Suck it up, Man

I was listening to NPR this morning and heard an interview with Valerie Jarett discussing the creation of Obama's new White House Council on Women and Girls, which will fundamentally address equality between the sexes.

But let's talk about the male ego for the moment, shall we? The unemployment rate for adult men hit 8.1% in February, compared to 6.7% for adult women. The types of industries hardest hit by the recession tend to have been male dominated, such as finance, manufacturing, and construction. And so, traditional households are finding themselves navigating an inverted world in which women bring home the bacon, and the men are minding the home front.

Today, Slate published a piece asking, "When men lose their jobs, could they be doing more around the house?" The article presents examples of men happily pitching in their share of household duties and acclimating to their new status as house husband. But the article ends on this note:

"Other women similarly report not wanting to further undermine their men's shaky out-of-work identity. The phrase "fragile male ego" comes up a lot in these conversations. "You're right, we don't want to shift things completely," [one woman] said when I probed a bit over the phone. "When he first lost his job, he was so uncomfortable about being home in the middle of the day, and my friend said to me, 'Don't make him into a house husband. Don't reinforce his upset that he's not working.' So I'm not." That strategy is about having faith that this, too, shall pass. It means treating the unwelcome entry of unemployment as temporary—momentary, even. You'll go back to work soon; in the meantime, I'll stay in charge of the grocery list. You can see through the surface tasks to the deep reason behind this method of coping: One identity-shattering shift at a time, please. But it also made me think about an insight from a reader named Dave, who sees stay-at-home fatherhood in his future because his wife has more education and higher earning potential. "Men pay a high price for tying their identity too closely to work," he says. To be closely identified with one's career ambitions used to be a good thing. It meant commitment, follow through, work ethic. Women used to look for all of that in a mate. Some men did, too. Now, it seems dangerously rigid."

I wonder though, if ego is just a small part of it. I think what we're really touching on is the politics of power. Simply put, money equals power. It can show up overtly in sexual politics with the old "sugar daddy, trophy wife" trope, or more subtly in leveraging power for decision making between couples. Historically, men make more money (one of the things Obama will try to address with his new council). Financial equality removes one form of dominance from the equation, so it might be that another type of power struggle may be taking its place.

Readers, any thoughts or experiences in this? Please share!

--Posted by Linda Petock, Vault News & Commentary