THE EXCHANGE VALUE OF HOUSEWORK

Explaining persistent inequalities in the division of household labor amid secular change in women's employment patterns and in sex-role attitudes remains a challenge for sociologists and economists. The predominant conceptual solutions draw from a unifying paradigm of gender-neutral exchange, and furthermore align with economic or quasi-economic images of purposive action. This article analyzes three models from this class of explanations-the human capital theory of household time allocation, the resource-bargaining perspective on marital power and the economic dependency model-using data from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households. The results fail to support any of the three variations on the theme of gender neutrality in the principles governing the division of household labor. Instead, the pattern of negative findings provokes consideration of how husbands' and wives' housework behavior might serve as a vehicle of symbolic display. Evidence is presented suggesting that among couples whose earnings arrangement seriously deviates from the gender norm, housework is used symbolically to reassert one's ''essential' masculinity or femininity. Overall, the results support a more expansive view of spousal exchange as a means of addressing the puzzle of why housework remains ''women's work.''