Anna at DakotaWomen responds thoughtfully to my post of yesterday. The topic was a study of Swedish municipalities that found a positive correlation between higher levels of gender equity and poorer health for both men and women. Anna begins with a couple of good questions:
My problem is the fact that I question, as do the researchers themselves, and as do you, the validity of the study. What's the point of reporting on it? Would you have mentioned it if it was a study that showed women and men live longer and families are better off with higher degrees of gender equity? Probably not.
I believe I explained why I reported on this study. I thought it would draw a response from DW, and I was right. Besides, it was an interesting study. Why should gender equity correlate with worse health for both men and women? And if there is a cost to gender equity, shouldn't we take it into account? I think honesty is the best policy when thinking about policy.
As to the second question, one can try to be fair. I pointed out that I was skeptical concerning this study, as was Anna. Anna is no doubt right that I would have been less likely to report on this study if it had reached the opposite conclusion. It amused me precisely because it seemed inconvenient to folks at the opposite end of the political spectrum. For the same reason, Anna would have taken more notice if it had confirmed her biases. That is why it's a good idea to have two political parties and a range of perspectives: each of us can point out what is invisible to the other.
Anna's central paragraph is a marvelous piece of blogging. From the dates on grave stones she evokes a relationship between childbirth and mortality in the past. She did what any good piece of journalism does: she made me want to know more. I recommend it to our readers.
Her last paragraph was more personal:
If we're going to discuss the study, though, it seems the researchers are placing the responsibility on men to change their roles in response to the changing roles of women. I eagerly await your return to homemaking, Prof. Blanchard. Public health depends on it.
On this score I am way ahead of you, Anna. I have changed more diapers than the rest of my male line going back to Adam. In the case of my first child, I changed more diapers than my wife. As for homemaking, I cook half the meals and do my share of the housework. That you assume otherwise because I am male, or because I am conservative, is the same kind of prejudice that leads a racist to assume that any Native American is a drunkard.
Oddly enough, this is one of the things Anna and I seem to agree about. The rigid division of child-rearing labor that held until my generation was not so good a thing. I got a lot more time with my infant children than my father ever did, and I wouldn't trade that for anything. So far as I can tell, this hasn't negatively affected my health or that of my wife. But maybe we need to hear more from the Swedes.
Recent Comments