1. Illich's book, Gender, published in 1982, is devoted to making this point. Illich argues, in what appears to me to be an unnecessarily cryptic way, that the market standard is a male standard and that therefore women in the market are paid less than men. He also recognizes that under "economistic" or utilitarian cost-benefit assumptions, it is hard to measure women's unpaid nonmarket work, that is, what women do—for children, for men, in the home and in the community. I argue that it is the work of women as wives that Illich is trying to conceptualize. This work is broader continue

than housework but includes it; it also includes women's mothering, but mothering that is strictly privatized and subordinated to the heterosexual couple. Wives' work, since it is not directly marketable in a market economy, gets defined as worthless. [BACK]

2. Delphy, Close to Home, pp. 94-95. Joan Acker, in an influential early article ("Women and Stratification"), stressed that hierarchies based on gender create different conditions for women and men within the same family. Although this insight was an important first step in making women visible in stratification studies, it is also important to recognize that gender hierarchy is itself related to the extent to which married women's life chances depend on those of their husbands. [BACK]

3. Delphy, 1984, Close to Home, p. 96. [BACK]

4. See especially Coser and Rokoff, "Women in the Occupational World." [BACK]

5. Blood and Wolfe, Husbands and Wives. [BACK]

6. Gillespie, "Who Has the Power?" [BACK]

7. Weitzman, Divorce Revolution, pp. 337-43. Other studies made on larger populations representing the nation as a whole come up with less dramatic percentages but they are still in the same direction: income up for men, down for women upon divorce. See especially Duncan and Hoffman, "Economic Consequences of Marital Dissolution." Duncan and Hoffman's main point is that most women do not remain in poverty because they remarry. Thus the solution to poverty for women is to again become dependent on a husbands income! [BACK]

8. Debate between Phyllis Schlafly and Sara Weddington, February 27, 1986, University of Oregon. [BACK]

9. Wickert, "Freud's Heritage." [BACK]

10. Doi, The Anatomy of Dependence. [BACK]

11. Altman, Homosexualization of America. [BACK]

12. See Whitehead's discussion of the berdache in American Indian societies ("Bow and Burden Strap," p. 95). Whereas earlier interpreters of this status in which a man adopted a woman's activities focused on its "homosexual" implications, Whitehead maintains that homosexuality was "never mentioned as one of the indicators of the budding berdache." The berdache involved taking on female occupation and dress, with sexual orientation playing only a minor role. [BACK]

13. Brownmiller, Femininity. [BACK]

14. Roy, "Concepts of 'Femininity' and 'Liberation,'" p. 221. [BACK]

15. Stevens, "Women's Liberation Movement in Latin America," p. 75. [BACK]

16. D. Lewis, "Black Family." [BACK]

17. For a good summary of trends with respect to women and the family, see Cherlin, "Women and the Family." [BACK]

18. Holter, ed., Patriarchy in Welfare Society. break [BACK]

19. Swidler, "Love and Adulthood in American Culture." See also Bellah et al., Habits of the Heart, chapter 4. [BACK]

20. The pollster Daniel Yankelovich reports that in 1970 and again in 1980, 96 percent of all Americans "declared themselves dedicated to the ideal of two people sharing a life and home together" ( New Rules, p. 249). The couple, presumably any two people—not men's groups, not women's groups, not kin groups nor even friends—is the central locus of loyalty and commitment among adult citizens in the United States. [BACK]

21. Waite, Goldscheider, and Witsberger, "Nonfamily Living." See also Marini, "Age and Sequencing Norms." [BACK]

22. Roebuck, "Grandma as Revolutionary." [BACK]

23. Gordon and O'Keefe, "Incest as Family Violence," report from a study of fifty incest cases in Boston from 1880 to 1960 that, although they could not measure the father's participation in child-rearing directly, they did find that the presence of the father in the household (which at least made it possible for him to have child care responsibilities) was more likely to be associated with nonsexual abuse than with incest. "Ninety-five percent of male nonsexual child-abuse assailants lived in the same household as their children, as compared with 68% of incest assailants. This is the more striking considering that sharing a house often provided more opportunity for an illicit sexual relationship" (p. 30). This at least suggests that overt incest is not necessarily encouraged in males by their living in the same household, at least if the mother is present. H. Parker and S. Parker ("Father-Daughter Sexual Abuse," especially p. 545) have reported research comparing a sample of incestuous fathers with agematched nonincestuous fathers in penal and psychiatric facilities. The authors found that the abusing fathers were much less likely to have lived in the home during the first three years of the child's life. Their major conclusions were that the combination of a father's own early parental-attachment deficits and his low level of involvement in the socialization of his daughter increased considerably the probability of abuse. [BACK]

24. On incest's being more common among stepfathers than among fathers, see Finkelhor, Child Sexual Abuse, p. 25. [BACK]

25. See C. Lewis, Becoming a Father, for an explicit presentation of the following "beliefs" about fathers: "that fathers have only recently been discovered by family researchers, . . . that in previous generations fathers were not involved in childrearing, . . . and that recently men have started to become highly involved in and committed to child care." [BACK]

26. Kamerman, "Child Care Services."

27. Ibid. [BACK]

26. Kamerman, "Child Care Services."

27. Ibid. [BACK]

28. Hewlett, A Lesser Life. [BACK]

30. For clarification of this issue, see Mansbridge, "ERA and Gender Gap." [BACK]

31. Gill, "Attitudes Toward Equal Rights Amendment." [BACK]

32. Poole and Zeigler, Women, Public Opinion, and Politics, p. 6. [BACK]

33. Shapiro and Mahajan, "Gender Differences in Policy Preferences." break [BACK]