Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.48 AVERAGE
3.48 AVERAGE
I didn't love this book. I wanted to and was lured in by the cover art and tagline, but even as a stay-at-home- mom who has somewhat 'embraced the New Domesticity,' I was not the target audience. While I liked (and agreed with) many of the points Matchar brought up the overall writing style was far too dry. I felt like I was reading a textbook at times and then suddenly there would be an editorial comment (often a bit harsh or snide). It was just a weird mix. I feel like the target audience is likely at least a decade younger than me and perhaps willing to be swayed by trends and also by Matchar??? Case in point, section titled "We HAVE to be creative: The Gen Y urge to make stuff." Had high hopes but in the end didn't love it.
This was a really interesting read. I didn't particularly care for the author's voice, but I did think there were tons of fascinating things to think about. I'd love to read this as a bookclub pick - the discussion would be pretty intense, I think.
Full review here: http://www.everyday-reading.com/2013/12/homeward-bound-why-women-are-embracing.html
Full review here: http://www.everyday-reading.com/2013/12/homeward-bound-why-women-are-embracing.html
I'm not sure where I saw the review for this book, but it was recent and was intriguing enough to send me right over to Amazon to pick this book up for my next nonfiction read. My friends and I are squarely in the demographic that the book discusses (namely young women ages 20-35), and as I have several friends who chose to stay home with their children and most of us also craft, there you go. I was also interested in this book as it is written with a lot of data and studies discussed, in fact about 15% of the book is the citations section, so that looked like a great reason to read it.
The author covers a lot of ground in this book, using a combination of personal interviews and scientific studies to investigate why so many women are becoming housewives again. The options of running a handmade business via Etsy or running a lifestyle blog as methods/means to support oneself are covered, along with the negatives of these options which are namely that very few people do support themselves or bring in any significant money at all by these ventures. The corporate culture, especially in the US with its woman-unfriendly and particularly mother-unfriendly policies, is explored as one of the reasons why young mothers choose to stay home with their children. The "backlash" against 80s/90s consumerist culture and feminist "have it all" families that produced these young women is discussed throughout the book, as many young women do not want to live the lives that their stressed, overworked mothers did. The concept of "feminism went too far" is brought up several times, as well as the dangers of too many women choosing to go back to being housewives and thus removing themselves from corporate culture and the possibility of changing it still further. The recent economic slowdown is another reason presented as pushing young women (and some men) out of corporate culture, especially if they don't feel like they are creatively challenged or fulfilled there. The ever-increasing bar for "natural parenting" is listed as well, as so many time-consuming parenting methods (attachment parenting, baby led weaning, growing/making all food, cloth diapering, etc.) can be used to justify why a woman should stay home with her children. And finally, the detriments of staying home are discussed, including the lack of financial stability and the lack of progress on social fronts that could benefit women who do not have the luxury of maternal leave, sick time, or staying home with their children.
Overall this is a very interesting book, with some controversial claims and a lot of discussion around them. I agree with the points that corporate culture in the US needs to change, and I understand why those policies drive many women to stay home with their children. The lure of staying home as either a mother or housewife is very seductive (it's even calling my name at times), but this book makes some good points for why it's harder to do than some women realize. And on the flip side, the author also points out that house work is vastly unappreciated, and that some of the crafting and DIY movements are helping to change that and move back to where the work that both husband and wife did was valued even as it was different (i.e. in colonial times). I'd definitely take a look at this book if you've considered being a stay at home spouse or parent, as well as if you're interested in some of the current politics around feminism.
The author covers a lot of ground in this book, using a combination of personal interviews and scientific studies to investigate why so many women are becoming housewives again. The options of running a handmade business via Etsy or running a lifestyle blog as methods/means to support oneself are covered, along with the negatives of these options which are namely that very few people do support themselves or bring in any significant money at all by these ventures. The corporate culture, especially in the US with its woman-unfriendly and particularly mother-unfriendly policies, is explored as one of the reasons why young mothers choose to stay home with their children. The "backlash" against 80s/90s consumerist culture and feminist "have it all" families that produced these young women is discussed throughout the book, as many young women do not want to live the lives that their stressed, overworked mothers did. The concept of "feminism went too far" is brought up several times, as well as the dangers of too many women choosing to go back to being housewives and thus removing themselves from corporate culture and the possibility of changing it still further. The recent economic slowdown is another reason presented as pushing young women (and some men) out of corporate culture, especially if they don't feel like they are creatively challenged or fulfilled there. The ever-increasing bar for "natural parenting" is listed as well, as so many time-consuming parenting methods (attachment parenting, baby led weaning, growing/making all food, cloth diapering, etc.) can be used to justify why a woman should stay home with her children. And finally, the detriments of staying home are discussed, including the lack of financial stability and the lack of progress on social fronts that could benefit women who do not have the luxury of maternal leave, sick time, or staying home with their children.
