The pervading myth of gender differences encourages men and women to vote against a stronger social safety net, thereby requiring women to fill that gap — and leave less competition for jobs with men.
That’s a big argument from Holding It Together: How Women Became America’s Safety Net, a 2024 book by research Jessica Calarco. In her acknowledgements, she said her publisher reached out because she had been quoted as saying “Other countries have social safety nets. The US has women.”
It’s a piercing look, and one I deeply valued — both for broad cultural criticism and for my own discovery. At all income levels, women are more likely to offer childcare, domestic work and eldercare. The book features many anonymized anecdotes to demonstrate the research. At times these feel especially uncharitable to the male characters, but then that just might be the point.
In rich households, women are far more likely to opt out of the most demanding work, and support high-earning men earn more. In poor households, couples are much less likely to be married, and so women are more likely to also be primary income earners alongside their domestic work.
Calarco also summons research on middle-earning households. Today’s husbands often feel more progressive than their fathers. Yet, as the researcher writes: “these egalitarian narratives serve as a shield, allowing men to dismiss inequalities that emerge in their romantic relationships as the result of individual preferences so that gendered outcomes are allowed to go unquestioned, thereby leaving gender inequalities intact.”
The book is unsparing, both of the system and, perhaps more concretely, of men. I’m less convinced that’s effective in securing political power, but it’s certainly important. As Calarco reminds more poignantly: “Care is noticing someone else’s needs even if they don’t ask and being there or listen when they do.”
Below my notes for future reference.
Continue reading “Other countries have social safety nets. The US has women.”
