Do Men Care about Childcare? Women’s Relative Resources and Men’s Preferences for Work–Family Reconciliation Policies

Margarita Estévez-Abe, Tae Hyun Lim
{"title":"Do Men Care about Childcare? Women’s Relative Resources and Men’s Preferences for Work–Family Reconciliation Policies","authors":"Margarita Estévez-Abe, Tae Hyun Lim","doi":"10.1093/sp/jxae002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Existing literature on the politics of work–family reconciliation policies focuses primarily on women and their policy preferences as the main driver of recent policy expansions. But what do we know about male preferences? This article explores this question in an innovative way by integrating insights from economic and sociological studies of division of labor and bargaining within the household. It investigates the link between women’s relative resources within the household and their male partners’ preferences for different types of reconciliation policies. Drawing on regression analysis of nineteen OECD countries using the International Social Survey Program data (Family and Changing Gender Roles IV), we find that: (1) men in dual-earner households, men in college-educated educational homogamy, and men in educational hypogamy (the woman is better educated) are more likely to support reconciliation policies; and (2) women’s earnings and education have different effects on men’s preferences.","PeriodicalId":517187,"journal":{"name":"Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society","volume":"38 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxae002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing literature on the politics of work–family reconciliation policies focuses primarily on women and their policy preferences as the main driver of recent policy expansions. But what do we know about male preferences? This article explores this question in an innovative way by integrating insights from economic and sociological studies of division of labor and bargaining within the household. It investigates the link between women’s relative resources within the household and their male partners’ preferences for different types of reconciliation policies. Drawing on regression analysis of nineteen OECD countries using the International Social Survey Program data (Family and Changing Gender Roles IV), we find that: (1) men in dual-earner households, men in college-educated educational homogamy, and men in educational hypogamy (the woman is better educated) are more likely to support reconciliation policies; and (2) women’s earnings and education have different effects on men’s preferences.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
男性关心育儿问题吗?女性的相对资源与男性对工作家庭协调政策的偏好
有关工作与家庭协调政策的现有文献主要关注妇女及其政策偏好,将其视为近期政策扩张的主要驱动力。但我们对男性的偏好了解多少呢?本文以一种创新的方式探讨了这一问题,综合了经济学和社会学对家庭分工和谈判的研究。文章研究了妇女在家庭中的相对资源与她们的男性伴侣对不同类型的调解政策的偏好之间的联系。通过利用国际社会调查计划数据(家庭与性别角色变化 IV)对 19 个经合组织国家进行回归分析,我们发现(1) 双职工家庭中的男性、受过大学教育的教育同质家庭中的男性以及教育低同家庭中的男性(女性受教育程度较高)更有可能支持和解政策;以及 (2) 女性的收入和教育程度对男性的偏好有不同的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Comparison of the Socioeconomic and Gendered Organization of Social Reproduction in the United States and the United Kingdom, 1973–2013 Do Men Care about Childcare? Women’s Relative Resources and Men’s Preferences for Work–Family Reconciliation Policies Rethinking Part-Time Outsiders’ Risks and Welfare Attitudes What About Fertility? The Unintentional Pro-natalism of a Nordic Country
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1