Couples and housework

夫妻和家務(wù)

The ironing lady

燙衣娘子

This just in: men are selfish layabouts

最新發(fā)現(xiàn)：男人是自私的懶漢

Apr 21st 2012 | from the print edition of The Economist

譯者：mylta

THEY are regarded as chores by both sexes, but fall disproportionately on only one. The latest survey of time use in America suggests women still shoulder most of the housework, spending on average an hour a day scrubbing, hoovering and shopping, compared with barely 20 minutes for the unfairer sex.

家務(wù)活應(yīng)該由男女分擔(dān)，但大部分落到一方身上。在美國，這項關(guān)于時間使用的最新調(diào)查表明，家里的女人依然承擔(dān)大部分的家務(wù)勞動，平均每天花在擦洗、吸塵、購物上的時間為一小時，而大老爺們花在這上面的時間僅為20分鐘。

Standard explanations for this division of labour rest on the pay gap between the sexes. A recent report from the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, a think-tank, shows women still earn about 20% less than men—close to the rich-country average—in America. Couples can maximise earnings if the lower-paid (usually female) partner does the unpaid work at home. But in a new paper* Leslie Stratton of Virginia Commonwealth University asks whether different attitudes to housework also play a role in divvying up the dusting.

承擔(dān)家務(wù)男女有別的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)解釋是他們的收入存在差距。智庫“婦女政策研究所”最近的一項報告表明，美國女性收入仍比男性低20%，接近富裕國家的平均水平。不計報酬的家務(wù)勞動讓夫妻中收入較低者（常為女方）去做，能使家庭收入最大化。但弗吉尼亞聯(lián)邦大學(xué)的萊斯利·斯特拉頓在最近的一篇論文中提出疑問，男女雙方的不同態(tài)度是否與家務(wù)勞動的分配也有聯(lián)系。

Mr Stratton draws on data from the 2000-01 Time Use Survey in Britain, which shows how people spent their day and which tasks they enjoyed. Attitudes certainly differed: women disliked laundry less than men. Ironing was generally dreaded; weirdly large numbers of both sexes liked shopping for food.

斯特拉頓先生利用2000-2001的英國的“時間使用調(diào)查”數(shù)據(jù)，從這些數(shù)據(jù)能夠看到人們的一天是怎樣度過的，他們樂于做些什么工作。態(tài)度當(dāng)然不同：女性不像男性那樣討厭洗衣服，雙方都怕熨燙衣服，喜歡購買食品的男性女性數(shù)量都大得離譜。

Ms Stratton found some evidence for the pay-gap hypothesis. Women with higher wages did a little less work at home. A woman who earned 10% more than average ducked out of two minutes’ housework per weekday. Her partner heroically made up this time at the weekend. But his wages made no difference to the extent of his efforts around the house.

斯特拉頓女士發(fā)現(xiàn)了收入差距假設(shè)的一些證據(jù)，收入高的女性所做家務(wù)就稍少一些。一位收入高于平均數(shù)10%的女性非周末每天做家務(wù)的時間會減少2分鐘，其配偶會爽快地在周末把這個缺口補上。但男性收入的多少與干家務(wù)的多少無關(guān)。

The major determinant of how much housework a man did was how much he disliked it. Men who liked housework a lot (sic) spent around 60% more time per weekday on it than those who were indifferent to it, sparing their partners up to ten minutes of drudgery. Women’s preferences seemed to have no effect on the time they spent on chores.

決定男性做家務(wù)多少的主要因素是他對家務(wù)活厭煩程度的大小。特別喜歡做家務(wù)的男性（原文如此）非周末每天做家務(wù)的時間比那些對家務(wù)事冷淡的男性多出60%左右，這最多可以減少配偶10分鐘的操勞時間。女性的偏好對于她們做家務(wù)的時間似乎沒有影響。

One way to reduce the burden for both is to get help, although again the rewards are unevenly spread. In areas where hired help was 10% cheaper than average, he got away with 43% (9.6 minutes a day) less housework at weekends, and she did 17% (14.2 minutes) less. Almost all the extra housework generated by children was taken on by the woman. Each sprog under five added 20 minutes to her weekday housework time, but just a couple of minutes to his. As children get older the weekday burden falls, but weekend time rises—and still comes mainly from her.

減少雙方負(fù)擔(dān)的方法之一是請人幫忙，盡管由此得到的好處也不會均分。在有些地方，雇傭幫手的花費低于平均數(shù)10%，男性周末就會少做43%（每天9.6分鐘）的家務(wù)，女性就會少做17%（14.2分鐘）。和孩子有關(guān)的額外的家務(wù)差不多都由女性承擔(dān)。一名5歲以下的幼兒非周末每天會增加女性20分鐘的家務(wù)時間，但男性因此增加的時間只有兩三分鐘。隨著小孩逐漸長大，非周末每天的負(fù)擔(dān)漸輕，但周末家務(wù)時間增加，增加的主要是女性。

There is truth in the idea that chores go to the lower-paid partner. But cause and effect are unclear. Do women do more because of lower pay, or might their careers suffer from a disproportionate burden at home? Evidence that only men’s preferences seem to matter suggests the second explanation should not be swept under the carpet.

家務(wù)活交給收入低的一方去做的想法有一定道理，但其中的因果關(guān)系并不清晰。女性做的家務(wù)多，難道就是因為她們的收入低？或者，她們的事業(yè)受到家務(wù)分配不當(dāng)?shù)挠绊懥藛?？似乎只有男性的喜好才是重要的，這一點表明，我們還應(yīng)去探究另外一個原因。