Bourgeois Feminism Is A Feminism That Demands Nothing Of Men

leavingmybody:

thepeacockangel:

thepeacockangel:

Did you know that as more married upper class and upper middle class women became employed during the 70s there was a dramatic uptick in demand for domestic labor?

They do not demand their husbands pick up the slack when they enter the workforce, instead building their “liberation” on the backs of working class women, usually working class WOC.

As well 19th century Bourgeois feminists were only horrified by working class sex workers because sex work was easier and paid better than being a scullery maid, thus making it harder and more expensive to get domestic labor.  They set up caring courses (read: Training and recruitment courses for domestic laborers) and crusaded against sex workers to make sure their supply of domestic labor was unthreatened.  

You’ll note bourgeois feminists never demonize or rail against domestic labor the way they rail against sexual labor.  This is because they have no use for sex workers and all the use in the world for domestic workers.

Here’s a source on the growth of domestic labor demand

Source on sex work in the 19th century

this is why i’m against hiring maids especially if you have  a husband or significant other…common y’all clean the shit up yourself, if you got money to hire a maid, you got time to clean.

I mean, TBH, if you have the money to hire a maid, hire her, pay her really fucking well, distribute some of your income to her because she probably fucking needs it or she wouldn’t be there scrubbing your gross tub.

Though really like there’s no course of action a member of the bourgeois can take except like funding the fuck out of the revolution that isn’t them just being a bourgeois fuck (and even then they’re still being kind of a bourgeois fuck)