“Women's Work”? Women Partners of Transgender Men Doing Housework and Emotion Work

Despite increasing family studies research on same‐sex cohabiters and families, the literature is virtually devoid of transgender and transsexual families. To bridge this gap, I present qualitative research narratives on household labor and emotion work from 50 women partners of transgender and transsexual men. Contrary to much literature on “same‐sex” couples, the division of household labor and emotion work within these contemporary families cannot simply be described as egalitarian. Further, although the forms of emotion work and “gender strategies,”“family myths,” and “accounts” with which women partners of trans men engage resonate with those from women in (non‐trans) heterosexual and lesbian couples, they are also distinct, highlighting tensions among personal agency, politics, and structural inequalities in family life.     

The Division of Labor in Lesbian,Gay, and Heterosexual New Adoptive Parents

Little research has investigated the division of child care and housework in adoptive or lesbian/gay parent families, yet these contexts “control for” family characteristics such as biological relatedness and parental gender differences known to be linked to family work. This study examined predictors (measured preadoption) of the division of child care and housework (measured postadoption) in lesbian (n = 55), gay (n = 40), and heterosexual (n = 65) newly adoptive couples. Same‐sex couples shared child care and housework more equally than heterosexual couples. For the full sample, inequities in work hours between partners were associated with greater discrepancies in partners' contributions to child care and masculine tasks; inequities in income between partners were related to greater discrepancies in contributions to feminine tasks. Participants who contributed more to child care tended to contribute more to feminine tasks. These findings extend knowledge of how labor arrangements are enacted in diverse groups.     

Sexual orientation and household financial decisions: evidence from couples in the United States

We analyze how sexual orientation is related to household financial decisions using 2000 US Census data, and find that lesbian couples pay higher annual mortgages relative to house value than do heterosexual or gay couples. We also estimate that cohabiting heterosexuals pay more than their married counterparts. We link this homosexual-specific differential to homeowners’ propensity to save. This differential reflects the gender composition of same-sex households, and their very low fertility, in addition to the precautionary motives increasing cohabiting couples’ propensity to save relative to married ones. Evidence from retirement and social security income of older couples exhibits the same pattern of differentials by sexual orientation and cohabiting status.     

Are Gay and Lesbian cohabiting couples really different from heterosexual married couples?

Both partners from gay and lesbian cohabiting couples without children were compared longitudinally with both partners from heterosexual married couples with children (N at first assessment = 80, 53, and 80 couples, respectively) on variables from 5 domains indicative of relationship health. For 50% of the comparisons, gay and lesbian partners did not differ from heterosexual partners. Seventy‐eight percent of the comparisons on which differences were found indicated that gay or lesbian partners functioned better than heterosexual partners did. Because the variables that predicted concurrent relationship quality and relationship stability for heterosexual parents also did so for gay and lesbian partners, I conclude that the processes that regulate relationship functioning generalize across gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couples.     

Assortative Mating Among Dutch Married and Cohabiting Same‐Sex and Different‐Sex Couples

The authors compared male and female same‐sex and different‐sex couples in the Netherlands with respect to age and educational homogamy. Because many same‐sex couples in the Netherlands are married, differences between married and cohabiting couples were analyzed for all 3 groups. Analyses of data from the Dutch Labor Force Surveys 2001–2007 (N = 184,999 couples) showed that male same‐sex couples are less homogamous in terms of age and education than different‐sex couples. Female same‐sex couples are less homogamous in terms of age, but not in terms of education. No meaningful differences were found between married couples and cohabiting couples. Partnership status appeared less important than the sex composition of the couple. Given the relatively tolerant climate toward homosexuals in the Netherlands, the similarity of the results with those yielded by studies conducted in the United States may be considered striking.     

Family Work Performance and Satisfaction

Abstract

Using data taken from a random sample of married and cohabiting couples (N =96), we examine the factors associated with a couple's division of unpaid family work. We extend the usual analyses by testing, in addition to gender ideology and relative resource factors, the role of a partner's emotion-work performance. We find that all three perspectives are relevant to the discussion of unpaid family work: gender ideology and relative resources are associated with the division of housework and child care, and partner's emotion-work performance is the most predictive of domestic-labor satisfaction. doi:10.1300/J002v40n04_04     

Coparenting and Father Involvement in Married and Unmarried Coresident Couples

Children can benefit from involved fathers and cooperative parents, a benefit which may be particularly important to the growing population of children born to unmarried parents. This study observes father involvement and coparenting in 5,407 married and unmarried cohabiting couples with a 2‐year‐old child in the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort (ECLS‐B). A link was found between cooperative coparenting and father involvement for all couples. Compared with married couples, couples who married in response to the pregnancy and couples who remained unmarried showed higher levels of father involvement and more cooperative coparenting, indicating a potentially greater child focus.     

