Implicit sexism and classism in “research”…

Radfemological Images has a great analysis of a piece of “research” that was making the rounds about how unhealthy and expensive McDonalds is compared to making food at home. It’s not that the point itself is bad, but that the data presented contains implicit sexism and classism which goes unnoticed unless you look carefully.

Woman as “useful object”. In the top picture, the cost of preparing the food is taken into account and is part of the pricing structure at McDonald’s; you are paying the people who prepare your food when you pay for your meal (granted, at minimum wage, those people aren’t being paid very much). In the bottom two pictures, the cost of preparing the food is completely omitted. That means that in order for the bottom two to represent “saved money” the person preparing the food has had to do this, for free.

6 thoughts on “Implicit sexism and classism in “research”…

  1. Brad Reddekopp October 3, 2013 at 22:02

    …but I do at least half the shopping and most of the cooking. This analysis focuses on *women’s* unpaid labour. Don’t men cook and shop these days?

    • Francois Tremblay October 4, 2013 at 00:10

      Well, yea. I also do most of the cooking.

    • Francois Tremblay October 4, 2013 at 15:36

      The point, I think, is that it’s classified as women’s work and therefore not relevant, not that only women do it.

      • Brad Reddekopp October 4, 2013 at 22:20

        Is it still widely seen as “women’s work”? Not in the circles I frequent but maybe my friends and family are weird.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: