> She now has to wash and put away the glass.

No she doesn't. She can just leave it there. She can leave her own glasses there, too.

The pressure to keep the counter clean isn't coming from the husband. He doesn't give a damn how many dishes are on the counter. It's coming from an expectation of femininity that she's internalized: "a wife is supposed to keep the counter free of dishes". The husband isn't helping her meet this expectation, but he isn't imposing the expectation on her, either.

I'm not married, but I see this theme in a lot of fights over household chores: it's not that the husband expects his wife to do all the chores, it's that he doesn't actually believe the chores need to be done.

This is a sexist assumption which denies the woman individual agency. One person in a relationship having a higher standard for cleanliness than the other isn’t necessarily the result of some society-wide conditioning. There are plenty of very tidy men and more relaxed women out there in the wide world. And plenty of relationships where both partners are very neat or very messy.

When people have different standards, they need to communicate and work together to solve problems in a mutually acceptable way. Both “I don’t care if we live in a pigsty so it’s all your fault for caring about it” and “everything needs to be perfectly spotless and you need to contribute equal time to maintaining the space to my exacting specification” are one-sided cop outs.

I agree! I don't mean to imply that the "relaxed" standard is better than the "tidy" standard. But my point is that the husband was not being hypocritical. He was not expecting his wife to keep the house to the "tidy" standard while himself only meeting the "relaxed" standard (which is what rhacker implicitly accused).

> This is a sexist assumption which denies the woman individual agency.

Yes, I made a generalization. I've never met the man or the woman involved, so I don't know their specific circumstances. It would have been more accurate for me to say something like "it's probably coming from an expectation of femininity that she's internalized", or "many women in the US today internalize an expectation of femininity that prioritizes tidiness". Obviously not every woman is tidy and not every man is relaxed, but there's a definite trend towards women being tidier than men, and that trend comes from internalized gender norms.

This kind of generalization is very common in discussions about gender on the Internet. For example, rhacker's parent comment made a similar generalization, as did your comment about "rich middle-aged white men" a few days ago. [1] I don't think my generalization was any worse than those; I just flipped the genders by making a generalization about women instead of a generalization about men.

I think there's a deeper discussion here about "if personal preferences arise from internalized gender norms, does that mean the preferences are invalid?" You seemed to interpret my comment as saying that her preference for tidiness was somehow invalid because it came from internalized femininity. I didn't intend that; I think that personal preferences arising from internalized femininity (_and internalized masculinity_) are perfectly valid.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30977147&p=3#30979367

My father did all the washing up in our house growing up, and mum did most of the cooking, but he never once annotated me for leaving dirty dishes whilst my mother regularly would complain.

Almost every married woman I know fits the stereotype of being more houseproud than their husbands (I'm in the UK).

You call it sexist, but it seems to reflect a genuine sex-based divide.

On the other end, my girlfriend doesn't seem to mind at all. She does when it gets very messy, but the minor ones don't bother her like it does me. The author's mindset regarding dishes in the above article does remind a bit of her as well.

They'd get home from work later, and to relax immediately discard laptop, jacket, shoes, mail around the house, get changed and leave work clothes on the floor, start making a snack and leave plates in the kitchen before I was about to make dinner.

We contributed equally towards costs of living, so there was no 'breadwinner' power imbalance, just a fundamentally different expectation of how our living space should be used. I never found a way to reconcile this.

I guess one sane way is to hire someone to tidy up the house on a daily basis and share the cost.

I wonder if women traditionally spending more time at home is the cause of this gender difference.

But also i think there is a biological reason. Mothers notice dangers to young children more, as on an evolutionary time scale they were responsible for protecting a child from birth, when the child is most vulnerable.

Keeping things clean stops any nasty avoidable accidents.

I see that as an argument for choosing traditional gender roles because it seems to me that one of the main causes of conflict in 50/50 relationships are these arguments about chores, tidiness, etc.

Splitting chores 50/50 seems like asking for trouble given that men and women have evolved differently in this regard - he ends up feeling that she's endlessly nagging him, she ends up feeling that she has to manage him like a child.

Seems like the traditional breadwinner/homemaker setup would be a solution to this problem.

Know him? Of course I know him. He's me.

