a parent enjoy its child's success if it doesn't identify as its own,( an example can be when and if a step parent doesn't identify with the child, it wouldn't have the same emotional response, if it does, then the response would be the same), its the same as group or tribal behvaior or a soldier dying on the battle field for his/her nation, the moral and positive judgement of actions are two completely separable things

[@helldgonni2270]

「コンテンツを調整する必要があります」、

[@mouseutopiadystopia24601]

Supply, demand, and arbitrage determine your compensation of labor. If you aren’t paid enough money for your labor, then offer more productivity and/or negotiate better deal with a different employer. If you are a stay-at-home wife, then your husband compensates you by providing food, shelter, and luxuries, so your work is not unpaid labor. The state/your employer should not compensate you for taking care of your family. That’s your responsibility. Grow up. Get a job, or marry a man with a good job.

[@LaurynLJones]

"It's Not Just Biology | Feminist Economics Part 1" KZbin, uploaded by New Economic Thinking 15 September 2021, kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZyrZaamnsiWsJY how to cite this video

[@tomofnorthcal]

I agree with equal pay and rights, but in mass media no one says equal responsibility and no one says respect men for being different. We are different and people not on camera mostly treat each other with respect and are responsible.

[@TheDynamicmarket]

solution: respect the human rights and liberty of every individual regardless of which group it belongs.so we do not need gender perspective. case closed

[@harrisjm62]

its funny you should mention that as human rights pertaining to certain groups are being violated much more frequently than others. Care to have a solution for the issues said groups face without having specific perspectives? Additionally, can you please refer specifically to which article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights you are refering to? The UDHR frequently brings up the rights of individuals belonging to groups because it recognizes the two cannot be separated from one another. Check out Article 25, Section 2 UDHR for example.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

@@harrisjm62 you have it backwards, he is being solidaristic, inclusive, and diplomatic by not naming the more frequently violated group. Hint-it isn't women. Not for murder, labour exploitation, molestation, violence, homelessness, starvation, medical access, etc. etc.

[@xfhghe]

Today the educated woman in the West have a wealth of life choices. They can become tradition housewives, a working parent, they can rise to the pinnacle of the professional world, create businesses that rivals anything men have built. But I would argue that you can’t have it all. High status and high paying professions are very competitive and demand 90+ hr work weeks forever. Same with businesses. Child bearing is the province of youth. And relationships for women favors youth. Wealthy ugly old men are able to attract beautiful younger women (consider Onassis). But the reverse is not true. Wealthy high status women is not the attraction for most men, but physical beauty and agreeableness are. I understand that Indian culture does not believe in love at first sight. That love develops as a product after years of effort. While I would encourage a daughter of mine to pursue higher education, I would hope that she thinks hard about her path before embarking upon it. And that hopefully, it will be the one which will give her the greatest lasting fulfillment.

[@madhav1]

1. If companies are able to get away with paying women less than men for the same amount of work or more, isn’t it more valuable for those companies to just hire women for every vacancy as well? 2. CEO is an intricate role that needs competent people, it just so happens that men generally tend to be more competent. Doesn’t mean that women aren’t. But men dominate. 3. Care workers (nurses) generally have less value addition compared to technical roles (doctors) to a firm. It has nothing to do with genders and collectively held stereotypes.

[@harrisjm62]

1. It is, which is why you'll find companies that emphasize cost-cutting hire at min-wage and most min-wage earners are women. 2. CEO isn't anymore competant than most other professional positions, usually average. But they are well-connected. Someone very good at their job may be irreplacable, which also means un-promotable. Do you have any constructive criticism to bring? You seem like you came here only looking for problems.

[@madhav1]

@@harrisjm62 whatever may my intentions be, it really doesn't matter much more than the question that I'm posing. 1) minimum wage labourers in us are generally students who haven't refined their skills yet, and need an income to stay afloat. Women may be disproportionately higher because they're willing to do any job they get to subsist. 2) many entrepreneurs are men, founders are men, building a company from ground up is a big feat and those would definitely pass it on to people they find worthy, they can't really afford to give participation trophies for the sake of representation. If they find a competent women well and good. Don't get me wrong, there are a few women entrepreneurs making it big, but even they wouldn't choose representation over competence. 3) you didn't address my third point, can I print that you agree with it?

[@vansonthewall]

Citation needed for point 3 where you assert care workers add less value than technical workers (in fact, a lot of papers say the opposite, that care work is perhaps the most essential job in an economy). Researchers working on mRNA vaccines may be important, but you do realize it would be useless without the millions of nurses and healthcare workers administering it to the public.

[@madhav1]

@@vansonthewall essential workers such as janitors, delivery men, bricklayers, construction workers everywhere are "underpaid" as per you logic. You are not taking demand and supply into consideration. Care workers, laymen jobs are " un/ semiskilled jobs. Literally anyone can do it and such labours are available in abundance are easily replacable. But that is not the case for technical and skilled jobs which very few people hold profeciency over and are technically irreplaceable. Hence their worth.

[@vansonthewall]

@@madhav1 Honestly, you're right. They ARE underpaid. As to careworkers and the rest, bold to assume anyone could do their job and bolder still to say that an econ student hasn't thought of demand and supply. Good day.

