Ehrenreich's "Maid to Order": Feminism, Race, and Domestic Labor

Introduction: Feminism and the Domestic Sphere

Household duties are traditionally, in many cultures, considered the province of women. Even after receiving an education, women often stay home to raise children rather than build a career. The labor women perform in the home — including cleaning and childrearing — is almost always unpaid, leading to a situation in which women are essentially domestic servants. Moreover, with educated women remaining in the home, the world continues to be dominated by a patriarchal structure in which men hold positions of political, social, and economic power.

In "Maid to Order," Barbara Ehrenreich argues that the modern and postmodern feminist movement has created a massive and meaningful shift in the role of women in society, but she points out that this change has so far impacted only the lives of wealthy white women. Although the author misses a few key points, Ehrenreich is correct in observing that the demonization of housework by wealthy women has led to a situation in which women of color and poor women are left behind.

Outsourcing Housework and the Exploitation of Women of Color

Women of color continue to be trapped by the old norms and values in which women occupy the private sphere, while men occupy the public sphere in positions of power in politics, business, or manufacturing. When the first waves of feminism took root in society, household duties — including housecleaning — became demonized as symbols of patriarchy and sexism. Many women wanted to work outside the home and take part in the public life once reserved only for men. When this cultural shift happened, however, men did not rush in to fill the gap at home. Instead, the extra wages earned by the secondary breadwinner in the family were used to hire a professional cleaner to manage household chores. That professional cleaner was, ironically and unfortunately, usually a woman of color. Ehrenreich finds the outsourcing of household chores problematic precisely because many of those paid professionals are women of color, and this aspect of her 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 housework was once the "great equalizer of women," according to Ehrenreich, only wealthy white women were ultimately able to work outside the home and hire professional cleaners (60). Housework, then, is not an "equalizer" but rather the very thing that distinguishes rich from poor.

Weaknesses in Ehrenreich's Argument

Although this critique is generally convincing, there are a few weaknesses in Ehrenreich's argument that deserve mention. For one, the reason women of color were becoming professional cleaners was that it offered a viable means of making a living while they learned English and established some financial independence — enabling them either to put their children through college or to attend school themselves. There is nothing inherently wrong with performing domestic work for pay; in fact, this situation is preferable to performing domestic duties for no pay at all.

Second, Ehrenreich somewhat ironically denigrates the very people she is trying to defend. When she describes working for a corporate cleaning agency and says she was "relieved of the thinking process" (67), the comment sounds arrogant, as if she considers herself too intelligent for cleaning. Some professional cleaners do think critically about their work and do an excellent job because of it. Many homeowners hire professional cleaners precisely because professionals outperform them. Ehrenreich would not criticize people for hiring financial advisors, so why should hiring a professional cleaner be treated differently? Her concern seems disproportionately focused on housecleaning rather than on the broader landscape of underpaid service work. There is no need to cast housecleaners as victims; finding employment with a cleaning agency is not necessarily worse than any other service profession.

The question of domestic work and its social valuation is complex, and a more balanced approach would acknowledge both the structural disadvantages facing workers of color and the legitimate economic role that professional cleaning services play in modern households.

Conclusion

"Maid to Order" is a powerful essay that decries the exploitation of women of color. Ehrenreich also addresses the exploitation of domestic laborers more broadly, noting that even as they have become professionals, their pay remains low. Unfortunately, Ehrenreich's argument weakens at several points. She does not acknowledge that some people are genuinely poor at housework and that, if a clean home is important to them, hiring a professional is a reasonable choice. The author also fails to recognize that many professional men and women simply do not have enough time to manage all their household chores and still have time with their families or for leisure. In those cases, there is nothing wrong with hiring outside help. After all, housecleaners exist to provide a paid service — a situation that is far preferable to the historical expectation that women stay home and perform all domestic labor without compensation.

Works Cited

Ehrenreich, Barbara. "Maid to Order." Harper. 2000.