You seem to have an extraordinarily limited and homogenous social circle.

Explaining certain kinds of behavior as the result of society-wide (patriarchaic) conditioning may be sexist itself, because it denies the womans individual agancy.

I personally think we will have to contend with the present and future of neuroscience research that investigates the distinction between which wills are truly free and which are conditioned on past experiences.

All that to say, however, that 'sexist is as sexist does'. If such language as in GP is used to denigrate the position of the woman in this disagreement by casting her as a nuisance to be managed externally, then that is sexist, because she is no longer afforded a voice in the discussion but is instead reduced to an object to be manipulated, the primary reason for this being her gender.

But I wouldn't recommend trying to close an argument by saying "Hey honey, I think you've been brainwashed by patriarchy. Don't you think we should try to challenge established hygiene and gender norms with this dirty glass standing as act of protest?"

This is a specific example of a general disagreement on values. Disagreeing on values is really difficult to resolve, since people rarely change them, so agreement is often impossible.

It's not entirely satisfactory, but if both partners can recognize the difference in values, respect the other's position, and act in a way that accommodates but doesn't acquiesce to one side or the other, then they can live with the disagreement.

So for the glass, the husband's position that a glass on the counter doesn't matter is valid, as is the idea that a clean counter has aesthetic value. So a compromise might be that the wife learns to accept that the counter will be dirty during the day, and they take turns cleaning it at night before bed.

This doesn't get said enough. It also not just wife vs husband - we all have different standards and it's a lesson that needs to be learned that usually someone isn't being malicious it's just not easy to force yourself to notice something if it's fine by your standards but not by your partner's.

I would assert that when one partner works disproportionately toward meeting the unshared expectations of the other partner (than vice versa), they are being exploited by that partner. Society frequently privileges some expectations over others. Consequently, one partner often feels disproportionately entitled to work from the other partner to fulfill their expectations.

Three excellent rules for a successful marriage.

A couple of years into our relationship my significant other finally realized, that if she wants me to do specific tasks in our household, then thats her desire and not mine. I.e. that I for example leave "a mess behind in the kitchen" since I am totally fine with that, and its only her desire to have a cleaner kitchen, and not some general rule I had broken.

This lead to a huge change in our relationship. Since then she mostly starts negotiating rules that we both can agree upon instead of starting a fight. I am very thankful for that.

If only more people did this in all walks of life. Rather than get angry at teammates when they do something that annoys us, we can negotiate a mutually beneficial working agreement. We need to have the courage and self-control to approach these conversations when we see friction, and ask for compromise rather than demand change. And we need to have good faith.

This is an age old pattern.

Pick any ten presidential biographies and I bet you eight of them have some passage about "my wife cared a lot about <household standard of cleanliness/orderliness/presentation thing> but I thought it was excessive"

I'm sure someone familiar with ancient literature can find a few ancient Romans saying the same things.

I'm having a hard time following the logic here.

You agree that at some point someone has to do the dishes, correct?

We can assume based on the article that the wife is the one doing the dishes. So, that means every time the husband leaves dishes out he is making more work for his wife than if he just put his dishes in the dishwasher.

Not necessarily the reasoning that it may be re-used is valid, also it may be that he would eventually put it in the dishwasher when the dishwasher is ready to be run. They could probably have come to an agreement that there was a specific spot that one singular glass can chill out (maybe not even in the kitchen).

This might be difficult if he actually doesn’t understand when the dishwasher is ready to be run.

As you say there are solutions accommodating both viewpoints, but it requires either good communication, so one side’s “expertise” is conveyed and internalized by the other. Or both sides being competent enough at all the parts involved in the discussion, but for that they’d need to take turns doing the task so they both have the same understanding of the situation (it also gives more credibility to each other’s claims).

The article author choosing to put 100% of the efforts on the communication part was pretty convincing.

A) Need to be done now B) Need to be done by the husband C) A & B

If it's just a water glass, I'd not be surprised if the husband intends to (or would) reuse it from its position on the counter, hence the entire dishwasher->cupboard cycle is superfluous from the husband's point of view.

Indeed. From the article:

> I might want to use it again.

