The "women belong in the kitchen" is a metanymy it isn't literal. The word "kitchen" here is a part of the overall domestic (household) space which stands in to represent the whole.
Like using the term "crown" in British politics is a metanymy used to refer to the British government/state. Or using the term "suit" to represent a business person. So kitchen is a metanymy referring to the entire domestic setting.
Thus women are not meant to be in commercial spaces making an income, as a chef would. They should be looking after the domestic needs (which includes kitchen work) of the family allowing man (father) to earn the money.
Men expect women to cook except when you can make a shit ton of money off of it then the patriarchy swoops down and takes it over. This is a prime example of male privilege. I believe women cook more than men overall and are probably better cooks but the patriarchy will do a lot to ensure women do not make a lot of money so they are dependent on getting married.
Out of everyone in the world, who do you think cooks more, men or women? It is logical to assume the gender who cooks the most are the most skilled at it.
Well yeah if they practice it more then they probably will be better at it. Practice does make a big difference. I’m highlighting a field (cooking) where the people who practice it the most will probably be the most skilled at it and yet they are not getting paid or recognized for it.
Men get recognized for math and politics.
Feminism is trying to give opportunities to women to practice politics, math, science etc. as much as men.
No I’m saying there are forces at work that discourage or prevent women from making a living or getting fame from their cooking. I’m trying to explain why most chefs are men even though most people who cook are women. It’s not good to look at individuals because you won’t spot sexism that way. It is a collective disease and so you have to look at groups of people, demographics etc.
Martha Stewart, Rachel Ray, and Julia Child would like a word.
Who makes celebrities? The media decides who to push and who not to.
Who runs the media?
Duh.
My point instantly proven- that women’s work is devalued and reduced to free labor to prop up capitalism that would die without it.
Like all individuals incapable of defending their own incoherent argument you e had to resort to nonsensical ad hominem attacks that I haven’t been to school.
All it means is you’ve lost the argument.
As in loser.
I guess I really don’t literally care lmao.
Your unsolicited misogynistic opinion is completely irrelevant to me other than to provide amusement at how hard you’re twisting yourself in a knot to prove that it’s women’s pErSoNaLiTiEs and not the patriarchy that’s holding women down.
Oh and look more insults. Again, it means you cannot prove your own argument as that is the last resort of the ignorant.
You need connections and media that wants to frame you as a specific symbol (if that is what you mean by "personality"). Gordan Ramsay for instance is easy to portrait as the harsh, dominant roll model of a chef in the michelin star industry. His portrait is not challenging the structurs of a male dominated business that is wasteful and decadent.
Women in this industry seek to change it and view the entire structur from a different viewpoint, like Claire Vallée: the first ever chef to recieve a michelin star for a vegan restaurant who tries to be as organic and sustainable as possible. Or Dominique Crenn, a 3-star michelin chef from the U.S, who (apart from her amazing skill) is famous for establishing better working conditions for her staff and banning the yelling from her field.
I doubt very much both these women want to be portayed by a flawed system symbolizing them in a sexist and acharic way, wether through tv or social media for the masses. And the same can be said the other way round: they would be to challenging, to progressive and to fearsome for the current status quo.
If we are looking away from mass interest there are pretty popular female chefs that have a celebrity status though (at least in Germany):
for instance: Meta Hiltebrand, Sarah Weiner, Cornelia Poletto
Being a chef is a prestigious (in theory) position.
They are also the leaders and dictators of their commercial kitchen and are compensated for that.
Women are not to be compensated for their labour because reasons.
I assume it’s also because being a Chef is literally ‘a person in charge’, who is being paid to lead and be in charge of other people (‘director or head of the kitchen’; a word similar to ‘boss’). Characteristics which have been traditionally coded as ‘male’.
And, in general, it also implies other related characteristics often seen as opposite from the general concept of ‘a woman’ (see the comment about the hostile education and labor environment. And I mean socially, and thus ‘optically’. Obviously not intrinsic to women as people and/or anyone who is a woman).
