0:00

This episode is brought to you

0:02

by Chevy Silverado. When it's time

0:04

for you to ditch the blacktop

0:06

and head off-road, do it in

0:08

a truck that says no to

0:11

nothing. The Chevy Silverado trail boss.

0:13

Get the rugged capability of its

0:15

Z-71 suspension and 2-inch factory lift.

0:17

Plus, impressive torque and towing capacity

0:19

thanks to an available Dermax 3-liter

0:21

turbo diesel engine, where other trucks

0:23

call it quits, you'll just be

0:25

getting started. Visit Chevy.com to learn

0:27

more. Nordstrom

0:31

brings you the season's most

0:33

wanted brands. Skims, mango, free

0:35

people, and Princess Polly, all

0:37

under $100. From trending sneakers

0:39

to beauty must-haves, we've curated

0:41

the styles you'll wear on

0:43

repeat this spring. Free shipping,

0:45

free returns, and in-store pickup

0:47

make it easier than ever.

0:50

Shop now in stores and

0:52

at Nordstrom.com. You're

0:55

the owner of a small

0:57

business, which means you're also

0:59

the tech guy, and HR,

1:02

and personal assistant, and head

1:04

honcho, and intern. You could

1:06

use another pair of hands,

1:08

like the experts you'll find

1:10

at Verizon Small Business Days,

1:12

April 21st through 27th. Get

1:14

a free tech check, special

1:16

deals, and more. Call 1,800,

1:18

483, 4428. Or visit Verizon.com/Small

1:20

Business, to book your appointment.

1:23

Verizon Business. Welcome

1:25

to the New Books Network.

1:27

Welcome to New Books and

1:30

Critical Theory. It's a podcast

1:32

that's part of the New Books

1:34

Network. On this episode I'm

1:36

talking to Anna Casey about

1:38

the return of the housewife

1:40

why women are still cleaning

1:42

up. So welcome to the podcast.

1:45

Thank you. Welcome. This is

1:47

a fantastic book. It's incredibly

1:49

timely. I mean, literally, like

1:52

almost every day we're seeing.

1:54

the kind of

1:56

I suppose revenge

1:59

of really kind of

2:01

outright sexist and misogynist

2:03

attitudes across many countries

2:05

in the world. And the book kind

2:07

of kind of really speaks to that

2:09

really tries to kind of unpack

2:12

that. But it does it I

2:14

think in a way that speaks

2:16

to a much kind of like

2:18

longer history of feminist critical thought.

2:20

and I'm intrigued by I guess

2:23

kind of like where the inspiration

2:25

came from for a book about

2:27

housework about you know the kind

2:29

of seeming blandness of domestic life

2:31

and yet something that's like kind

2:34

of so important to understanding

2:36

contemporary society. Yeah

2:38

no absolutely and I think

2:40

the sort of impetus for the

2:42

book came during the COVID-19

2:45

lockdown. So one of the

2:47

things that I noticed during

2:49

the pandemic was that there

2:51

was an intensification

2:53

of the use of

2:55

Instagram in particular, and

2:58

it was being used

3:00

in kind of new

3:02

sorts of ways, in

3:04

particular by women, predominantly

3:06

women. And obviously during

3:08

the COVID-19 pandemic there

3:10

was a real emphasis

3:12

on germs and hygiene

3:14

and alongside that there

3:16

was this sudden kind

3:18

of intensification of a

3:20

new type of digital

3:22

social media content which

3:25

was content depicting

3:27

women frantically cleaning,

3:30

tidying and decluttering

3:32

their homes. I found

3:34

that really interesting in itself, but

3:37

what I try to do in

3:39

the book is to think about

3:41

the historical context of these kind

3:44

of new cleaning influencer accounts because

3:46

I don't think they appeared out

3:49

of nowhere. I think, like you

3:51

say, they are part of a

3:53

long history of the white woman

3:56

housewife who kind of has never

3:58

really gone away. So a few

4:00

people have said to me about the

4:03

title of the boot, you know, it's

4:05

called the return of the housewife, and

4:07

a few people have said, you know,

4:09

did she ever go away? And I

4:12

think they're right. You know, I don't

4:14

think she did ever go away, but

4:16

I think she's really kind of back

4:18

with a vengeance at the moment. But

4:21

yeah, if you look across the history,

4:23

particularly of the 20th century, but even

4:25

earlier than that as well, every so

4:27

often we get a kind of resurgence.