Overall this is a very interesting book, with some controversial claims and a lot of discussion around them. I agree with the points that corporate culture in the US needs to change, and I understand why those policies drive many women to stay home with their children. The lure of staying home as either a mother or housewife is very seductive (it's even calling my name at times), but this book makes some good points for why it's harder to do than some women realize. And on the flip side, the author also points out that house work is vastly unappreciated, and that some of the crafting and DIY movements are helping to change that and move back to where the work that both husband and wife did was valued even as it was different (i.e. in colonial times). I'd definitely take a look at this book if you've considered being a stay at home spouse or parent, as well as if you're interested in some of the current politics around feminism.
This one started out being quite interesting, but over the course the book the repetitiveness started to wear on me. The author uses several phrases and general descriptions over and over when giving examples. Phrases like "...making food from scratch, down to homemade bread..." to describe the level of dedication were used numerous times. The anecdotes also started to run together with their introductory listings of domesticity cred (various combinations of: raising chickens, growing vegetables on her [fill in the blank] acres of backyard, canning, making soap, raising goats/sheep/ponies, etc.)
Overall an interesting look at a trendy phenomenon and the various women partaking in it.
Overall an interesting look at a trendy phenomenon and the various women partaking in it.
TW: SA
I’ve got to say, I’m pretty infuriated by this book. I know it was written in 2013, so it doesn’t take our current dystopian 2020 nightmare into account, but alas - I’m fucking mad.
And here’s why…
For a book that purports to be about tongue and cheek criticizing the radical leftist trend of “new domesticity” for its elitism and unattainable aesthetic… as a disheartened millennial who has “just” entered the workforce (not - I’ve been working for almost 9 years… at 24) I have to wonder at the elitism of being able to “hire out” ( the section of the book I’ve just come upon, pg 232).
Writer Emily Matchar talks about “hiring out” traditionally domestic tasks like cooking and cleaning, and yet has the balls to say-but-not-say that it is the aspirants of new domesticity that are wrenching feminism and harking back to yester-year. This looks a bit like Victorian-Era Upper Class use of servants to me… a bit Downton Abbey. Because of course the use of a “domestic class” doesn’t quite register to Matchar. Traditionally “feminine” domestic tasks haven’t disappeared… we’ve simple created a whole new class of servants to provide for these needs - and guess what? They get about as much respect as a 1950s housewife - perhaps less. By outsourcing these tasks, we’ve created a world that is convenient for the elite, but the working class poor (those working these domestic positions) can barely make ends meet. We have failed in feminism in providing respect for ALL kinds of work, and this “servant class” suffers for it.
The failure is not with the consumer, but the economic and political system. There is no closer relationship than feminism and the economy. Women weren’t magically allowed into the workplace because of the fighting power of feminism (as I’m sorry to say) but because the economic system let them in - needed them. The economy needed a larger workforce, and needed families and homeowners to have higher consumerist needs. This is what we saw in the 1980s and 90s - a booming economy, increasing workforce, and increasing consumerism. But around the economic recession in 2008, and the mechanization of labor, the economy realized that it did not need more workers and that consumerism had hit its all-time unmatchable high. And that’s when women started to be pushed out of the workforce, forced to work harder, longer hours, and in a way that is ultimately unsustainable for the human psyche. This led women and young people to seek out servant class jobs - because at that point there weren’t white collar jobs worth having. And yes, a lot of people began to realize that working in the servant class was worse than being a homemaker ever was. But now we deal with the cost of living being so high that it requires a dual-income household - and at that point you start to realize that the rug was slipped from out from under us as we were being distracted with the flashy rights we were receiving.
I am not saying that we need to go back, but instead, the economy and masculinity need to change to allow women to have fulfilling and meaningful lives - whatever that may look like. Listen, I’ve tried to be a career person, but around the pandemic I was just actively forced out because of my gender and age - the obligation to prove myself was entirely unsustainable. Women are now expected to run the household by themselves, raise kids, and have a successful career - and because income is not keeping up with cost of living - most families can’t even afford to “hire out” their domestic tasks. So you have women working around the clock while their boyfriends play Call of Duty and get promotions merely for showing up. Too specific? Sorry, lived experience.
Let’s not forget about the disappearing middle class, or the fact that we are entering a phase where the upper class is completely stamping out the lower or servant class. Why work for the man? Why work for billionaires that exploit and juice us of our life force? Homesteading and the new domesticity may be the only way that women and others can now change the economy - by creating a circular one and cutting off the blood-sucking straw of the billionaire class.
How did your convenience work out for you? How did outsourcing your home work out eh?
It makes me sick to my stomach that someone would blame the consumer, women, the homemaker, the small businesswoman - spend chapter upon chapter with tongue and cheek ridicule while only ever referencing the economy or economic inequality as a sort of shadow in the corner.
Because we have seen the failure of the economy, the food system, and the government this year. We’ve seen it all, and the environmental degradation has only increased. The billionaire class won’t change - they’re off in space anyways. So our answer has to be to cut off their legs- to stop holding them up- to change the tide of history with whatever power we have left - which is increasingly only present in our own homes.