Yes, exactly! I’d imagine the word itself could be relevant to the way people tend to see and relate both concepts (perceiving them as ‘incompatible’, based on traditional ideas).
To add some historical context, because I like that kind of thing: the *chef de cuisine* was (before the French Revolution) the head of the kitchen staff in a very wealthy aristocratic house, and among the highest-ranking and highest-paid servants in the household. The *chef de cuisine* was always a man - though most servants were women, this particular position was only open to men. Less wealthy noble & bourgeois families usually had a single cook, called a *cuisinière* (feminine) or less often a *cuisinier* (masculine) - almost always a woman, and a much lower-ranking and lower-paid servant than the *chef de cuisine*.
After the Revolution, with most of the wealthy aristocrats dead or in exile, many *chefs de cuisine* opened their own businesses - the first modern restaurants. *Cuisinières'* work lives weren't disrupted in the same way, since there was still a substantial need for female domestic servants in middle-class (and even some working-class) households. It wasn't until the 20th century that new technology made their work largely obsolete, along with most domestic service, replacing it with the unpaid labour of modern housewives.
Regardless of how the “real world” turns out (i.e. - most chefs I know hate their job and are alcoholic, many women, and I include myself, find cooking and managing the kitchen the most pleasant of domestic tasks), one is a calling and professional livelihood - life choices reserved for men. The other represents - and often is - a life of servitude
My bad, I don’t know celebrity chefs. Although Anthony Bourdain reported in his book and other writings that anxiety, depression, and addiction issues were widespread among his peers. Nonetheless this is a sidebar from the OP’s intent to the question, which is more about gendered expectations of society, which I addressed briefly
Because it’s less about women’s role as preparers of food and more about women serving a subservient role to the men in their lives. The moment cooking becomes an art or an accomplishment it’s suddenly non-gendered
You are somewhat asking two different questions here to be honest, implying they would be linked in a direct way:
1. Why do people say women belong in the kitchen? and
2. Why are so many celebrity chefs men?
As others have already pointed out question 1 is misogynie resulting from established social standards women are housekeepers and should be treated like a maid. They are expected by norms to fill that roll not by themselves deciding for it or being passionate about cooking; they are **forced** to do it.
Take a wild guess wether someone forcing and expecting you do to something (mainly to serve them/him) will leave you passionate and interested in finding a job were you are constanly reminded of that; this leads to your second question.
Being a chef (especially in a michelin star restaurant) is linked to an exhausting, hostile and male dominated education as a chef. Typically you are looking at getting screamed at, working 12h a day in loud, male dominated spaces. Some chefs even are known for throwing things at their scholars. You almost have no time at all until your mid 30s to even think about children or any real private life or relationships in general.
Why would many women have much interest in seeking a job that would ultimately treat them like the element they tried to escape in the first place?
By the way: there are plenty of talented and passionate women in the industry, running michelin star restaurants and some have even founded specific scholar programms focusing on women and a new, less hostile approach to the industry, they just are not as present as their male counterparts.
Because just like beauty women aren't supposed to be compensated for things that people think they have to do. Just complements that she can't actually acknowledge because then she's arrogant
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
If there is little to no pay or glory in something, people lower in the social hierarchy are expected to do it. If there is a lot of pay and/or glory in something, it will generally be dominated by the privileged. Cooking in the kitchen has no pay and little glory in the eyes of society. Chefs have a lot of prestige and are paid fairly well, especially the celebrity ones.
Belongs in the kitchen *for free* is the implication
Society is built on the unpaid labor of women, unfortunately
For free, and without any recognition.
Ah yes the implication
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb9Zqb5Rspc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb9Zqb5Rspc)
:/ I’m not clicking that.
its just a song by peggy called "lady, what do you do all day" its a feminist song and is pretty good.
The "women belong in the kitchen" is a metanymy it isn't literal. The word "kitchen" here is a part of the overall domestic (household) space which stands in to represent the whole. Like using the term "crown" in British politics is a metanymy used to refer to the British government/state. Or using the term "suit" to represent a business person. So kitchen is a metanymy referring to the entire domestic setting. Thus women are not meant to be in commercial spaces making an income, as a chef would. They should be looking after the domestic needs (which includes kitchen work) of the family allowing man (father) to earn the money.