4:29

images of the kind of happy

4:32

housewife. So in the 1950s, for

4:34

example, again in the 1980s, we

4:37

see the sort of resurgence of

4:39

a kind of almost like a

4:41

domestic goddess kind of figure. So

4:44

Yeah, the clean fluencer kind of

4:46

is part of that tradition. You

4:48

know, in some ways she's not

4:51

new. She often emerges during times

4:53

of crisis and obviously, you know,

4:55

I talked about COVID, which was

4:58

obviously a huge health crisis, but

5:00

there were other crises occurring at

5:03

the same time. You know, it

5:05

was a real sort of moment

5:07

of multiple crises. If you think

5:10

about Brexit. Trump in the US,

5:12

austerity politics, the cost of living

5:14

crisis for example. So all of

5:17

these different crises coalescing meant that,

5:19

you know, it was almost a

5:21

kind of perfect moment for the

5:24

resurgence of these very sort of

5:26

hyper normative images of House wifery.

5:28

So yeah, absolutely. I think

5:30

it's really important to think

5:33

about where she comes from

5:35

in terms of her historical

5:37

context. I guess though

5:39

the kind of hook for the book

5:41

and the really kind of crucial

5:43

thing that reinforces the contribution

5:47

and its newness is as you've

5:49

mentioned these cleaning influences or clean

5:52

influences which you know is the

5:54

kind of like I guess kind

5:56

of key term for them and

5:59

I'm fascinating I mean, you sort

6:01

of touched on this already, but

6:03

I'm fascinated to know kind of

6:05

like a bit about sort of

6:08

what's new about them, who they

6:10

are, I guess maybe like how

6:12

you define one, both in terms

6:15

of, you know, thinking about how

6:17

they're different, I guess, on that

6:19

lineage of the white housewife, but

6:22

also, I suppose, the kind

6:24

of characteristics that make

6:26

them unique and special.

6:28

Yeah, well I guess the fact

6:30

that they're digital is the sort

6:32

of the first thing to note.

6:35

So, you know, we tend to

6:37

sort of assume that social media

6:39

and Instagram has been around forever,

6:41

but I think we have to

6:43

remind myself that it really hasn't.

6:46

And so Instagram in the way

6:48

that we know it today has

6:50

only really been around for... sort

6:53

of six years or so. It

6:55

used to be a photo sharing

6:57

app in the very early days

7:00

and then it became associated with

7:02

big companies. So the paid partnership

7:04

function for example was

7:07

introduced in 2017 and

7:09

that completely transformed the

7:11

ways in which people

7:13

started to use social

7:15

media and Instagram especially.

7:17

So I think that's

7:19

an important point. You

7:21

know, the clean influences

7:23

are women predominantly

7:26

who are setting up their

7:28

own representations, their own accounts,

7:30

they're creating their own content,

7:33

and they're creating their own

7:35

versions of the white woman

7:38

housewife. So I think that's

7:40

probably slightly different to what

7:43

came before. But at the same

7:45

time, they are kind of... doing

7:47

something that Housewives have done for

7:50

a very long time, which

7:52

is to impart tips and

7:54

knowledge and guidance around how

7:56

to create the perfect home

7:59

to their father. followers. But

8:01

I guess in terms of what

8:03

how you define a clean

8:06

influencer? A clean influencer

8:08

is a cleaning influencer

8:11

and in order to

8:13

be an influencer there

8:15

are certain kind of certain things

8:17

that have to also occur.

8:20

So an influencer has a

8:22

high number of followers. heavily

8:24

commercialised content so often quite

8:26

lucrative and they don't follow

8:28

very many people so they've

8:30

got that kind of online

8:32

social media celebrity. So what

8:34

you tend to get is

8:36

a few sort of clean

8:38

influences who've really made it

8:40

become really really popular and

8:42

it's a bit like a

8:44

triangle you know you have a

8:46

few who've really made it at the

8:49

top, made it work for themselves and

8:51

then you have an infinite number of

8:53

smaller kind of imitation accounts. So it

8:56

is fascinating I think because,

8:58

you know, if we think

9:00

about housework as being something

9:02

that is invisible historically, you

9:05

know, women's labours often described

9:07

as valueless, invisible, you know,

9:09

nobody really wants to talk

9:12

about it. Scholars have completely

9:14

ignored it, you know, it

9:16

seemed to be something that

9:19

has no monetary value because

9:21

women are supposed to do

9:23

it. you know, out of love and

9:26

care for their families etc. And

9:28

bearing all of that in mind,

9:30

one of the things that Clean

9:33

Fluencing does do is makes

9:35

it highly visible. It makes

9:37

it a visible, it makes

9:39

housework visible probably for the

9:41

first time. So it's very

9:44

sort of omnipresent and it's

9:46

really kind of bringing housework

9:48

into the... into the sort

9:50

of popular mainstream, particularly around

9:52

digital culture of course. So

9:55

I think, you know, there

9:57

are a lot of parallels.

10:00

in terms of the clean

10:02

influences and the housewives that

10:04

came before. But yeah, the

10:06

book really explores what is

10:08

kind of different and unique

10:10

about the sort of digital

10:12

media aspect of housework in

10:14

this regards. Yeah. The other

10:17

thing and slightly kind of further

10:19

into the book, you know, you've

10:21

talked about, I guess, the kind

10:24

of domestic drudgery of like the

10:26

labor, the work of social reproduction.

10:28

in the house, but one thing

10:30

that really kind of comes

10:33

out from these digits all

10:35

clean influences is the way

10:37

that like housework is kind

10:39

of glam, which like I

10:41

can really assure you it

10:43

isn't. And I'm kind of

10:45

like struck by that as

10:47

again this sort of new

10:49

or novel aspect partially I

10:51

guess how does it you

10:53

know sort of differentiate them

10:55

from both. housewives in the

10:57

past but also I guess kind of

10:59

like the way feminism has dealt with

11:02

domestic labor in the past but then

11:04

also I'd love to know like what

11:06

are the techniques for you know turning

11:08

doing the dishes into something that can

11:10

be Instagramable and you know can kind

11:12

of get you thousands of followers. Yeah

11:15

well you're absolutely right of course

11:17

you know there's absolutely nothing

11:19

really glamorous about housework and you

11:21

know there's centuries of

11:23

feminist writing which has, you

11:26

know, described the sort of

11:28

drudgery, the monotonousness, the thanklessness

11:30

of housework. So, you know,

11:32

of course, Simone Dubois, I

11:35

talked about housework as being

11:37

a flight for himself. She

11:39

talked about it as being

11:42

torturous and even as a

11:44

form of kind of masochism

11:46

at one point as well.

11:48

So, you know, the idea

11:51

that housework is somehow glamorous

11:53

and good for us really

11:55

kind of flies in the

11:57

face of so much feminist

11:59

research. and feminist writing, but

12:01

that is the really interesting

12:03

thing about clean influencing.

12:06

You know, it's kind of re-articulated

12:08

housework, so that instead of being

12:10

about drudgery and monotony and boredom

12:13

and torture, it's actually repositioned as

12:15

a form of self-care, something that

12:17

is good for us and somehow

12:20

kind of good for our mental

12:22

health. And I'm really fascinated by

12:24

the ways in which we've all

12:27

kind of accepted this as true. which

12:29

to me seems bizarre because in

12:31

the process of writing the book

12:33

I searched and searched and searched

12:36

everywhere I could think of

12:38

for any peer-reviewed research whatsoever

12:40

that would demonstrate that there's

12:43

a link a positive correlation

12:45

between housework and as being

12:47

good for your mental health

12:50

and I can't find anything

12:52

at all. Instead all I

12:54

can find our studies which

12:57

you know, quite often make

12:59

clear links between feelings of

13:01

depression, feelings of captivity

13:04

with housework. So it is

13:06

really interesting that it has

13:08

been kind of repositioned to

13:10

something quite sort of glamorous

13:13

and good for us. And

13:15

I think that's probably what

13:17

marks it as separate to

13:20

the housewives that came before.

