Yes; because when (for example) a woman can support herself financially she can leave an abuser. That's still got nothing to do with the division of household tasks.
It does actually because if women are not seen as equals in the division of laborof work and pay generally in society then this will undermine the division of labor within the home. The social setting has to match the household setting otherwise they undermine each other.
And that's why I've been saying it's important that there is always the possibility of flexibility and renegotiating the division of labour; what suits a household at one phase of life might not be right ten or twenty years later. That takes out the rigidity.
Not really. For the time that one is stuck at home and restricted to that role of looking after home and children while the other is out developing their career, work and financial ability some would argue that even during these times its unfair and priviledges one and not the other.
I think this all depends on the assumptions about what makes for a happy and fullfilled life. Some say its being out in the world, having the freedom to fullfill your potential as a human learning and improving your status so that you move up the hierarchy of development and achievement.
While others especially collective societies believe its all about sacrifice, duty, investment in kids and family and community. So feeling a person has missed out on empowerment within a modern secular ideology that makes the individual needs and rights above all else is not necessarily the true key to happiness and fullfillment.
A footnote here is that as a result of Feminist ideas such as a women need not marray as its a setback to individual freedom and financial independence may women put off marrying and haviung children. As a result there is a new growing psychological problem of unhappy and unfullfilled women who have missed their chance to find a partner and have children.
As for power difference, the main power difference is economic. This is why shared access to finances and shared decision-making is so important, no matter who does the actual earning.
Ironically in this hyper individualised society many young people are setting up relationships like business contracts and wanting seperate accounts.
I have no idea what you mean by "believing two identical situations."
You said
"it doesn't make a traditionally gendered division of labour abusive". So different people can believe in both non abusive and abusive
"traditionally gendered division of labour" which shows the belieeeef itself in
"traditionally gendered division of labour" is not abusive.
What? There is no way to do those things - like isolating someone, intimidating them, coercing or threatening them - and have that be "positive supportive behaviour." There is no way to exercise control over someone (which is what hierarchy is about) and have that not be abusive.
No a hiearchy is not about anything unless there is an mind to abuse. Like my links showed hiearchies are natural and even healthy and beneficial when setup correctly with check and balances. Thats because they are good at organising people, society to be able to manage society.
Abuse happens within this same hierarchy. But we don't tear down the hierarchy. We refine the checks and balances to stop opprotunities for people to abuse and exploit. As you said a person has to make a concerted effort to abuse and control, recreate that situation to be abusive and controlling by manipulation or lack of transparency.
It might be true that they're not seeing the reality of the situation, but it's very common.
Not really, not to the point of abuse and destruction whether thats abusing a child or abusing your own body. The unreal thinking can vary from minor irrational thinking when upset to total destructful and anti social behaviour that harms self and others.
You don't have to be cognitively impaired or subject to significantly irrational thinking for that to be the case.
It seems you do, at least to the point where you believe destruction is a good thing, but that would be a significant unreality to believe damaging and destroying another especially your own child hich goes against just about every human tendency to survive and to protect offspring. Its a pretty significant unreal expectation and view of things.