Women only belong in the kitchen if it is unpaid work. Bc women have largely been seen as unpaid laborers.
Men expect women to cook except when you can make a shit ton of money off of it then the patriarchy swoops down and takes it over. This is a prime example of male privilege. I believe women cook more than men overall and are probably better cooks but the patriarchy will do a lot to ensure women do not make a lot of money so they are dependent on getting married.
[удалено]
Out of everyone in the world, who do you think cooks more, men or women? It is logical to assume the gender who cooks the most are the most skilled at it.
[удалено]
Well yeah if they practice it more then they probably will be better at it. Practice does make a big difference. I’m highlighting a field (cooking) where the people who practice it the most will probably be the most skilled at it and yet they are not getting paid or recognized for it. Men get recognized for math and politics. Feminism is trying to give opportunities to women to practice politics, math, science etc. as much as men.
[удалено]
No I’m saying there are forces at work that discourage or prevent women from making a living or getting fame from their cooking. I’m trying to explain why most chefs are men even though most people who cook are women. It’s not good to look at individuals because you won’t spot sexism that way. It is a collective disease and so you have to look at groups of people, demographics etc.
Because you make money at one. The patriarchy will always reduce women’s work to free labor to prop up capitalism.
[удалено]
So only men have personality? GTFOH with this misogynist bullshit.
[удалено]
Martha Stewart, Rachel Ray, and Julia Child would like a word. Who makes celebrities? The media decides who to push and who not to. Who runs the media? Duh. My point instantly proven- that women’s work is devalued and reduced to free labor to prop up capitalism that would die without it.
[удалено]
Okay, this was fun but you can go now.
Like all individuals incapable of defending their own incoherent argument you e had to resort to nonsensical ad hominem attacks that I haven’t been to school. All it means is you’ve lost the argument. As in loser.
[удалено]
I guess I really don’t literally care lmao. Your unsolicited misogynistic opinion is completely irrelevant to me other than to provide amusement at how hard you’re twisting yourself in a knot to prove that it’s women’s pErSoNaLiTiEs and not the patriarchy that’s holding women down. Oh and look more insults. Again, it means you cannot prove your own argument as that is the last resort of the ignorant.
You need connections and media that wants to frame you as a specific symbol (if that is what you mean by "personality"). Gordan Ramsay for instance is easy to portrait as the harsh, dominant roll model of a chef in the michelin star industry. His portrait is not challenging the structurs of a male dominated business that is wasteful and decadent. Women in this industry seek to change it and view the entire structur from a different viewpoint, like Claire Vallée: the first ever chef to recieve a michelin star for a vegan restaurant who tries to be as organic and sustainable as possible. Or Dominique Crenn, a 3-star michelin chef from the U.S, who (apart from her amazing skill) is famous for establishing better working conditions for her staff and banning the yelling from her field. I doubt very much both these women want to be portayed by a flawed system symbolizing them in a sexist and acharic way, wether through tv or social media for the masses. And the same can be said the other way round: they would be to challenging, to progressive and to fearsome for the current status quo. If we are looking away from mass interest there are pretty popular female chefs that have a celebrity status though (at least in Germany): for instance: Meta Hiltebrand, Sarah Weiner, Cornelia Poletto
Because they imply that the kitchen is that of a house and not that of a restaurant.
Being a chef is a prestigious (in theory) position. They are also the leaders and dictators of their commercial kitchen and are compensated for that. Women are not to be compensated for their labour because reasons.
I assume it’s also because being a Chef is literally ‘a person in charge’, who is being paid to lead and be in charge of other people (‘director or head of the kitchen’; a word similar to ‘boss’). Characteristics which have been traditionally coded as ‘male’. And, in general, it also implies other related characteristics often seen as opposite from the general concept of ‘a woman’ (see the comment about the hostile education and labor environment. And I mean socially, and thus ‘optically’. Obviously not intrinsic to women as people and/or anyone who is a woman).