13:22

So if you look at

13:24

sort of housewiffery, guidebooks

13:27

from the past, you know,

13:29

even in the 1980s, 1970s,

13:31

and 1980s, the sort of

13:34

how-to housewife guides, they were

13:36

quite sort of instructional. You

13:39

know, there was nothing, it

13:41

was kind of advice about

13:44

how to get through the

13:46

day basically as efficiently and

13:48

painlessly as possible. Whereas

13:51

today, it's less about... you know

13:53

just getting it over and done

13:55

with and instead it's more to

13:58

do with enjoying your housework. and

14:00

it's almost sort of described

14:02

as a form of self-care

14:04

you know something that makes

14:06

me happy and you know

14:08

something that that really kind

14:10

of you know you shine

14:12

your sink and you also

14:14

shine your soul you know

14:16

something which is actually good

14:18

for us and it's it's

14:20

bizarre because like I say

14:22

I can't find any evidence

14:24

to demonstrate scientifically that this

14:27

might be the case. Yeah,

14:29

so it is, it's very

14:31

interesting how people have sort

14:33

of accepted this mantra that

14:35

housework is somehow good for

14:37

us. But it's also interesting

14:39

that clean influences never use

14:41

the word housework. And I

14:43

wonder whether that word housework

14:45

and the housewife has quite

14:47

a sort of, it has

14:49

connotations which the contemporary clean

14:51

fluencer might want to distance

14:53

herself from. So, you know,

14:55

the housewife, if you think

14:57

about the sort of stereotypical

14:59

image of the housewife, it's

15:01

maybe somebody quite downtrodden or

15:03

like a stepford wife or

15:05

whatever. So yeah, the clean

15:08

fluences are kind of a

15:10

way of sort of reinventing,

15:12

cleaning, tidying and decluttering so

15:14

that it's somehow kind of

15:16

energizing and good for us.

15:18

You know, sometimes the clean

15:20

fluencing videos feel a bit

15:22

like exercise videos almost. You

15:24

know, this is something, you

15:26

know, it might be a

15:28

bit painful, but it's really

15:30

good for us. You know,

15:32

it's energizing, it's fun. It's

15:34

glamorous and yeah that whole

15:36

kind of narrative feels a

15:38

million miles away from you

15:40

know somebody like Hannah Gafron

15:42

in the 1960s who who

15:44

wrote about you know housework

15:47

as a form of captivity

15:49

and Yeah, so absolutely it's

15:51

really interesting how housework has

15:53

been sort of reframed as

15:55

kind of a form of

15:57

glamour I mean this and

15:59

again you've kind of gestured

16:01

towards this is of the

16:03

way the book takes its

16:05

critique much kind of more

16:07

broadly. There's again two kind

16:09

of aspects here. One is

16:11

a critique of I guess

16:13

kind of you know self-help

16:15

discourses in which clean influences

16:17

are really embedded and you've

16:19

talked you know again shine

16:21

your sink and shine your

16:23

soul as a way of

16:25

kind of dealing with you

16:28

know multiple crises that contemporary

16:30

social life and contemporary capitalism

16:32

confront. people with. But I'm

16:34

also intrigued I guess by

16:36

the book's critique of the

16:38

sort of antisocial nature of

16:40

these you know positive thinking

16:42

self-help kind of discourse is

16:44

the way I suppose kind

16:46

of the book is saying

16:48

that this really places all

16:50

of the responsibility onto the

16:52

individual. And I mean, tree

16:54

to hear, I guess, kind

16:56

of what the critique of

16:58

sort of self-help discourse is

17:00

and how that critique, you

17:02

know, is kind of embedded

17:04

in your critique of clean

17:07

influences too. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah,

17:09

I think it's really important

17:11

to think about the clean

17:13

influences in tandem with the

17:15

wider sort of very, very

17:17

popular... positive thinking movements, which

17:19

is firmly embedded within popular

17:21

culture today. So yeah, you're

17:23

absolutely right. It's a kind

17:25

of, it sort of has

17:27

its roots, doesn't it, in

17:29

the 1980s, in the kind

17:31

of early days of neoliberal

17:33

discourse, as I suppose, and

17:35

very much taps into this

17:37

idea that, you know, it's

17:39

fine to acknowledge that things

17:41

are tough. That's fine. It's

17:43

okay to talk about. the

17:46

fact that you have anxiety

17:48

and depression, it's okay to

17:50

talk about the fact that

17:52

you might be struggling with

17:54

money. It's even okay to

17:56

talk about how messy your

17:58

house is, but the point

18:00

is to take personal responsibility

18:02

for fixing it. And so

18:04

the kind of, you know,

18:06

clean fluences in a way

18:08

of the sort of ideal

18:10

neoliberal citizens aren't they? You

18:12

know they're quite sort of

18:14

relatable, they have the same

18:16

sort of problems as everybody

18:18

else, but they don't turn

18:20

to the state, the solutions,

18:22

they don't look outwards towards

18:24

the community, they don't expect

18:27

anything from anybody else, they

18:29

just crack on and solve

18:31

the problems themselves. And so...

