Housework as a Dominant Ideology

One cultural activity that perpetuates a dominant ideology like a good work ethic is housework. Some of the operating values associated with housework are order, cleanliness, efficiency, industriousness, and integrity, to name a few. Yet the industry resulting from the stay-at-home mom's or dad's housework isn't as immediately obvious, at least not to capitalists, and perhaps to those who inadvertantly capitalize from it. In addition few domestic engineeers receive a paycheck for their efforts. However chores like cleaning the toilet, washing the dirty dishes, and preparing meals also requires the organizational and managerial skills found in the business community.

It would seem that housework is a bad thing is the implication of the activity is a mere rearranging and pushing around of dirt and dust that eventually settles. Yet what if what is being brought into the home is more than dirt from the outside? If the hard working stay-at-home mom or dad internalizes the implicit suggestion that he or she is filthy by the means of an objective or very subjective ideological dirt, this coud have the domino-effect of other family members also internalizing the same message. This benefits the upper-class and its ideoloies because not only is the nurturing home environment now grounds for unstable coalitions and potential disagreements, but also housework becomes the symbolic violence of dishonesty and a lack of moral, not to mention laziness. If the stay-at-home mom or dad doesn't have pure morals to being with, how can he or she possibly assimilate into society?

There are also relevant manifest and latent functions and dysfunctions resulting from housework. For example the manifest function of housework is that other people like family members are healthier for living in a cleaner home. Yet the Lex Luther effect mentioned in the previous paragraph suggests that cleanliness is a relative term. Be that as it may the latent function of housework is that the stay-at-home parent cleaning the house might be in better shape for the effort and exercise. In short housework benefits the stay-at-home parent as he or she reaps the rewards of being a busy bee. However a busy bee can be easily distracted from the latent dysfunction of perpetuating the status-quo.

A permeating ideology resulting from housework mimics the corporate community in that everyday errands like chores require subjecting oneself to the boss per say, whether that dynamic include the dyad between married couples, between employee and employer, or between the stay-at-home parent and dominant ideologies. Given personal involvement in a task like mopping the kitchen floor, accountability for perpetuating espoused ideologies is unavoidable. Another household chore like vacuuming cannot be completed all by itself either. Likewise the proletariat also subjects him or herself to the boss to do his bidding. As a result the dominant ideology suggested is not only a good work ethic, but also the labor theory of value. Yet the conundrum arises when an appreciative thank you from a family member doesn't equate to an income allowing the stay-at-home mom or dad to fend for her or himself financially. In short the fruits of his or her efforts isn't a given, unlike that from a job outside the home.

Clearly work in the guise of cleaning the house doesn't always lead to profit, in part due to the fact that competition in the work force is one less as a consequence. To explain choosing housework over being a yes-man or woman benefits the upper-class and the corporate community because the more lucrative careers are now available for the beautiful people to vie over. Another route of exclusion from the dominant majority, their ideologies, and their lifestyle, is isolation from the population choosing to work outside the home, because housework is mostly a solitary committment while networking for sheer necessity in the business world is not. Clearly this alienation serves to reinforce dominant ideologies as it starkly contrast the socialization and the mingling within a big corporate giant like General Electric. If the stay-at-home parent is unaccompanied daily as the spouse goes to work and the children go to school, the decreased level of personal contacts outside the milieu of the home suggests housework isn't very apealing nor profitable, but somehow specialized in the same instance.

Conferring legitimacy on the stay-at-home parent is a double-edged sword as some might think housework is an exploitive microcosm of the dominant majority because the means of mental and material production rest on conveniently exalting ideologies. The upper-class can feel pristine at the expense of the lower class. Secondly the threat of losing legitimacy can be so pervasive that the household worker bee thanklessly attempts to clean the house while effacing him or herself in the face of more than one kind of stratification and domination. Yet the objective reality is often quite different in that the dominant majority not only influence through the means of mental and material reproduction, but also control though symbolic and surreal violence, as it takes on a status-quo of its own via dirt.

Yet I hear dirt is also good for the skin, meaning that there are also benefits to housework. One particular benefit is that household worker's children can repeat the example they have been shown by the means of their stay-at-home parents actually being around more in comparison to them working outside the home and in the workforce. This helps the children in the long run to lead productive lives via the self-less example shown. The family members may not choose to become maids nor butlers, but the transference of values like efficiency, integrity, and industriousness can be found in almost all jobs, along with a good career, lifestyle, and future.