Intimacy and Emotion Work in Lesbian,Gay, and Heterosexual Relationships

Knowledge about how gender shapes intimacy is dominated by a heteronormative focus on relationships involving a man and a woman. In this study, the authors shifted the focus to consider gendered meanings and experiences of intimacy in same‐sex and different‐sex relationships. They merged the gender‐as‐relational perspective—that gender is co‐constructed and enacted within relationships—with theoretical perspectives on emotion work and intimacy to frame an analysis of in‐depth interviews with 15 lesbian, 15 gay, and 20 heterosexual couples. They found that emotion work directed toward minimizing and maintaining boundaries between partners is key to understanding intimacy in long‐term relationships. Moreover, these dynamics, including the type and division of emotion work, vary for men and women depending on whether they are in a same‐sex or different‐sex relationship. These findings push thinking about diversity in long‐term relationships beyond a focus on gender difference and toward gendered relational contexts.     

Stability and Change in the Division of Labor among Cohabiting Couples

Because cohabitors express preferences for egalitarian relationships, it is generally presumed (by researchers and the popular press) that cohabiting couples engage in fairly equitable exchanges of domestic and paid work. This article explores how some cohabiting couples “do gender” through the division of labor—both paid and domestic work. Data are from in‐depth interviews with both partners from 30 cohabiting couples (N = 60) who have moderate levels of education. Few of these couples began their relationships sharing both paid work and domestic labor equally. Furthermore, the number of couples engaged in equal exchanges declined over time, while those relying on conventional exchanges grew. The devalued nature of domestic work, the persistence of gender privilege, and the “stalled” revolution are evident in how these working‐class cohabiting couples arrange their divisions of labor, reasons for changes, and why women are less able than men to opt out of housework.     

Couple Longevity in the Era of Same‐Sex Marriage in the United States

The author used a new longitudinal data set, the How Couples Meet and Stay Together surveys (N = 3,009), to generate the first nationally representative comparison of same‐sex couple stability and heterosexual couple stability in the United States. He measured the association between marriage (by several definitions of marriage) and couple longevity for same‐sex couples in the United States. Reports of same‐sex relationship instability in the past were due in part to the low rate of marriages among same‐sex couples. After controlling for marriage and marriage‐like commitments, the break‐up rate for same‐sex couples was comparable to (and not statistically distinguishable from) the break‐up rate for heterosexual couples. The results revealed that same‐sex couples who had a marriage‐like commitment had stable unions regardless of government recognition. A variety of predictors of relationship dissolution for heterosexual and for same‐sex couples are explored.     

HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTION AND SEXUAL ORIENTATION

The 2006 Canada census is used, along with a well‐known model of household production, to estimate the value of household commodities produced by gay, lesbian, and heterosexual couples. The results show some intriguing differences and similarities. Unlike heterosexuals, gay and lesbian couples respond differently to changes in the cost of time. However, all couples are characterized by the importance of market goods over time and the importance of human capital in the market over the home, with respect to household production. Hence, although there are differences in the sexual division of labor between households of different sexual orientations, the value of household commodities is mostly driven by differences in the amount of market goods used in the home. Market goods are determined by income, and differences in income within a couple‐type swamp differences in income across couple‐types, and as a result there is no statistical difference in the value of household commodities produced across the three sexual orientations. (JEL D13)     

The Stability of Same‐Sex Cohabitation,Different‐Sex Cohabitation,and Marriage

This study contributes to the emerging demographic literature on same‐sex couples by comparing the level and correlates of union stability among 4 types of couples: (a) male same‐sex cohabitation, (b) female same‐sex cohabitation, (c) different‐sex cohabitation, and (d) different‐sex marriage. The author analyzed data from 2 British birth cohort studies: the National Child Development Study (N = 11,469) and the 1970 British Cohort Study (N = 11,924). These data contain retrospective histories of same‐sex and different‐sex unions throughout young adulthood (age 16–34) from 1974 through 2004. Event‐history analyses showed that same‐sex cohabitations have higher rates of dissolution than do different‐sex cohabiting and marital unions. Among same‐sex couples, male couples had slightly higher dissolution rates than did female couples. In addition, same‐sex couples from the 1958 and 1970 birth cohorts had similar levels of union stability. The demographic correlates of union stability are generally similar for same‐sex and different‐sex unions.     

Planned Gay Father Families in Kinship Arrangements

The current study examined whether there are differences between gay father families (n = 36) and heterosexual families (n = 36) on father‐child relationship, fathers' experiences of parental stress and children's wellbeing. The gay fathers in this study all became parents while in same‐sex relationships. They donated sperm to lesbian couples and then shared the child‐rearing with them in kinship arrangements. It was also examined whether aspects that are related specifically to gay fathers (i.e., experiences of rejection, having to defend their family situation, with whom the children live, and conflicts with the children's mothers) are also related to the father‐child relationship, parental stress and children's wellbeing. Data were collected by means of questionnaires filled in by the fathers. No significant differences between the family types were found on emotional involvement and parental concern in the father‐child relationship, parental burden (as an aspect of parental stress) or the children's wellbeing. However, gay fathers felt less competent in their child‐rearing role than heterosexual fathers. For gay fathers especially, experiences of rejection and the feeling that they have to defend their situation were significantly related to father‐child relationship, parental stress and children's wellbeing.     

