The Politics of Household Chores

Household duties are traditionally, in many cultures, considered the province of women. Even after they receive an education, women often stay home and raise the children rather than put their energy into building a career. The labor that women perform in the home including cleaning and childrearing duties is almost always unpaid work, leading to a situation in which women are essentially domestic servants. Moreover, with educated women in the home, the world continues to be dominated by a patriarchal structure in which men remain in positions of political, social, and economic power. In "Maid to Order," Barbara Ehrenreich argues that the modern and post-modern feminist movement has created a massive and meaningful shift in the role of women in society but the author points out that this change has only so far impacted the lives of wealthy white women. Although the author misses a few key points, Ehrenreich is correct in noticing that the demonization of housework by wealthy women has led to a situation in which women of color and poor women are left behind.

Women of color continue to be trapped by the old norms and values in which women occupy the private sphere, whereas men are in the public sphere engaged in important positions of power in politics, business, or manufacturing. When the first few waves of feminism took root in society, household duties including housecleaning became demonized as representing patriarchy and sexism. Many women wanted to work outside the home and take part in the public life that was once reserved only for men. When this shift in cultural values happened, however, the men did not rush in to fill the gap at home. Instead, the extra wages garnered by the secondary breadwinner in the family was used to hire a professional cleaner to manage the household chores. That professional cleaner was, ironically and unfortunately, usually a woman of color. Ehrenreich finds the outsourcing of household chores problematic because of the fact that many of the paid professionals are women of color. This aspect of the author's argument remains strong throughout "Maid to Order."

According to Ehrenreich, outsourcing household chores is exploitative of women of color because it ensures that their options are limited to domestic servitude. Whereas once housework was the "great equalizer of women," according to Ehrenreich, only wealthy women who happen to also be white were able to work outside the home and hire professional cleaners (60). Housework is not an "equalizer," but rather the very thing that distinguishes rich from poor. Although this is generally true, there are a few weaknesses in Ehrenreich's argument that deserve to be mentioned. For one, the reason why women of color were becoming professional cleaners was because it was a viable means of making a living while they learned English and established some financial independence so that one day they could either put their children through college or attend school themselves. There is nothing wrong with doing domestic work and receiving pay, and in fact, this situation is preferable to doing domestic duties for no pay at all.

Second, Ehrenreich seems to ironically denigrate the people she is trying to defend (women of color), by saying that cleaning is menial labor. After all, Ehrenreich herself tried to work for a corporate cleaning agency and says she was "relieved of the thinking process," (67). Saying that she was "relieved of the thinking process" makes Ehrenreich sound arrogant, as if she is too smart for cleaning. There may be some professional cleaners who do a good job because they do think critically about their work. Also, many homeowners hire professional cleaners because professionals do a better job. Ehrenreich would not criticize people for hiring financial advisors, then why should she be upset that people are hiring cleaners to do what they cannot do well for themselves? Ehrenreich seems uniquely concerned about housecleaning, instead of taking a more balanced approach perhaps by also addressing the issue of underpaid workers at Wal*Mart. There is no need to make housecleaners feel like they are victims, as Ehrenreich seems to do. Finding temporary or even permanent employment with a cleaning agency is not necessarily any worse than any other service profession.

In spite of these few conceptual weakenesses, Ehrenreich's argument remains strong. It is particularly disturbing to read that the corporate housecleaning agencies are not only exploitative but also train their workers to do a superficial cleaning job. As Ehrenreich points out, the point is "not to clean so much as it is to create the appearance of having been cleaned" (67). Ehrenreich is also correct to point out that cleaning is not the only exploitative industry in the world, and that almost all industries on some level exploit workers.

The author unfortunately does not offer a cogent solution such as by suggesting that all people -- including men and women of color -- should take part equally in the household chores instead of outsourcing the work. At the same time, Ehrenreich suggests that parents do not shelter their children from housework and instead use household chores as an opportunity to help the children feel more like they are part of the family by giving them responsibilities. This is a romantic notion, and could in some cases help take care of the household duties in a non-sexist manner. Yet there will always be some families who need to hire professionals for their housework either because the professional does a better job or because they work too hard to take care of all the chores.

"Maid to Order" is a powerful essay that decries the exploitation of women of color. Ehrenreich also discusses the exploitation of domestic laborers in general, for even as they have become professionals, they are not getting paid a lot. Unfortunately, the author's argument becomes weak at several points. For example, Ehrenreich does not discuss the fact that some people are not good at housework and if a clean house is desirable then a professional is necessary. Also, the author fails to recognize that some professional men and women do not have enough time to do their housework and still have time with their family or for leisure. In these cases, there is nothing wrong with hiring outside help. After all, housecleaners exist so that they can provide a paid service, which is far better than the situation in the past where women were expected to stay at home and do all the work.