Gen Y's dirty little secret

Nov 23, 2012

Young adults who live at home into adulthood still rely on their mothers to do housework, new research has found.

Associate Professor Lyn Craig and Dr Abigail Powell from UNSW's Social Policy Research Centre compared the domestic work of 5512 and adults aged 15-34 living at home with that of their , using household data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics Time Use Surveys (1992, 1997 and 2006).

The study, which builds on Associate Professor Craig's previous research, also found an uneven distribution of domestic tasks between young men and women living with their parents.

"We know that is unevenly distributed between parents but these results show that the gender division of labour is trickling down to the next generation," she said.

"The age that young people move out of the family home is rising in Australia but our findings show that young people do not become less of a burden to their parents domestically as they get older."

The findings will be presented at the Australian Women's and Gender Studies Biennial Conference at UNSW.

Key findings:

  • 97% of mothers participated in domestic work per day, compared to 81% of fathers, 73% of young women and 54% of young men
  • The young men that did participate in domestic work spent the same amount of time as young women – both averaging 70 minutes per day
  • Young men aged 25-34 years contribute to more than 15-24 year-old men
  • Employment status plays the greatest role in determining participation and time spent in domestic activities for young people, with those working contributing less
  • Young people who participate in domestic labour do so alongside their parents, rather than taking individual responsibility for it
Overall the research found that young people's participation in domestic work is low and does not displace the time spent by parents on these activities.

''You might think as the children get older they would make a more equal contribution to housework, cleaning, cooking and washing, but it's really not the case,'' she told Fairfax media.

''It does seem to be a sticky problem. You would hope for more signs of change which are sadly not really there.''

Explore further: Extra time in math class has its minuses, scholar says

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Why women are still left doing most of the housework

May 24, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- An Oxford University study says if current trends continue, women will probably have to wait until 2050 before men are doing an equal share of the household chores and childcare. According ...

Mum's the word when it comes to children's happiness

Apr 03, 2011

As part of the study, which will follow 40,000 UK households over a number of years, young people aged between 10 to 15 years have been asked how satisfied they are with their lives. The findings indicate that a mother's ...

Young and invisible: African domestic workers in Yemen

Dec 07, 2007

Filmmaker Arda Nederveen and anthropologist Marina de Regt have made a short documentary about Ethiopian and Somalian women who work as domestic workers in Yemen. Many families in economically developed countries make use ...

Empty nest syndrome may not be bad after all, study finds

Feb 21, 2008

One day they are crawling, the next day they are driving and then suddenly they aren’t kids anymore. As children reach adulthood, the parent-child relationship changes as parents learn to adapt to newly independent children. ...

Recommended for you

Extra time in math class has its minuses, scholar says

20 hours ago

(Phys.org) —Eric Taylor, a PhD student at Stanford University's Center for Education Policy Analysis, found that students who spent more of the school day in math class had higher math scores, but the gains ...

Help wanted: Principals who love change

Jul 17, 2014

Training principals for new roles is key to U.S. Department of Education school reforms, according to a new report by SMU researchers. But insufficient training and support for principals to meet the new expectations is leading ...

User comments : 16

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Lurker2358
2.5 / 5 (13) Nov 23, 2012
The issue is that "young people" have little opportunity for advancement in the modern world because everything is already owned by somebody else. It's not like a generation or two ago when land prices were a thousand dollars per acre and you could build a house on a few years worth of savings. Now land is $40,000 or more per quarter acre and the house itself costs 4 or 5 times as much to build, and Rent costs 50% more than a mortgage note for a house four times the size of what you're renting used to cost.

So unless you're in the top 25% of earners, it's just about impossible for a "young person" to ever own anything beyond the clothes on their back.

Then you have to deal with the problem of the previous generation having about 10 to 15 years equivalent less education than this generation, in spite of being twice the age, so they have nearly nothing to teach anybody.

All of this translates to very little reason to be motivated to do "chores" for your elders.
Lurker2358
2.6 / 5 (10) Nov 23, 2012
But the "Baby Boomer's" Dirty Little Secret is that their parents have been on Social Security for three to five times longer than the amount of money they paid in could ever cover, even if you inflation adjusted it, and the baby boomers will be on it for at least 2 to 3 times longer than what they paid in could ever cover.

The translation of that? People who are about 40 years old and younger right now are "owned" by their parents, pretty much for life, as their personal servant, either directly or by default.

But yeah, that whole "price of land increased 50 times in 50 years" has a lot, lot, lot to do with "boomerang kids" and has just as much to do with lack of motivation to do anything. The gap between what average young people have and what they NEED to be self-sufficient is 10 times bigger than it was a generation or two ago.
jonnyboy
Nov 23, 2012
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Lurker2358
3.2 / 5 (9) Nov 23, 2012
while i disagree with almost every single point you attempted to make, i sincerely hope that the rumor that you have stopped dating little boys is true.


What the hell are you talking about?

You are being reported to the moderators.
PaxAeterna
3 / 5 (4) Nov 23, 2012
I live in the solid south and the only child molesters I've ever heard of are elderly bible thumpers.

Go figure. Take take take take take. No wonder they accuse everyone else of their shortcomings.