Shared Beliefs and the Union Stability of Married and Cohabiting Couples

Cohabiting couples and couples who cohabit prior to marriage have less stable relationships than married couples who did not cohabit, and these differences in stability may be linked to different processes within the relationships. This research examines the similarity of partners’ beliefs about the division of household labor using the National Survey of Families and Households (N = 1,039), finding that couples who do not share beliefs about the division of household labor are more likely to end their union. Cohabiting couples have a particularly high likelihood of ending the union when the two partners hold widely divergent views about whether housework should be shared, suggesting that cohabiting and married couples may have different responses to dissimilarity between the partners.     

Money management and views of civil partnership in same‐sex couples: results from a UK survey of non‐heterosexuals

Recent legislation in the UK has extended many of the legal and financial rights and responsibilities of heterosexual marriage to same‐sex couples who register their partnerships. Prior to the Civil Partnership Act (2004) however, little was known about financial arrangements in same‐sex couples, nor the extent to which these mirrored those of married or cohabiting heterosexuals. This paper reports the findings from the first large‐scale survey in the UK to investigate finances and civil partnership beliefs in a convenience sample of non‐heterosexuals: 510 individuals, of whom 386 were currently in a same‐sex relationship, participated in the survey. Our findings showed less merging of finances (such as in pooling, allowance, and whole wage systems) than is typical in heterosexual married couples. The results of a series of multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that rating CP as more important, and having both names on the mortgage, significantly reduced the odds of independent (ie, separate) management of finances. Participants were almost unanimous in their endorsement of CP as a form of legal recognition, with a large majority saying that they would also consider it for themselves.     

Cohabiting couples: rethinking money in the household at the beginning of the twenty first century

This paper assesses the implications of existing research on the intra‐household economy for current debates about the emergence of new forms of radically democratic intimate relationships in ‘late modern’ or ‘world risk’ society. The different ways in which couples organise money are particularly important in evaluating these debates because as Pahl (1989 , 1997 , 1999 ) argues, money can be seen as a tracer for other aspects of a couples’ lives together, especially the power relationship between them. One of the groups currently thought to be in the vanguard of shifts to new forms of egalitarian and radically democratic intimate relationships are heterosexual cohabiting couples. So far however, there has been little, if any, research on the ways in which cohabiting couples organise money, particularly in Britain. This paper therefore assesses the possible implications of existing research on the intra‐household economy amongst heterosexual couples in the UK and elsewhere, for the ways in which cohabiting couples may possibly be organising household money in Britain today, and what light this sheds on current debates about shifts towards greater equality in new forms of intimate relationships. One of the main questions underlying the discussion concerns the extent to which trends towards individualisation in intimate relationships are coming to be associated with greater sharing and equality in the distribution of financial resources, as Giddens’ (1992 ) thesis would lead us to expect, or whether as Pahl (1999 ) and others ( Jamieson, 1999 ) have suggested, an increasing proportion of couples may now be coming to use individualised or privatised systems of money management which while enhancing individual control over finances, may nevertheless still be associated with the maintenance and reproduction of some very traditional gender inequalities between male and female partners, albeit in a new and apparently impersonal, ‘marketised’ form.     

Family Diversity and Child Health: Where Do Same‐Sex Couple Families Fit?

Increasing family diversity during the past half century has focused national attention on how children are faring in nontraditional family structures. Much of the limited evidence on children in same‐sex couple families suffers from several shortcomings, including a lack of representative data. We use the National Health Interview Survey (2004–2012) and the National Survey of Children's Health (2011–2012) to identify children in different‐sex married and cohabiting families, never and previously married single‐parent families, and same‐sex couple families. Considering important characteristics such as the child's race or ethnicity and adoption status, household socioeconomic standing, family stability, and parent health, we examine the relationship between family type and parent‐rated overall child health. The results suggest that poorer health among children in same‐sex couple as well as different‐sex cohabiting couple and single‐parent families appears to be largely the product of demographic and socioeconomic differences rather than exposure to nontraditional family forms.     

Parent Care as Unpaid Family Labor: How Do Spouses Share?

The study adapts theories of the household division of labor to the division of parent care between spouses and expands them by taking the kin relationship with the parent and the intensity of care into account. Tobit and weighted logit models are used to analyze the division of parent care in 2,214 couples from the British General Household Surveys. The models revealed patterns of parent care that are predominantly governed by the kin relationship. Time availability was strongly associated with couples' division of parent care, whereas the resource‐bargaining approach received little support except for dual‐earner couples that provided more intensive care for the husband's parents. Children‐in‐law's characteristics were hardly related to the division of high‐intensity caregiving in dual‐earner couples.     

Why emotion work matters: sex,gender, and the division of household labor

Attempting to explain why biological sex remains the primary predictor of household labor allocation, gender theorists have suggested that husbands and wives perform family work in ways that facilitate culturally appropriate constructions of gender. To date, however, researchers have yet to consider the theoretical and empirical significance of emotion work in their studies of the gendered division of household labor. Using survey data from 335 employed, married parents, I examine the relative influence of economic resources, time constraints, gender ideology, sex, and gender on the performance of housework, child care, and emotion work. Results indicate that gender construction, not sex, predicts the performance of emotion work and that this performance reflects a key difference in men's and women's gendered constructions of self.