18:33

Yeah, I mean clean fluencing

18:35

is absolutely full of these

18:37

kind of positive affirmations, you

18:39

know, which are quite often

18:41

expressed through hashtags. So things

18:43

like, you know, don't give

18:45

up on your dreams, just

18:47

be you. That's a real

18:49

big one. And you do

18:51

you. You know, you see

18:53

these sort of affirmations all

18:55

over clean fluencing content. And

18:57

yeah, the message is really

18:59

simple, isn't it? It's, you

19:01

know, yes, your life might

19:03

be tough. and we are

19:06

a community of people here

19:08

within clean fluency and culture

19:10

who get it because we're

19:12

just like you. But you

19:14

know all you have to

19:16

do is shift your mindset,

19:18

you know have a down

19:20

day but then kind of

19:22

bounce back from it and

19:24

you know kind of work

19:26

on yourself better yourself in

19:28

order to find the solution.

19:30

It's that whole idea isn't

19:32

it that the solution to

19:34

all of the kind of

19:36

inequalities. that very much permeate

19:38

our everyday lives are solvable

19:40

from within by changing our

19:42

mindset. And I think it's

19:44

really harmful actually to sort

19:47

of, you know, to kind

19:49

of, well, within clean influencing

19:51

culture, it's quite aspirational, isn't

19:53

it? So it sort of

19:55

gives people who follow the

19:57

kind of hope, the idea

19:59

that if they too work

20:01

hard enough, if they too

20:03

follow their dreams in the

20:05

same sort of way, if

20:07

they, you know, crack on

20:09

and clean their house in

20:11

the same sort of way,

20:13

then you know they too

20:15

will be on the root

20:17

to happiness. And yeah, and

20:19

it doesn't really appear to

20:21

be working. So it's very

20:23

interesting how clean fluencing very

20:26

much sort of reproduces those

20:28

kind of positive thinking mantras

20:30

in a completely uncritical way.

20:32

Yeah, and it basically lets,

20:34

it lets kind of those

20:36

sort of old meritocratic narratives

20:38

unfold completely unchallenged. Dear old

20:40

work platform, it's not you,

20:42

it's us. Actually, it is

20:44

you. Endless onboarding, constant IT

20:46

bottlenecks? We've had enough. We

20:48

need a platform that just

20:50

gets us. And to be

20:52

honest, we've met someone new.

20:54

They're called Monday.com. and it

20:56

was love at first onboarding.

20:58

They're beautiful dashboards, they're customizable

21:00

workflows, that is floating on

21:02

a digital cloud nine. So

21:05

no hard feelings, but we're

21:07

moving on. Monday.com, the first

21:09

work platform you'll love to

21:11

use. This episode is brought

21:13

to you by State Farm.

21:15

You might say all kinds

21:17

of stuff when things go

21:19

wrong, but these are the

21:21

words you really need to

21:23

remember. Like a good neighbor,

21:25

State Farm is there. They've

21:27

got options to fit your

21:29

unique insurance needs, meaning you

21:31

can talk to your agent

21:33

to choose the coverage you

21:35

need, have coverage options to

21:37

protect the things you value

21:39

most, file a claim right

21:41

on the State Farm mobile

21:43

app, and even reach a

21:45

real person when you need

21:47

to talk to someone. Like

21:49

a good neighbor, State Farm

21:51

is there. kind of bringing

21:53

this to life is to

21:55

think about some of the

21:57

examples in the book and

21:59

I sort of hesitate to

22:01

be like name names but

22:03

the book throughout has got

22:05

examples of some of the

22:07

kind of clean fluences who

22:10

are big and I wonder

22:12

if if you could kind

22:14

of give a couple of

22:16

those to sort of bring

22:18

to life that kind of

22:20

structural critique you've been talking

22:22

about. Yeah, well I suppose,

22:24

I mean the kind of

22:26

obvious example is Mrs. Hinch,

22:28

mainly because she is the

22:30

UK's most well-known clean fluencer

22:32

by quite a long way.

