To Have and to Hold: Slave Work and Family Life in Antebellum South Carolina

1998 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 561
Author(s):  
David W. Blight ◽  
Larry E. Hudson
1998 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 526
Author(s):  
Marie Jenkins Schwartz ◽  
Larry E. Hudson Jr.

1998 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 681
Author(s):  
Catherine Clinton ◽  
Larry E. Hudson Jr.

1988 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-271
Author(s):  
Kelly Piner
Keyword(s):  

PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (19) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine J. Kaslow ◽  
Melanie J. Bliss
Keyword(s):  

2019 ◽  
Vol 118 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Ok-Hee Park ◽  
Kwan-sik Na ◽  
Seok-Kee Lee

Background/Objectives: The purpose of the paper is to examine how family-friendly certificates introduced to pursue the compatibility of work and family life affect the financial performance of small and medium-sized manufacturers, and to provide useful information to companies considering the introduction of this system in the future.


Author(s):  
Christie Hartley

In modern liberal democracies, the gendered division of labor is partially the result of men and women making different choices about work and family life, even if such choices stem from social norms about gender. The choices that women make relative to men’s disadvantage them in various ways: such choices lead them to earn less, enjoy less power and prestige in the labor market, be less able to participate in the political sphere on an equal basis, make them to some degree financially dependent on others, and leave them at a bargaining disadvantage and vulnerable in certain personal relationships. This chapter considers if and when the state should intervene to address women’s disadvantage and inequalities that are the result of gender specialization. It is argued that political liberals can and sometimes must intervene in the gendered division of labor when persons’ interests as free and equal citizens are frustrated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document