MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? - Tartu Ãlikool

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GENDER DIFFERENCES IN TIME USE use is further influenced by the area of residence. Division of roles can be linked to different traditions in urban and rural areas. Opportunities available for employment or recreation may differ, too. (Figure 4) Studies have indicated that parenthood leads to a more traditional division of work between women and men (McGinnity and Russell 2008). Women in families with small children tend to spend significantly more time on household care than men. If a household includes children younger than seven, women in that household spend almost six hours a day on household and family care. The contribution of men to household work in such households is only a little over two and a half hours. However, men with small children spend more time on employment than women, with an average of five hours a day. Even though the time spent on different types of work is much longer in families with small children than in other households, the gender differences are not particularly large in terms of total committed time. Women in these households spend almost 8.5 hours daily on different types of work, while men spend only one hour less. The impact of children on the division of work depends on the age of children. A child’s direct impact on the amount of household work can be in negative correlation with the age of the child – a child’s participation in household duties increases with age (Anxo and Carlin 2004). Education influences the time use by women and men in two ways. Firstly, higher education increases the likelihood of higher income, which can mean more power and a greater say in decisions about the choice of work in a household. Secondly, education can be linked to a person’s beliefs. People with higher education are likely to have more egalitarian views and prefer more equal division of household tasks (Anxo and Carlin 2004). Studies have indicated that the time spent on household care by women decreases as their level of education increases, while highly educated men are more likely to contribute to household care (McGinnity and Russell 2008). In Estonia, however, if we exclude people who are still studying, education has no influence on the division of household work between women and men. However, education does influence the total volume of work. As people with higher education are more likely to be employed, the time spent on employment activities correspondingly increases at higher levels of education. The impact of age on people’s time use manifests itself mainly through different life cycles. Young people are mostly engaged in studies and are still living with their parents and, consequently, the duration of time spent by them on household care and their total occupied time are not very large. The biggest workload has been observed in case of women and men aged 25–44 (see Figure 5). In case of women of this age, various types of work duties take up almost nine hours a day. The gender gap is also the largest in the age group 25–44, with the total committed time of men being one and a half hours shorter than that of women. This age coincides with active childcare and the most active engagement in employment. However, while women in the age group 25–44 spend a lot of time on household care, this is exceeded by women of at least 65 years of age (almost five hours a day). Comparison of age groups reveals that older men spend the most time on household duties, with only 45 minutes less than women of the same age. As only a few people of at least 65 years of age are engaged in employment, their total occupied time is the shortest across all age groups (excl. the 10–14-year-olds) and the gender gap in total committed time is also the smallest. (Figure 5) The ratio between employment and leisure time depends on labour status. Employed persons spend significantly more time than others on paid work. The longer the time spent on employment, the less time remains for other activities. Nevertheless, employed persons spend on average three hours a day on household work. As a result, the total committed time of employed persons is significantly longer compared to others (see Figure 6). Even though paid work takes up almost an equal share of a day of employed women and men (5.5 and 6 hours, respectively), women have to spend an hour more than men on household care. The gender difference in the total committed time is the largest among the unemployed. Employment activities constitute a rather small share of the total committed time of unemployed women and unemployed men. Even though in this situation neither sex is seemingly prevented from taking care of the household, men still tend to spend a rather modest amount of time on household care. Unemployed women MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? MAN’S HOME IS THE WORLD, WOMAN’S WORLD IS HER HOME? 31
SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GENDER DIFFERENCES IN TIME USE spend two hours more on household tasks than unemployed men. The inactive group includes students, pensioners, homemakers, etc., not included in employment. Looking separately at the inactive group, we can see that the largest gender difference appears in the time use of homemakers. Men and women stay at home for completely different reasons, which leads to a large difference in the time they spend on household care. Only 10% of men are homemakers, and most of them live in households without children, alone or with parents. However, the majority of female homemakers live in households with minor children (i.e., they are mothers who stay home with children). After summing up all obligations, we can see that the workday of female homemakers is almost three hours longer than that of men. The most equal division of work in the inactive group can be seen among pensioners. The gender gap in the time they spend on household work is only one hour and the time spent by them on employment is almost non-existent. (Figure 6) Gender differences in the total committed time are also highlighted by a regression model that includes various factors which affect the time use of women and men (see Table 1). This model enables to assess the impact of each factor on total committed time, assuming that all other parameters remain unchanged. There are separate models for weekdays and weekends. According to this model, women spend almost an hour more on employment and household work combined than men of similar age, labour status, education, age of children, place of residence and marital status. The total committed time of older men is shorter than in the age group 15–24. However, the total committed time of women is not significantly affected by age. Labour status affects the total committed time of both women and men, but the impact is greater in the case of men. Compared to employed men, inactive men have 4.5 hours less work-related obligations during weekdays. The amount of total committed time of men does not depend on their education. However, in the case of women, higher education means that they spend more time on different types of work activities. Children usually lengthen the duration of both household work and employment activities. In a household with children under seven years of age, 62 minutes a day are added to both types of work. Children cause more additional work in particular for women. Although the share of employed men with children is larger and they spend more time on employment than men without children, the increase caused by children in the volume of household work for women is even higher. Women with children up to six years of age spend over an hour more on different types of work than women without children. For men, children increase the total committed time by half an hour. Married or cohabiting people work more than single persons. Living with a partner increases the obligations of women and men by more than half an hour. Place of residence has a somewhat greater impact on men’s time use – men living in cities have half an hour more unoccupied time than men in rural areas. The gender gap in time dedicated to various works is larger at weekends than during weekdays. Women have, on average, 76 minutes less unoccupied time than men with similar sociodemographic parameters. As the importance of employment and studies is significantly smaller at weekends than on weekdays, labour status has less influence on total committed time during weekends than on weekdays and there are greater similarities in time use between groups of different labour status. Like on workdays, children have a great impact on women’s and men’s time use at weekends. The total committed time is shorter at weekends than on workdays in households with school-age children, but the total commited time of both women and men increases in households with children aged 0–6. If a household includes children of pre-school age, women spend over one and a half hours more and men spend three quarters of an hour more time on various work tasks at weekends than women and men without children. (Table 1) Household care Different household tasks and dividing them between household members is a constant source of negotiations and potential conflicts. People in a household need to eat, their clothes have to be washed and home needs to be kept clean. The question is, who agrees to perform these chores. 32 MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? MAN’S HOME IS THE WORLD, WOMAN’S WORLD IS HER HOME?
Page 1 and 2: MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM O
Page 3 and 4: Koostanud Statistikaameti rahvastik
Page 5 and 6: SAATESÕNA PREFACE PREFACE Overview
Page 7 and 8: SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GE
Page 31: SOOLISED ERINEVUSED AJAKASUTUSES GE
Page 37 and 38: TERVIS JA TÖÖVÕIME HEALTH AND CA
Page 61 and 62: TÖÖ- JA PEREELU ÜHITAMINE RECONC
Page 83 and 84:
TÖÖ- JA PEREELU ÜHITAMINE RECONC
Page 85 and 86:
KULTUURIASUTUSTES KÄIMINE VISITING
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
NAISED JA MEHED HARIDUSELUS WOMEN A
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
HARIDUSE PEEGELDUS TÄISKASVANUEAS
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129:
MÄRKIDE SELETUS EXPLANATION OF SYM
show all

MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? - Tartu Ãlikool

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?

MEHE KODU ON MAAILM, NAISE MAAILM ON KODU? - Tartu Ãlikool