22:34

You know she's a household

22:36

name. She's been sort of

22:38

referenced in EastEnders and Coronation

22:40

Street, which is generally a

22:42

marker of being a household

22:44

name, I think, in the

22:46

UK. She's got about almost

22:48

5 million followers on Instagram,

22:50

and she absolutely embodies all

22:52

of what I've just been

22:54

talking about. So she was

22:56

a white working class woman

22:58

from Essex, a kind of,

23:00

you know, inverted commerce, ordinary

23:02

woman, and she set up

23:04

an influencing account. And the

23:06

influencing account, which was a

23:08

clean influencing account, sorry I

23:10

should say, became incredibly popular

23:12

quite quickly. And so she

23:14

became this kind of, you

23:16

know, extremely popular, clean fluencing

23:19

celebrity. And, you know, she's

23:21

ended up with incredibly sort

23:23

of lucrative deals with people

23:25

like, with companies like Proctor

23:27

and Gamble, for example, she's

23:29

got her own kind of

23:31

branded, range of cleaning products.

23:33

So I think she's a

23:35

really good example of this

23:37

kind of meritocratic fantasy which

23:39

runs throughout clean fluencing culture.

23:41

So she kind of makes

23:43

it seem possible. And I

23:45

think when I was writing

23:47

the book, part of me

23:49

kept thinking about reality television,

23:51

for example, which does something

23:53

similar, doesn't it? It's me.

23:55

it seems like if you've

23:57

got enough talent and if

23:59

you've got if you're hardworking

24:01

enough then anybody of course

24:03

can make it to those

24:05

dizzy heights but in reality

24:07

it doesn't happen you know

24:09

you maybe get a tiny

24:11

minority of people who are

24:13

lucky enough to make it

24:15

and then everybody else kind

24:17

of trails along behind. So

24:19

yeah, I think in terms

24:21

of an illustration of the

24:23

kind of process of clean

24:25

fluencing, I think she's a

24:28

really good one. There's another

24:30

clean fluencer who I talk

24:32

about in the book called

24:34

Laura Mountford, who has a

24:36

book called Live Life Laundry.

24:38

I think that's the right

24:40

title, but I might have

24:42

to check. And yeah, she

24:44

talks about her. journey towards

24:46

self-care through her laundry. So

24:48

yeah, there are plenty of

24:50

examples within the book of

24:52

the ways in which different

24:54

clean influences have kind of,

24:56

you know, they record video

24:58

diaries basically of their everyday

25:00

lives and sometimes the video

25:02

diary might be them talking

25:04

about their feelings of depression,

25:06

their feelings of anxiety. and

25:08

you know sometimes even talking

25:10

about taking antidepressants so you

25:12

know it's quite candid often

25:14

and but then the point

25:16

is that you know the

25:18

next reel shows how they've

25:20

kind of you know pulled

25:22

themselves up they've cleaned their

25:24

house they're sitting down having

25:26

a nice cup of tea

25:28

and they're immaculate home and

25:30

everything is okay again so

25:32

it's this kind of you

25:34

know, almost like a cycle

25:37

of kind of failure and

25:39

then and resolution always through,

25:41

you know, through turning inwards.

25:43

So the solution is always

25:45

within. So I think Mrs.

