Intimate Partner Sharing and Commitment Today

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Todd Brower says:

    Hello Alicia,

    First, nice to see the work of a former colleague here. Congratulations.

    Second, I would be interested to know if you looked at the demographics and work on same-sex couples/families in drawing your conclusions. For example, you note that “economic risks in families are asymmetric and gendered” because of the lesser value placed on still disproportionately female, unpaid family care. Work on same-sex couples often shows that they, too, model traditional breadwinner/care-giver roles – certainly asymmetrical, but only gendered to the degree that the relationship or society undervalues that home work through a sex-stereotyped lens. [Brower, 17 Am. U.J. Gender Soc. Pol’y & L. 1 (2009)]. With same-sex couples/families in married, quasi-married, or unofficially recognized relationships, I wonder how that additional dimension is reflected in the themes your work pursues.


  2. Alicia Kelly says:

    Hi Todd. Thanks for commenting. I appreciate your important question. I argue for seeing the value of caregiving within the family economy regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the caregiver. At the same time however, I emphasize that unpaid caregiving work for children, for other dependents and for the elderly, continues to be done much more by women than men. And then its low value in property law works to deepen economic inequalities at home. Interestingly, the developing literature on economic behavior in same sex relationships I am familiar with finds that there is greater parity in terms of sharing the load of both market and home labor. There tends to be less specialization. I look forward to reading your article.