[@ultimate6243]

Gender Roles are not Social construct. Gender Roles are product of evolution.(Read Dual inheritance Theory to know more about it) Gender Roles exist even before Human came in this earth. Example-- Lioness serve meat/Food to Lion. If Gender Roles are social construct then who taught Gender Roles to Lioness?

[@Chikaboom97]

It's like saying, "Hey read Beauvoir, gender roles are socially constructed". The Point is that these questions have different answer depending on what the theory is, and this is one of the ways to problematise the traditional notion that biology determines gender roles.

[@Chikaboom97]

Also, male lions do hunt and do it often. I don't know where you get your facts? Disney maybe?

[@ultimate6243]

@@Chikaboom97 It's not about who Hunt or not. It's about who serve to whom. Lioness serve meat/food to Lion and not vice-versa.

[@ultimate6243]

@@Chikaboom97 Dual-inheritence theory is a scientific theory unlike feminist conspiracy theory(Which saya gender roles are creation of Human society) Many great scientist have contributed in development of "Dual inheritance theory". Link--en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_inheritance_theory

[@emilianosintarias7337]

@@Chikaboom97 I think the best bet is that biological sex determines gender roles under certain environmental conditions, but that there is always a social force that mediates this.

[@LuisFuentes1771]

Its incredible how poorly she understood traditional economics

[@Homcomru]

You know... all this whole video says is basically this: “Hey, let’s help blind people and only blind people. Since they are the true and only category of disabled people”. As much as I like women (and blind people, since that was what this analogy meant), *THERE ARE DEFINITELY OTHER GROUPS OUT THERE WITH DIFFERENT PROBLEMS.* Man... If you were a South Korean and you’d be asked if you wanted to be a girl (and a good housewife) or a boy (and study for 15 hours a day in SCHOOL to get to University and then to get to a job with similar work hours), I’m CERTAIN you (and I would as well) pick the HOUSEWIFE option. The women that take care of others have it comparatively *less complex* even if similarly (though probably not quite) as hard. That means that they also don’t have a say sometimes. And you know what...? Judging by how people vote for their countries’ leaders. Judging by how consumers (most of them) couldn’t give a CRAP about customisability (when it’s the DIY kind) and want things “pre-made” for themselves (Just think of how Tik Tok’s algorithm is more popular than KZbin’s nowadays), well... Saying stuff like “Oh, no! Stop having women run the household!” when many women actually prefer it due to it being *easier for them*, well... That’s either stupidity or misandric propaganda. (I’d go with the latter, since I’m pretty certain that women have at least like 20% more *very own special rights* than men nowadays and if that is increased it will only really be a complete reversal of what happens in Arab countries now)

[@thunderwarrior1]

Ha!

[@iamheasyouareheas]

I see you haven't watched any of the other material in this series, or content on this channel.

[@Homcomru]

@@iamheasyouareheas Then you are unfortunately “legally blind” (or whatever it’s called nowadays). A FEW of the videos here are pretty good. Like the video about how “Economics should align with reality”. This video is the LITERAL opposite, my man.

[@iamheasyouareheas]

@@Homcomru agree to disagree on the definition of sight and reality then I suppose

[@noammusk519]

What a load of bs propaganda

[@krpio5873]

How is this propaganda? Women are on avegare poorer around the world due to the fact that much of the work they perform is not remunerated such as child and old age care. Nobody's mom gets rich by rasing us. Yet this work is essential to society.

[@othmanelebbache3026]

@@krpio5873 how this is ridicule, what about the fathers who are working hard outside, to bring what the family needs, could not consider this as a revenue for the woman? but, indeed what u said is wrong, we are in the most age support women to work, because of capitalism, therefore we see a enormous decrease in average of marriage, even the women consumption is great, where they spend their salarie, in make up of course..

[@noammusk519]

@@krpio5873 True, but they choose to do that. That's like saying school teachers are poorer than doctors. Sure they are, shouldn't have been school teacher then. Child rearing is a choice.

[@RojaJaneman]

@@noammusk519 Slavery/servitude r rarely a matter of choice. It’s usually because the society conspires the conditions which pressurize the people into being a certain way or doing certain things. Lac of acknowledgment of such forces in the market is detrimental to the economy as a whole.

[@anjalisinha7382]

@@othmanelebbache3026 seems you have limited boundary of experience

[@emmanuelameyaw9735]

😂😂😂Marrying bad husband who put all the work on you is your responsibility ...don't marry him and later cry inequality in chores afterwards.

[@vansonthewall]

You may not have noticed that this video, to a large part, focuses on India and developing countries where women (and men) are significantly present in rural areas - within India especially, marriage is not a choice and is rarely done for love. Not to forget, often women are married off BECAUSE the son's family expects someone to take care of a household and that is the norm. This occurs even in cities. So perhaps your suggestion doesn't apply to the focus of this video, which isn't the US or the UK.

[@fatpotatoe6039]

@@vansonthewall True, it is disgusting

[@J040PL7]

why does she keep talking about the "double burden" of paid and unpaid work? surely you can choose to have just 1. no one is forcing anything to do both. i guess some people just want it all.

[@thepowerman8952]

Geary, D. C. (2010). _Male, Female: The evolution of human sex differences_ (2nd ed.). American Psychological Association. She should read this book.

[@Chikaboom97]

Lol the fact that you couldn't figure out the difference between sex and gender is sad

[@Chikaboom97]

I'm sure Jayati Ghosh is aware of the biological arguments