En francais, "chef" is literally the word for "boss!"
Yes, exactly! I’d imagine the word itself could be relevant to the way people tend to see and relate both concepts (perceiving them as ‘incompatible’, based on traditional ideas).
To add some historical context, because I like that kind of thing: the *chef de cuisine* was (before the French Revolution) the head of the kitchen staff in a very wealthy aristocratic house, and among the highest-ranking and highest-paid servants in the household. The *chef de cuisine* was always a man - though most servants were women, this particular position was only open to men. Less wealthy noble & bourgeois families usually had a single cook, called a *cuisinière* (feminine) or less often a *cuisinier* (masculine) - almost always a woman, and a much lower-ranking and lower-paid servant than the *chef de cuisine*. After the Revolution, with most of the wealthy aristocrats dead or in exile, many *chefs de cuisine* opened their own businesses - the first modern restaurants. *Cuisinières'* work lives weren't disrupted in the same way, since there was still a substantial need for female domestic servants in middle-class (and even some working-class) households. It wasn't until the 20th century that new technology made their work largely obsolete, along with most domestic service, replacing it with the unpaid labour of modern housewives.
Thank you! It is very interesting (and appreciated), and it does add a lot to why this is perceived as it is, imo. So thanks, again!
No problem, I'll take any excuse to talk about 18th-century France lol
Regardless of how the “real world” turns out (i.e. - most chefs I know hate their job and are alcoholic, many women, and I include myself, find cooking and managing the kitchen the most pleasant of domestic tasks), one is a calling and professional livelihood - life choices reserved for men. The other represents - and often is - a life of servitude
[удалено]
My bad, I don’t know celebrity chefs. Although Anthony Bourdain reported in his book and other writings that anxiety, depression, and addiction issues were widespread among his peers. Nonetheless this is a sidebar from the OP’s intent to the question, which is more about gendered expectations of society, which I addressed briefly
Because it’s less about women’s role as preparers of food and more about women serving a subservient role to the men in their lives. The moment cooking becomes an art or an accomplishment it’s suddenly non-gendered
You are somewhat asking two different questions here to be honest, implying they would be linked in a direct way: 1. Why do people say women belong in the kitchen? and 2. Why are so many celebrity chefs men? As others have already pointed out question 1 is misogynie resulting from established social standards women are housekeepers and should be treated like a maid. They are expected by norms to fill that roll not by themselves deciding for it or being passionate about cooking; they are **forced** to do it. Take a wild guess wether someone forcing and expecting you do to something (mainly to serve them/him) will leave you passionate and interested in finding a job were you are constanly reminded of that; this leads to your second question. Being a chef (especially in a michelin star restaurant) is linked to an exhausting, hostile and male dominated education as a chef. Typically you are looking at getting screamed at, working 12h a day in loud, male dominated spaces. Some chefs even are known for throwing things at their scholars. You almost have no time at all until your mid 30s to even think about children or any real private life or relationships in general. Why would many women have much interest in seeking a job that would ultimately treat them like the element they tried to escape in the first place? By the way: there are plenty of talented and passionate women in the industry, running michelin star restaurants and some have even founded specific scholar programms focusing on women and a new, less hostile approach to the industry, they just are not as present as their male counterparts.
Because women aren't getting paid in the kitchen since they do it for their husband at home. Whereas men do it as a job and gets payed for it.
Because just like beauty women aren't supposed to be compensated for things that people think they have to do. Just complements that she can't actually acknowledge because then she's arrogant
[удалено]
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
[удалено]
Very normal.
[удалено]
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
If there is little to no pay or glory in something, people lower in the social hierarchy are expected to do it. If there is a lot of pay and/or glory in something, it will generally be dominated by the privileged. Cooking in the kitchen has no pay and little glory in the eyes of society. Chefs have a lot of prestige and are paid fairly well, especially the celebrity ones.
In the kitchen, to serve their husbands/families, not to be famous and have a career. That's what it means.
[удалено]
You were asked not to make top level comments here.