Skip to content
Call Us Today! 212-533-4646 | MON-FRI 12PM - 4PM (EST)
DONATE
SUBSCRIBE
Search for:
About Us
UNWLA 100
Publications
FAQ
Annual Report 2024
Annual Report 2023
Annual Report 2022
Annual Report 2021
Initiatives
Advocate
Educate
Cultivate
Care
News
Newsletters
Sign Up For Our Newsletter
Join UNWLA
Become a Member
Volunteer With Us
Donate to UNWLA
Members Portal
Shop to Support Ukraine
Search for:
Print
Print Page
Download
Download Page
Download Right Page
Open
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-19
20-21
22-23
24-25
26-27
28-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38-39
40
On the brighter side, Newland also found that women’s political status has improved over the last 25 years. She cites the designation of 1975 as International Women’s Year and the IWF Conference in Mexico City as factors having ”a significant impact on public awareness.” Though sexual equality is nowhere achieved as a fact, it is now almost universally accepted as a goal. Feminists — as everyone surely knows by now — have asserted the right of each woman to work outside the home and to receive equal pay for equal work. Claiming this right meant simply that wo men were to have the opportunity to choose among careers, but not that every woman was to rush in search of gainful employment. Quite to the contrary, the women’s movement has done much to focus attention on the issue that being a mother and the manager of a household is gainful employment. Movement spokeswomen have argued that because the woman working in the home contributes to both the economy and the public good, she deserves actual monetary payment in addition to credit on Mother’s Day. She should earn, as do those in any labor market, Social Security or other types of retirement benefits, medical and life in surance coverage and similar types of worker compensation. Most importantly, her contribution to the growth and functioning of the American economy must be recognized and calculated for exactly what it is worth. The public discussion of these questions—or perhaps just the threat of the possibility that housewives would seek employment in a better- paid market—has evidently had an impact. A recent survey found that four out of ten Americans believe housewives should be paid for looking after home and children. Among those who enthusiastically support pay for women employed at home are young women —18 to 29 years of age—and college graduates. White-collar workers and professionals are more supportive of the idea than are blue-collar workers. The two groups most opposed to payments for house management and child-rearing are women aged 65 to 88 and, not sur prisingly, men in the 30 to 44 age- bracket. In our society work is all too often recognized only if it has a dollar value. Yet, no national plan has been develop ed to accord proper monetary com pensation for the work performed by housewives. The need to do so is obvious and pressing. In 1977, as in 1877, the majority of women are employ ed as mothers and managers of house holds. They remain, despite the importance of their contribution, an invisible majority according to our economic system and its various economic indicators. Dr. Jessie Hartline, a Rutgers University economist, has proposed a realistic approach to solving the house- management pay dilemma. She suggests that housewives exchange services and pay each other salaries. In this way they could operate more efficiently, as well as cash in on employment benefits and tax deductions. Housewives employed under this plan would pay into Social Security, which would entitle them to retirement pay. The women cooperating in this way would also earn all worker compensation benefits—such as sick pay. Moreover, they could deduct purchase cost and depreciation of appliances from their income tax. Dr. Hartline also suggests that housewives could incorporate their own firms. She adds that such cor porations already exist, but that ’’they are owned by men.” JUST BETWEEN US AND THE TELEPHONE by Liubov Kalynovich Ukrainian men — and what is woman’s work — or what are women suited for? A while ago an acquaintance, a man about 45 years old, had to stay in another city for several months, without his wife. He complained that he had so little time that he could not be active in the com munity. He had to do his own laundry, his own ironing, and even his own cooking! When I pointed out to him that some of our mutual friends, women who live alone, also had to do these things for themselves in addition to going to work, he said: ’’But they’re women!" — meaning, they have to do these things under any circumstances! When a man lives alone his friends sympathize with him because he has no one to cook for him. Even though many men can cook delicious food, the general reaction is to sympathize (or to help) — but only when it comes to men. Almost no one ever thinks that a single woman is ”a poor thing who has to do her own cooking, her own laundry, and her own housecleaning" in addition to her pro fessional work. Could mothers be at the bottom of this? My neighbor always did all of her own housework. Not long ago, when she reproached her son about the slop piness of his room, on the order of ’’what’s going to become of you” and the like, he answered: ’’Why should I learn how to straighten things out, put them away, and iron? When I finish school, I’ll get married. My wife can take care of all that.” This taught his mother a few things. Now her son also takes a turn at wash ing the dishes or the floors, doing the ironing, and other chores. But mothers are not always at fault. The lack of appreciation of women is a general problem in Ukrainian communit ies. Just look around in your own parish — are there any women (how many?) on the church committee? When there are meetings and elections of an executive group — how do things look then in our communities? Customarily a man is elected as head, and when it comes to the secretary you’ll hear, "let’s have someone from the fair sex!” — naturally a woman. Have you ever seen an election in which this sit uation was reversed? One of my friends told me she was asked to give a lecture on one occasion because it was decided that a woman should have the opportunity to speak. She declined, feeling offended. Women do not want to be invited as "token blacks”, but we do want to be appreciat ed for our individual qualities or talents. In medieval times our women had more equitable rights perhaps than to day. Just compare the laws! Or, consider the terms of the old marriage rite: it was a "druzhba” (friendship, partnership) of two people and the custom was to call either the bride or groom "druzhyna." НАШЕ ЖИТТЯ, ЛЮТИЙ 1977 25
Page load link
Go to Top
1 
2-3 
4-5 
6-7 
8-9 
10-11 
12-13 
14-15 
16-17 
18-19 
20-21 
22-23 
24-25 
26-27 
28-29 
30-31 
32-33 
34-35 
36-37 
38-39 
40 