You wouldn't happen to be one would you jonnyboy? You're not marching home again to get some of that sweet sweet prepubescent ass are you?
Confederated
1.7 / 5 (12) Nov 23, 2012
"But the "Baby Boomer's" Dirty Little Secret is that their parents have been on Social Security for three to five times longer than the amount of money they paid in could ever cover, even if you inflation adjusted it, and the baby boomers will be on it for at least 2 to 3 times longer than what they paid in could ever cover." -Lurker2358
Only a brain dead liberal could think this. I gave the best years of my life in Viet Nam and NO amount of compensation could ever repay me for what I did over there. If it weren't for me you'd be speaking Russian or Red Chinese right now and if I want a little indulgences on the side there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
Poor Lurker,,,thinks he can take from those that gave him life...isthat why you want to abort every child so they can't take from you? I'm starting to wish my generation would have done such things and we wouldn't have to deal with boorish morons like Otto/FrankHerbert/lite.
(contd)
Confederated
1.4 / 5 (10) Nov 23, 2012
You must be a blotto sockpuppet..Probably PaxAeterna too. How pathetic it is that liberals must make numerous accounts to generate support for their amoral/socialist causes. I'm keeping my powder dry, just try and take my stuff and luxuries you POS.

I fought for my country against scum like you in the jungle. Bring it on. I worked at NASA for two decades after Viet Nam. Just threaten me and I'll rain hellfire down upon you. Keep it up and your whole family is toast.
Tangent2
4 / 5 (4) Nov 23, 2012
What kind of psycho comes onto a physics forum and starts threatening a member and their family?

The confederated kind, that's who.

Get over yourself, you aren't that big of a deal. And you completely missed the point of what Lurker was getting at.

Arrogant and Ignorant, you must be American.
gambit
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 23, 2012
@ confederated. I have seen some idiotic statements online before but wow. You couldn't be dumber if you tried. You must have gotten too much agent orange sneaking around the jungle looking for charlie huh. We would be speaking Russian or Chinese if not for you huh? Cause they would have done what? Taken over Asia? who cares old man. You got picked to fight a war over nothing, you're friends in the field all died for nothing (we pulled out remember?) but keep telling yourself those best years of you're stupid life were worth something to someone. The government treated all of you nam vets like scum because you were expendable. We do not fight wars for our own protection, only a moron would even think that after WW2. Ever heard of nuclear weapons? Who is gonna invade us or even go against us? The Russians tried and backed down quickly. The Chinese know better after what we did to Japan. Oh and you're not the only American who owns guns idiot, we all got them.
Vendicar Dickarian
2.3 / 5 (6) Nov 23, 2012
The issue is that "young people" have little opportunity for advancement in the modern world because everything is already owned by somebody else. ...
So unless you're in the top 25% of earners, it's just about impossible for a "young person" to ever own anything beyond the clothes on their back.


This is some serious horse hockey. While it amounts to a pity party and barely deserves a response, I will at least point out that you should read, very carefully, the book "The Millionaire Next Door." It should give you some perspective on the differences between wealth and spending. You might be surprised to find that much high-priced real estate is not owned by individuals, but is only mortgaged from the bank. Tens of millions of frugal individuals however, live in and OWN low-cost, high-quality real estate. They simply worked hard and saved - nothing to it. Well, except for not spending lots on BMWs and the like.
gambit
4 / 5 (4) Nov 23, 2012
Yes but you're missing the fact that the value of a dollar has basically hit rock bottom. So someone making less than 25k a year cannot really afford to buy a house and raise a family on that. When you could do exactly that not but 40 years ago when my father was a young man. He had a minimum wage job and could still afford a house and a new car, all while supporting a family of 4. Try doing that today on minimum wage and see how far it gets you. It's really just simple economics why are you people so stupid. If the dollar is worth 90% less than it was 40 years ago than the average wage earner has to make 90% more to equal the same standard of living. Why can't you idiots figure this stuff out its pretty simple. Capitalism to survive must have some form of wealth redistribution. Have you ever played monopoly in you're life? Well what happens at the end of the game? 1 person ends up with all the money = game over. Redistribution takes place and the game begins again. Figure it out.
kochevnik
1.8 / 5 (5) Nov 23, 2012
@Confedertarded If it weren't for me you'd be speaking Russian or Red Chinese right now and if I want a little indulgences on the side there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
I AM speaking RUSSIAN and moreover we beat your confederate ass back to Tennessee.
dan42day
3 / 5 (8) Nov 24, 2012
The issue is that "young people" have little opportunity for advancement in the modern world because everything is already owned by somebody else...

So unless you're in the top 25% of earners, it's just about impossible for a "young person" to ever own anything beyond the clothes on their back.

...All of this translates to very little reason to be motivated to do "chores" for your elders.


No, the issue is that "young people" in western society have been spoiled into a sense of entitlement and laziness that is unprecedented in human history. To argue that they shouldn't feel any sense of responsibility toward helping their parents maintain the household in which they are being SUPPORTED because "the world is unfair" goes beyond absurdity!

Thank god my children didn't turn out like that!

grondilu
2.5 / 5 (4) Nov 24, 2012
Household sucks. It's annoying, and young men always have more interesting things to do. Like watching porn and TV-series, playing video games, writing some code, trolling on internet forums. Really it's hard to find any time for menial tasks such as house-holding.
headrushed
5 / 5 (1) Nov 26, 2012
The only problem here that is worth mentioning is overpopulation. Human beings have overpopulated. There is really nothing else worth talking about until we get a handle on this as the key problem.
cantdrive85
2.6 / 5 (5) Nov 26, 2012
Confederated, that's funny you deplore the "liberals" while being employed by the government for nearly your entire adult life. BTW, you crawled around in the jungle for corporate interests, and for NO other reason.
barakn
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 26, 2012
I gave the best years of my life in Viet Nam and NO amount of compensation could ever repay me for what I did over there. If it weren't for me you'd be speaking Russian or Red Chinese right now and if I want a little indulgences on the side there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
You seem to be referring to the Domino Theory, in which it was postulated one country falling to communism would trigger another, and so forth, ad infinitum. There's just one problem: you lost the war in Vietnam, and it did fall to Communism, but somehow the domino chain fizzled out. So, NO, we wouldn't be speaking Russian or Chinese because of you. Your estimation of your self-worth is greatly exaggerated.