Women in the workplace and social networks
I read this interesting passage in a book I recently read:
The opening of the workplace to women has had a momentous impact on enabling women to fulfill their individual potential. However, as Putnam notes, women have historically played a larger role in creating the social fabric of society than men have played. Women have usually been more involved in civic organizations, grassroots politics, and religious organizations. They have also historically tended to manage family social networks of friends and neighbors. Putnam cites a study showing that among women of equal age, socioeconomic, and marital status, being in the workplace cuts volunteering by 50 percent, informal visiting with friends 25 percent, club and church attendance by 15 percent, and entertaining by 10 percent. Putnam does not criticize women for choosing to work outside the home; at an individual level, it may be both economically necessary and personally fulfilling. Rather, he merely notes that this micro-level change, replicated across millions of women during a relatively short time, has had an important macro-level effect.
- Excerpted from Eric D. Beinhocker's The Origin of Wealth
What is your opinion about how women's partipation in the workforce has changed some aspects of our quality of life? While I am in the camp that finds working outside the home personally fulfilling as well as economically necessary, I can see the author's point about how at a higher level, this phenomenon has changed society as we know it. The part where he mentions volunteering and building social networks also echoes with sentiments I have heard from stay-at-home-mothers about the things they prioritized above holding a day job outside the home.
(Outside of this factor, the author also talks about other factors like suburban sprawl and the effect of mass media leading to an erosion of social networks. You may read these quotes on my personal journal, if you are interested.)
Edited:
I am adding a couple more excepted paragraphs under the cut, so folks don't get the impression that the author was being critical about women in the workplace:
Given the structural and largely irreversible nature of the causes of the Great Disruption (e.g. few would advocate women returning to the home, and people won't give up their cars), the question of what can be done is difficult. Putnam advocates an "agenda for social capitalists" that includes the following components:
- Greater individual commitment to social involvement (and watching less TV)
- Programs in schools to help build norms of trust and social capital in the next generation
- Reforms to make workplaces more family friendly
- Better public transport and the rewriting of zoning laws
- Efforts to encourage voting and political involvement
The opening of the workplace to women has had a momentous impact on enabling women to fulfill their individual potential. However, as Putnam notes, women have historically played a larger role in creating the social fabric of society than men have played. Women have usually been more involved in civic organizations, grassroots politics, and religious organizations. They have also historically tended to manage family social networks of friends and neighbors. Putnam cites a study showing that among women of equal age, socioeconomic, and marital status, being in the workplace cuts volunteering by 50 percent, informal visiting with friends 25 percent, club and church attendance by 15 percent, and entertaining by 10 percent. Putnam does not criticize women for choosing to work outside the home; at an individual level, it may be both economically necessary and personally fulfilling. Rather, he merely notes that this micro-level change, replicated across millions of women during a relatively short time, has had an important macro-level effect.
- Excerpted from Eric D. Beinhocker's The Origin of Wealth
What is your opinion about how women's partipation in the workforce has changed some aspects of our quality of life? While I am in the camp that finds working outside the home personally fulfilling as well as economically necessary, I can see the author's point about how at a higher level, this phenomenon has changed society as we know it. The part where he mentions volunteering and building social networks also echoes with sentiments I have heard from stay-at-home-mothers about the things they prioritized above holding a day job outside the home.
(Outside of this factor, the author also talks about other factors like suburban sprawl and the effect of mass media leading to an erosion of social networks. You may read these quotes on my personal journal, if you are interested.)
Edited:
I am adding a couple more excepted paragraphs under the cut, so folks don't get the impression that the author was being critical about women in the workplace:
Given the structural and largely irreversible nature of the causes of the Great Disruption (e.g. few would advocate women returning to the home, and people won't give up their cars), the question of what can be done is difficult. Putnam advocates an "agenda for social capitalists" that includes the following components:
- Greater individual commitment to social involvement (and watching less TV)
- Programs in schools to help build norms of trust and social capital in the next generation
- Reforms to make workplaces more family friendly
- Better public transport and the rewriting of zoning laws
- Efforts to encourage voting and political involvement