I can tell you for a fact my dishwasher would run a whole lot less than 1/2 the time it does now, if I lived alone. Like, 1/4 as much. And that's just considering the wife, not the kids, like my usage solo vs. us before we had kids, and that's despite some things (dirty pots and pans) taking up more than 1/2 as much space as they do with two people. And it's not because I'd be doing more thorough hand-washing—I'd be doing a lot more re-using with a quick wipe, or maybe a brief run under the water, or even nothing at all (for, say, water cups). And yes, of course they'd stay on the counter (in the sink they'd get too gross to re-use, and they'd be in the way).

I'm the breadwinner. I pay 100% of the bills, excluding the 'I went to buy potato chips and ice cream'

I WFH so I also tend to do the majority of chores. Which when I get burnt out or get sick I don't get as many chores done and the house goes to shit. Only ending up punishing myself really.

I also have to 100% of the time decide what's for dinner and either order or cook it. My partner's incapable of making decisions.

My areas of the house(my office for example) are kept orderly and clean. I try my best to keep the rest of the house clean.

But when I leave a pot on the stove over night, I'll hear about it.

Thanks I'll look into this. Never heard of this.

https://eggshelltherapy.com/overfunctioning-underfunctioning...

Talk about right on the money. I very much appreciate you helping me. I have some changing to do.

This is a way for you to learn if you are undervaluing your partner's contributions, or if they think/know that they are free-riding.

I sit at the dinner table hoping to talk every night. She's busy scrolling facebook. Yes sometimes I end up on my phone as well, but I actively make the effort to be there to talk.

>you are undervaluing your partner's contributions

I am a big believer in legitimate praise and even giving compliments to strangers. Though obviously stearing clear of flattery and fakeness.

Once in a while she does find the energy to do something. I always notice and say something positive.

Feel free to just think of me as some internet a*hole, but I'm just feeling terrible imagining myself in your position.

Nope, I appreciate the advice. From another post I think I discovered the approach. No splitsville needed.

Going through is the only way out.

E.g. If you want more talk time at dinner, then voice that, and state that you will work on being present as well. To show that that you're in it together.

Is this you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment_in_adults#Anxious-p...

It may seem unfair, but that’s the masculine responsibility. To run a tight ship and keep things orderly, regardless of what may be happening outside of the house.

It’s all about dignity and respect really. Take that away from your partner and they’ll resent you, no matter how much pove there is between the two of you.

Even if there is a 2:1 income ratio, each side can feel they are contributing monetarily and collectively decide what tasks are worth doing vs paying for.

I can understand the psychology of both sides - the breadwinner thinks they are doing their job outside the house so why is the spouse not doing all the stuff inside the house.

Any subset of tasks breadwinner spouse pick up (like dishes or laundry) they expects a gold star sticker for doing extra. Meanwhile the homemaker spouse feels put upon for the 1000 other things they do around the house and dealing with the kids.

Likewise this is akin to the homemaker spouse tutored the neighbors kid for $100/week and then telling the 6-figure breadwinner that they are also contributing to the families income. Each side feels correct and like they are going above and beyond their scope..

Complementary relationships can be far less stressful if each are sacrificing for the well being of the other.

Even a lot of these people may be two income couples but came from one income households, so they grew up with a father doing nothing/much less around the house and find it normal.

Now if children are in play, then it's a whole different ballgame. It easily triples or quadruples the work that needs to get done around the house.

This to me feels like materialistic pandering. Breadwinners need to see their spouses as financial partners in a shared life.

It's teamwork. Having two warring departments in a company is bad news, so is two adversarial government agencies: there's a common goal at stake. It's no different at home.

If you were on a sports team, you'd think carefully about how a teammate wants the ball, and they'll think about how they can make it easy to set up for you to execute that pass. Making a hospital pass doesn't make either of you look better, and doesn't win the game.

This is a fascinating sentence which has stuck with me (after glancing at it a week ago I find myself thinking about it now). This isn't the culture I was raised in but it's a very interesting perspective.

[EDIT] It just means money that's expected to be spent, but not budgeted specifically for anything, and is largely put to personal discretion without any kind of accounting expectation—no? Some phrase using "discretionary" might also work, but that one seems too technical or formal.