Resources and decision making
Resources and decision-making in households
There is inequality in how family resources (money, food, etc.) are shared and who controls spending.
Barrett and McIntosh (1991):
Men gain more from women’s domestic work than they give back.
Husbands’ financial support often comes with conditions.
Men usually make major spending decisions.
Kempson (1994): Low-income women often sacrifice their own needs to meet family needs.
Money management
Pahl and Vogler (1993) identified two systems:
Allowance system – men give wives a set amount to manage household needs; men keep surplus.
Pooling – both partners share access to income and spending decisions (e.g., joint accounts).
Pooling has increased and is now the most common system.
Decision-making
Pooling suggests greater equality, especially in dual-income households.
However, if men still control pooled income, they retain more power over major financial decisions.
Pahl and Vogler (2007): Even in pooling systems, men often make big decisions.
Hardill (1997): Men usually made important career-related decisions.
Edgell (1980):
Very important decisions – by husband or jointly (husband having final say).
Important decisions – usually joint.
Less important decisions – usually made by wife.
Laurie and Gershuny (2000): By 1995, 70% of couples said they had an equal say, especially among high-earning, professional women.
Cultural versus material explanations
Gershuny and Laurie: Support the economic/material explanation – inequality stems from earnings.
Feminist view: Inequality also comes from patriarchal culture – socialized gender roles define men as decision-makers.
This reflects the cultural explanation of gender inequality.
The meaning of money
Pooling money doesn’t automatically mean equality – it depends on who controls it and how much each contributes.
Keeping money separate doesn’t always mean inequality – it can show independence.
Vogler et al: Cohabiting couples less likely to pool money but more likely to share domestic work equally.
Nyman (2003): Money’s meaning varies by couple; it reflects the nature of their relationship.
A ‘personal life’ perspective on money
Focuses on the meanings couples give to money and control.
Control over money isn’t always about inequality.
Smart (2007): Same-sex couples didn’t see money control as a power issue.
Weeks et al (2001): Same-sex couples often use ‘co-independence’ – shared money plus personal independence.
Smart suggests same-sex couples avoid traditional gendered money roles.
The personal life perspective stresses understanding personal meanings and contexts in financial relationships.