Beyond ‘Equality’: Work and Family Ideals in Contemporary U.S.

This article provides critical new insight into the discrepancy between the seemingly widespread desire for egalitarian arrangements alongside the reality of persistent unequal work-family arrangements. We argue that haziness in the meaning of what constitutes an egalitarian work-family arrangement results in an overestimation of the desire for evenly sharing paid and unpaid labor. Using original survey data nationally representative of adults in the United States (N = 998), findings show an unspecified sharing arrangement was chosen as ideal by about 50 percent of respondents. Yet, when given precise definitions of what constitutes equal sharing, only 25 percent of respondents considered an even-sharing arrangement their ideal, whereas the majority opted for uneven or non-symmetrical methods of sharing. Rejecting gender essentialism, the belief that men and women are inherently different, was associated with an increased likelihood in reporting an even-sharing ideal, among both men and women. Being a sole provider was less idolized when gender essentialist beliefs were low, especially among men. We conclude that overlooking the variety of work-family arrangements that typical Americans consider to be egalitarian erroneously disregards gender beliefs as a primary barrier to equal partnerships.