25:47

Inch is probably a really

25:49

good example and there are

25:51

other examples in the book

25:53

as well. Now a lot

25:55

of I guess kind of

25:57

critical cultural studies would almost

25:59

kind of like stop there

26:01

and have that kind of

26:03

sense of you know presenting

26:05

structural critique. But one of

26:07

the things that really struck

26:09

me as kind of fascinating

26:11

and maybe kind of unique

26:13

about the book is I

26:15

suppose the balance you bring

26:17

towards the end of the

26:19

book where you kind of

26:21

say actually there are some

26:23

redeemable elements of the clean

26:25

fluencer that there's kind of

26:27

you know ways that they

26:29

can help us sort of

26:31

understand the realities of gendered

26:33

and racialized divisions of labour

26:35

and I'm sort of intrigued

26:37

by Can the clean fluency

26:39

be sort of saved? Can

26:41

they be, you know, kind

26:43

of part of the solution

26:46

as much as their kind

26:48

of, you know, real work

26:50

is obscuring a lot of

26:52

social problems? Yeah. I mean,

26:54

I think one of the

26:56

things that I'm really careful

26:58

to do throughout the book

27:00

is to make sure that

27:02

at no point am I

27:04

laying the blame for any

27:06

of this or individual clean

27:08

influences? So you know for

27:10

a very very long time

27:12

women have often sought ways

27:14

of finding a balance between

27:16

the demands of their unpaid

27:18

labour and their paid labour

27:20

and thinking of different ways

27:22

in which they can you

27:24

know combine the two. So

27:26

if you think about the

27:28

Tupperware parties of the 1950s,

27:30

for example, this was a

27:32

way in which women, an

27:34

early example of the ways

27:36

in which women combined those

27:38

two worlds, so in a

27:40

way, you know, clean fluency,

27:42

you can see how it's

27:44

become popular, because it does

27:46

appear to offer that, you

27:48

know, you don't have to

27:50

leave your home, you don't

27:52

have... have to check into

27:55

an office, you can do

27:57

everything from home, you can

27:59

be there for your children,

28:01

and hopefully, you know, make

28:03

a little bit of money

28:05

in the process. So I

28:07

think in a lot of

28:09

ways, the sort of, the

28:11

problem doesn't lie with the

28:13

particular women who set up

28:15

clean fluencing accounts. You know,

28:17

the problem lies, I think,

28:19

in a society that is

28:21

still structured and set up

28:23

and set up. in a

28:25

way which simply doesn't work

28:27

for many women. So it

28:29

still sort of rests on

28:31

the assumption, especially today, you

28:33

know, we get all of

28:35

the, we hear all of

28:37

these debates, don't we, about

28:39

the importance of getting back

28:41

into the office after COVID.

28:43

But you know those kind

28:45

of debates around flexibility, where

28:47

you work, whether or not

28:49

you can work from home,

28:51

you know these are really

28:53

important debates to have especially

28:55

in terms of women's lives

28:57

and especially in terms of

28:59

the demands of unpaid labour

29:01

as well. So yeah, so

29:04

I think in a world

29:06

which is kind of structured

29:08

to assume that to assume

29:10

the presence of somebody at

29:12

home carrying the domestic load.

29:14

You know, I think women

29:16

are going to sort of

29:18

continue trying to find ways

29:20

of, you know, holding it

29:22

together and making it work

29:24

for them. But, you know,

29:26

we also know that women

29:28

are, you know, massively burnt

29:30

out, that the struggle of

29:32

the, especially for work and

29:34

class women, poorer women and

29:36

women of colour, you know,

29:38

those kind of demands of

29:40

having to be in two,

29:42

sometimes even three places at

29:44

exactly the same time, are,

29:46

you know, exhausting, completely overwhelming.

29:48

And I think part of

29:50

the problem is that the

29:52

direction that debate is going

29:54

in at the moment is

29:56

to admit that you can't

29:58

have it all, but then

30:00

the thing that always has

30:02

to go is your paid

30:04

work. And the assumption that

30:06

it is women who carry

30:08

the bulk of the unpaid

30:10

domestic labour and that they

30:13

will be the ones who

30:15

will take main responsibility for

30:17

that, that part of women's

30:19

lives and responsibilities remains unchallenged.

30:21

So, you know, we hear

30:23

a lot at the moment

30:25

about. you know, what to

30:27

do about the overwhelm and

30:29

the thing that never gets

30:31

directly addressed is this kind

30:33

of link between the home

30:35

and women as the kind

30:37

of most naturally competent home

30:39

makers. So I think that's

30:41

interesting as well. And I

30:43

guess the solution is less

30:45

of a kind of obviously

30:47

moving away from this kind

30:49

of turning inwards for solutions.

