When my grandparents got married, it was the traditional roles, my grandfather working and taking care of the outside of the house, my grandmother taking care of the inside; he did finances and stuff, and she did household planning, etc.
That was the theory, anyway. Long afterward, decades after the divorce (in a time when divorce wasn’t overly common), she said that when they started out, he was thrilled with doing his part in the division of labor, but that he grew progressively less enchanted with adulting. So every so often, there’d be a task that he’d just decide that he didn’t want to do anymore. So he’d find a time and say, “Hey, let’s sit down and I’ll show you how to balance a checkbook, just so you know how to do it.” And then eventually it would become ‘her job’ to do the finances, etc. She said it happened with every single ‘responsibility’ he was supposed to be doing, it would eventually end up ‘her job’.
And then one day, about twelve, thirteen years into the marriage, he was like, “Hey, let me show you how to mow the lawn!” And she absolutely refused. He tried again and again, wheedled as best he could, but she just. Absolutely. Refused. She told me that she just knew that if she “learned” this, it would become just one more thing for her to do, and she was already doing the full 1950’s housewife thing, plus his ‘home’ responsibilities, plus raising a special needs child (whom she did an excellent job with, btw), and working a full-time job, and she just. Did. Not. Want this one more thing that was going to be foisted on to her, so she kept refusing.
Turns out, after a few months of her continuing to refuse, he took his daughters (he didn’t have any sons) outside and told them, “Hey, kids, it’s time for you to learn how to mow the lawn!”, and two weeks later it was the daughters’ “special job” to mow the lawn.
They ended up getting divorced a couple years later, I can’t imagine why …
Anyway, this picture reminded me of her story: there he is, happily lounging on a chair, smoking a pipe, drink in his hand, ‘directing’ his under-dressed wife on how to mow the lawn while he relaxes and ‘supervises’. Fuck that guy.
That is an interesting story and I appreciate that OP’s picture reminded you of it but I don’t think that person is ‘under-dressed’ even though I’d agree that some odd gender coding is going on in the image.
I am not OP, but this is a great time to remind people that debris from a mower can be very dangerous. Wear steel toe boots and long jeans. Don’t let children play near a mower.
He’s sitting there in the full heat of the day, wearing a long sleeved shirt and full-length trousers and tall socks, perfectly comfortable in the sun.
She’s sitting in an air conditioned bubble, wearing mid-arm sleeves, and mid-thigh shorts, at a time when Capri pants were considered fashionable yet still a bit scandalous.
If he’s comfortable with full-length everything in the sun, she’s definitely under-dressed in her air-conditioned bubble.
No, because (like so many other 1950’s advertisements) this image is from the male viewpoint: he’s relaxed in his lounger, perfectly content smoking a pipe and having a drink, while his wife is literally on display in front of him, cheerfully smiling and happy while she does the work and he stretches out watching her. In images like this, the male is assumed to be perfectly comfortable, and the comfort of the woman isn’t considered much at all. [Why, yes, honey, I was perfectly happy wrangling the kids and their homework this afternoon, getting them and the house pristine for you coming home from work. I even had time to cook a full dinner from scratch, clean the kitchen, take a shower, do my hair and makeup and put on jewelry! Here, have a drink while I take your coat and briefcase and help you on with your slippers!]
When my grandparents got married, it was the traditional roles, my grandfather working and taking care of the outside of the house, my grandmother taking care of the inside; he did finances and stuff, and she did household planning, etc.
That was the theory, anyway. Long afterward, decades after the divorce (in a time when divorce wasn’t overly common), she said that when they started out, he was thrilled with doing his part in the division of labor, but that he grew progressively less enchanted with adulting. So every so often, there’d be a task that he’d just decide that he didn’t want to do anymore. So he’d find a time and say, “Hey, let’s sit down and I’ll show you how to balance a checkbook, just so you know how to do it.” And then eventually it would become ‘her job’ to do the finances, etc. She said it happened with every single ‘responsibility’ he was supposed to be doing, it would eventually end up ‘her job’.
And then one day, about twelve, thirteen years into the marriage, he was like, “Hey, let me show you how to mow the lawn!” And she absolutely refused. He tried again and again, wheedled as best he could, but she just. Absolutely. Refused. She told me that she just knew that if she “learned” this, it would become just one more thing for her to do, and she was already doing the full 1950’s housewife thing, plus his ‘home’ responsibilities, plus raising a special needs child (whom she did an excellent job with, btw), and working a full-time job, and she just. Did. Not. Want this one more thing that was going to be foisted on to her, so she kept refusing.
Turns out, after a few months of her continuing to refuse, he took his daughters (he didn’t have any sons) outside and told them, “Hey, kids, it’s time for you to learn how to mow the lawn!”, and two weeks later it was the daughters’ “special job” to mow the lawn.
They ended up getting divorced a couple years later, I can’t imagine why …
Anyway, this picture reminded me of her story: there he is, happily lounging on a chair, smoking a pipe, drink in his hand, ‘directing’ his under-dressed wife on how to mow the lawn while he relaxes and ‘supervises’. Fuck that guy.
That is an interesting story and I appreciate that OP’s picture reminded you of it but I don’t think that person is ‘under-dressed’ even though I’d agree that some odd gender coding is going on in the image.
I am not OP, but this is a great time to remind people that debris from a mower can be very dangerous. Wear steel toe boots and long jeans. Don’t let children play near a mower.
OTOH, marketing materials rarely show PPE.
Yeah, absolutely do not be sitting on a ride along mower, that doesn’t have an air-conditioned bubble, in shorts. You will have a bad time.
He’s sitting there in the full heat of the day, wearing a long sleeved shirt and full-length trousers and tall socks, perfectly comfortable in the sun.
She’s sitting in an air conditioned bubble, wearing mid-arm sleeves, and mid-thigh shorts, at a time when Capri pants were considered fashionable yet still a bit scandalous.
If he’s comfortable with full-length everything in the sun, she’s definitely under-dressed in her air-conditioned bubble.
The argument you’re making seems to be that he is overdressed.
No, because (like so many other 1950’s advertisements) this image is from the male viewpoint: he’s relaxed in his lounger, perfectly content smoking a pipe and having a drink, while his wife is literally on display in front of him, cheerfully smiling and happy while she does the work and he stretches out watching her. In images like this, the male is assumed to be perfectly comfortable, and the comfort of the woman isn’t considered much at all. [Why, yes, honey, I was perfectly happy wrangling the kids and their homework this afternoon, getting them and the house pristine for you coming home from work. I even had time to cook a full dinner from scratch, clean the kitchen, take a shower, do my hair and makeup and put on jewelry! Here, have a drink while I take your coat and briefcase and help you on with your slippers!]
Looks like they were taking turns to use it.
Picture source: https://www.vintag.es/2018/11/the-power-mower-of-the-future-1957.html