4.3 Article

Divergent Gender Revolutions: Cohort Changes in Household Financial Management across Income Gradients

期刊

GENDER & SOCIETY
卷 35, 期 5, 页码 746-777

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/08912432211036912

关键词

cohort; gender; individualization; intersectionality; money; power

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study reveals a shift towards gender equality in couples' financial management over time, with a subtle relaxation in male control for low-earning women and an individualization of financial management for high-earning women. This trend is particularly pronounced among couples where both partners have equally high earnings.
The ways in which partners manage their money provide important clues to gender inequality in and the nature of couple relationships. Analyzing data from nationally representative surveys (N = 11,730 couples), I examine changes across British cohorts born between the 1920s and 1990s in their household financial management, and how the changes vary across individuals and couples occupying differential income positions. The results show divergent, nuanced cohort trends toward gender equality in couples' money management. Across successive cohorts of low-earning women, there has been a subtle relaxation in the form of male control, reflected in a decrease in the proportion of men adopting back-seat management by retaining the majority of the couple's money while delegating the chore of managing daily expenses to their partners. By contrast, the empowerment of high-earning women is reflected primarily in an individualization of financial management, evident in a cohort decrease in joint financial management and an increase in independent management. The trend of individualization is particularly prominent among couples in which both partners have equally high earnings. The findings provide new insights into and important extensions of the theorization of gender relations in and the individualization of couple relationships.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据