The egalitarian myth that Hochschild documents in this chapter is the upstairs-downstairs agreement to combat the problem of Nancy doing all the work in the ‘second shift’ at home. It is a delusional system that convinces both Nancy and Evan that their problem has been solved and that their responsibilities are now equal at home. Emotion work is the work of trying to feel the “right” feeling in order to keep everything “fine”. It relates to the egalitarian myth as it is another aspect of the delusional system, and works to pretend that the gender roles and responsibilities at home are equal while masking the gender discrepancies. I definitely see this division of labor in my own family. My mother carries all the responsibilities in the second shift at home, and though she only works part time, she does all the work at home with little if no help from my father.

The “ideology of domesticity” focuses on the language of affect rather than of hierarchy. The three constraints it places on the organization of work in our society include the employers’ entitlement to demand an ideal worker separate from family work, husbands’ right to live up to this work ideal, and the definition of duties of a mother framed around care-giving. This ideal of domesticity existed in both hunter and gatherer societies as well as colonial America, where mothers were expected to raise the children and cook for the family, while men were expected to hunt for food or work and protect and support the family rather than care for it. Under domesticity, personality, emotional expressiveness and market work are all gendered as well.

Williams argues that women’s disadvantaged position in the work force is a result of their self-selection into jobs that require less education and skill. Thus, sex differences in the occupation and wages are not caused by discrimination but by the free choices made by men and women. I do not agree with this argument, but rather that the history of the development of society has created constraints against women in the labor force. While the disparity may not be due to direct discrimination, it is due to the historical long-term discrimination that has been established.

The household division of labor in lesbigay families is much more egalitarian than in heterosexual families. Although a persistent commitment to equally dividing up household responsibilities exists, many studies fail to make a clear distinction between what is considered equal and what is considered fair. Most lesbigay families do though achieve this almost equal distribution of domestic work through a broad and inclusive conception of domesticity. These differences are based on career flexibility, a focus on female-identified professions and specialization in domesticity of one partner.

The main trends in sexual activity among teens according to the Risman and Schwartz article were surprising to me. Maybe it is simply due to the negative portrayal of teen sex in the media, but I was unaware that the rates of sexual activity among teens was decreasing. With the heightened stress on safe sex and abstinence, I did not know that teen pregnancy numbers, as well as abortion and STD rates have actually gone down, and that the age that adolescents are losing their viriginity at has gone up as a whole. The trend is also away from casual sex, and toward mainly engaging in sexual intercourse only when in a relationship. The rate of oral sex however has increased, or is simply just more widely spoken of today. These trends can be attriubuted to a newfound teen conservatism in the last decade, and also to a female empowerment in relationships today. Girls seem to be moving toward the safety and dignity of less sexualized relationships today, and are driven by the fear of negative consequences of casual sex, including pregnancy and disease.
The current trend in romantic and sexual behavior among college students is the hook up rather than the date. Few college students actually go on dates, and if they do it is usually only once they have established an exclusive relationship. Most relationships also begin with a hook up or a series of hook ups, most of which occur under the effects of alcohol, rather than a date. Though sex is usually reserved for relationships or a “friend with benefits”, sex now occurs more casually than in the 50’s or 60’s. Oral sex has become more of a regular occurrence than ever before, and is often performed during random hook ups.
These numbers apply to both genders; however gender differences are highly apparent. More males than females receive oral sex, and males are less likely to be stigmatized by having many random hookups, while girls are often labeled a slut. More males experience an orgasm in all degrees of hook ups, and males also report that their female partner had an orgasm many more times than they actually did.
My high school and college experiences mostly followed the trend of hooking up rather than dating, in between the committed relationships I was in. In general, my friends who are not in relationships definitely find the absence of dating at BC apparent, as well as the gender disparities.

The Puritan approach to sexual desire is one that admonished lust and sexual activity out of wedlock. Despite this ideal of remaining faithful to your spouse and shunning any woman who births a 'bastard child', the article presented Colonial America in a much more sexually perverse light than I would have ever expected of the sexually refined and religious society normally presented. It mentioned such acts as beastiality and crude terms to label permiscious women, as well as infidelity and rape issues between different racial and social classes. Despite these realities, the ideal still remained, with sex viewed as a means of reproduction rather than physical pleasure, and large families with lots of children was expected. Children learned sexuality from their parents as well as clergymen, as much of the sexual ideal was rooted in religion. Colonial society dealt with sexual deviance by instituting harsh punishments on those caught. These punishments were dealt to women and men, and included fines, whippings, and even hanging. The two main goals of regulating sexual deviance were to enforce the system of marital and reproductive sexuality as well as to uphold racial divides and maintain white dominance over blacks.
D’Emilio argues that the relationship between capitalism and the family is contradictory in that while capitalism frees us to sell our labor in a positive way, is also eliminates any other alternative. Throughout history, there has been little room in the capitalist system of production for men or women to be gay as economic survival was centered around participation in the nuclear family. The ideology of a capitalish society also proves contradictory, as it esteems privatized family as the source of love, emotional security and stability. Thus, while it enables individuals to live outside of the family, it simultaneously depends on pushing men and women into families in order to produce the next generation of workers. He argues that only once individuals, rather than family units, began to make their living through wage labor, could a homosexual identity develop. I agree with this argument, but also think that a political and ideological change must take place in order to bolster the gay identity that is being facilitated by the individualistic component of today's capitalism. Gays must be given legal societal rights and not be viewed with negativity as a minority group in order to fully develop their identity.