30:51

which I don't think we're

30:53

ever going to find inside

30:55

and instead kind of you

30:57

know looking outwards looking away

30:59

from social media for solutions

31:01

as well you know looking

31:03

towards communities collectives of care

31:05

for example outside of the

31:07

outside of the home perhaps

31:09

and but you know these

31:11

are kind of quite big

31:13

sort of radical proposals I

31:15

suppose but I think also

31:17

you know just talking about

31:20

the problem in the first

31:22

place is really important and

31:24

you know giving ourselves permission

31:26

to critique the clean influences

31:28

because I think sometimes because

31:30

social media accounts are so

31:32

they feel so personal and

31:34

they look so beautiful and

31:36

the people in the clean

31:38

fluencing accounts seem so real

31:40

and sometimes so nice, it

31:42

almost feels unkind to criticize

31:44

them, especially when they're saying

31:46

that they're experiencing a lot

31:48

of joy and satisfaction. But

31:50

you know I end the

31:52

book by talking about Sarah

31:54

Ahmed and you know her

31:56

idea of the feminist kill

31:58

joy and I think it's

32:00

really important that we do

32:02

kill this kind of joy

32:04

where we can and you

32:06

know give ourselves permission to

32:08

critique it because we know

32:10

that women you know are

32:12

suffering from those kind of

32:14

intensive conflicting demands that late

32:16

modern capitalist societies. put on

32:18

us. So yeah, I think

32:20

that's the kind of first

32:22

step really to sort of

32:24

give ourselves permission to critique,

32:26

but also as well, you

32:29

know, to uncouple, to decouple

32:31

housework and the ultra clean

32:33

and well ordered home from

32:35

feminine value and status. And

32:37

that's not going to be

32:39

an easy thing to do

32:41

because it goes back centuries.

32:43

But it's it's a kind

32:45

of having a well ordered

32:47

gleaming clean and tidy home

32:49

is something that has always

32:51

or for a very long

32:53

time, being associated with kind

32:55

of feminine value and status

32:57

in a way that it

32:59

hasn't for men. So yeah,

33:01

I think the solutions are

33:03

complex, but yeah, but I

33:05

think we need to talk

33:07

about them. And like I

33:09

said, give ourselves permission to

33:11

critique as well. I mean,

33:13

all of that strikes me

33:15

as the perfect kind of

33:17

starting point for another book

33:19

for a, I guess, interrelated

33:21

but you know kind of

33:23

new project but often at

33:25

the end of of academic

33:27

book writing there's a kind

33:29

of sense of having sort

33:31

of reached the end point

33:33

of a research agenda and

33:35

moving on to kind of

33:38

new things. So what are

33:40

you working on kind of

33:42

next in terms of either

33:44

this space or something kind

33:46

of different? Yeah, well I'm

33:48

interested in where all of

33:50

this comes from because like

33:52

I said in the beginning

33:54

when we study culture there's

33:56

quite often a tendency to

33:58

sort of disconnect. it from

34:00

its historical origins and sociologists

34:02

are really often not very

34:04

good I think at historically

34:06

situated the thing that they're

34:08

studying. So what I'm doing

34:10

at the moment is returning

34:12

to the 1980s because well

34:14

for all kinds of reasons

34:16

but I think in terms

34:18

of thinking about the cultures

34:20

that surround us today in

34:22

2025 I think a lot

34:24

of what we talk about

34:26

and a lot of the

34:28

concepts that we use as

34:30

sociologists and as feminists as

34:32

well have their roots in

34:34

that period in the 1980s.

34:36

So yeah my project at

34:38

the moment is to think

34:40

about those narratives and discourses

34:42

of the 80s particularly around

34:44

women and women's everyday lives.

34:47

So that's kind of the

34:49

plan. I'm interested in the

34:51

superwoman as well who was

34:53

kind of galvanized in the

34:55

1980s, so I'm going to

34:57

be looking a little bit

34:59

more at her. Six

35:11

months from now, you could be running

35:14

a 5K, booking that dream trip, or

35:16

seeing thicker, fuller hair every time you

35:18

look in the mirror. Through hers, you

35:20

can get dermatologist trusted, clinically proven prescriptions,

35:23

with ingredients that go beyond what over-the-counter

35:25

products offer. Whether you prefer oral or

35:27

topical treatments, hers has you covered. Getting

35:30

started is simple. Just fill out an

35:32

intake form online, and a licensed provider

35:34

will recommend a customized plan just for

35:36

you. The best part. Everything is 100%

35:39

online. If prescribed, your treatment ships right

35:41

to your door. No pharmacy trips, no

35:43

waiting rooms, and no insurance headaches. Plus,

35:45

treatments start at just $35 a month.

35:48

Start your initial free online visit today

35:50

at forhers.com/talk. That's F-O-R-H-E- Tung Tundi products

35:52

are not FDA approved or products

35:54

are not FDA

35:57

approved or or for

35:59

safety, effectiveness, or quality.

36:01

Price marries both on product and

36:03

based on product and

36:06

subscription website for full details,

36:08

full details, restrictions, and

36:10

important safety information.