And to be a bit crass - what happened when we told women they can have it all, accomplish everything? We sent them to college where many were sexually assaulted, sent them to the workforce where many were sexually harassed and exploited. We sent them out saying that because they had changed, the world had changed - but toxic masculinity has barely budged, and we can’t expect the world to be hospitable simply because we showed up. Men need to change, the economy needs to change - and we shouldn’t be upset with women who have been burned by the outside world wanting to turn somewhere that feels safe. Yes, women should be able to find meaningful work and education outside the home, but we also can’t be operating on a dream that we live in an idyllic system. Systematic change is the only way, we’ve done as much as we could within the system - and it didn’t pan out. So the new objective of feminism needs to be to change the system entirely - into a circular economy that both values women AND all kinds of work.
I’ve got to say, I’m pretty infuriated by this book. I know it was written in 2013, so it doesn’t take our current dystopian 2020 nightmare into account, but alas - I’m fucking mad.
And here’s why…
For a book that purports to be about tongue and cheek criticizing the radical leftist trend of “new domesticity” for its elitism and unattainable aesthetic… as a disheartened millennial who has “just” entered the workforce (not - I’ve been working for almost 9 years… at 24) I have to wonder at the elitism of being able to “hire out” ( the section of the book I’ve just come upon, pg 232).
Writer Emily Matchar talks about “hiring out” traditionally domestic tasks like cooking and cleaning, and yet has the balls to say-but-not-say that it is the aspirants of new domesticity that are wrenching feminism and harking back to yester-year. This looks a bit like Victorian-Era Upper Class use of servants to me… a bit Downton Abbey. Because of course the use of a “domestic class” doesn’t quite register to Matchar. Traditionally “feminine” domestic tasks haven’t disappeared… we’ve simple created a whole new class of servants to provide for these needs - and guess what? They get about as much respect as a 1950s housewife - perhaps less. By outsourcing these tasks, we’ve created a world that is convenient for the elite, but the working class poor (those working these domestic positions) can barely make ends meet. We have failed in feminism in providing respect for ALL kinds of work, and this “servant class” suffers for it.
The failure is not with the consumer, but the economic and political system. There is no closer relationship than feminism and the economy. Women weren’t magically allowed into the workplace because of the fighting power of feminism (as I’m sorry to say) but because the economic system let them in - needed them. The economy needed a larger workforce, and needed families and homeowners to have higher consumerist needs. This is what we saw in the 1980s and 90s - a booming economy, increasing workforce, and increasing consumerism. But around the economic recession in 2008, and the mechanization of labor, the economy realized that it did not need more workers and that consumerism had hit its all-time unmatchable high. And that’s when women started to be pushed out of the workforce, forced to work harder, longer hours, and in a way that is ultimately unsustainable for the human psyche. This led women and young people to seek out servant class jobs - because at that point there weren’t white collar jobs worth having. And yes, a lot of people began to realize that working in the servant class was worse than being a homemaker ever was. But now we deal with the cost of living being so high that it requires a dual-income household - and at that point you start to realize that the rug was slipped from out from under us as we were being distracted with the flashy rights we were receiving.
I am not saying that we need to go back, but instead, the economy and masculinity need to change to allow women to have fulfilling and meaningful lives - whatever that may look like. Listen, I’ve tried to be a career person, but around the pandemic I was just actively forced out because of my gender and age - the obligation to prove myself was entirely unsustainable. Women are now expected to run the household by themselves, raise kids, and have a successful career - and because income is not keeping up with cost of living - most families can’t even afford to “hire out” their domestic tasks. So you have women working around the clock while their boyfriends play Call of Duty and get promotions merely for showing up. Too specific? Sorry, lived experience.
Let’s not forget about the disappearing middle class, or the fact that we are entering a phase where the upper class is completely stamping out the lower or servant class. Why work for the man? Why work for billionaires that exploit and juice us of our life force? Homesteading and the new domesticity may be the only way that women and others can now change the economy - by creating a circular one and cutting off the blood-sucking straw of the billionaire class.
How did your convenience work out for you? How did outsourcing your home work out eh?
It makes me sick to my stomach that someone would blame the consumer, women, the homemaker, the small businesswoman - spend chapter upon chapter with tongue and cheek ridicule while only ever referencing the economy or economic inequality as a sort of shadow in the corner.
Because we have seen the failure of the economy, the food system, and the government this year. We’ve seen it all, and the environmental degradation has only increased. The billionaire class won’t change - they’re off in space anyways. So our answer has to be to cut off their legs- to stop holding them up- to change the tide of history with whatever power we have left - which is increasingly only present in our own homes.
And to be a bit crass - what happened when we told women they can have it all, accomplish everything? We sent them to college where many were sexually assaulted, sent them to the workforce where many were sexually harassed and exploited. We sent them out saying that because they had changed, the world had changed - but toxic masculinity has barely budged, and we can’t expect the world to be hospitable simply because we showed up. Men need to change, the economy needs to change - and we shouldn’t be upset with women who have been burned by the outside world wanting to turn somewhere that feels safe. Yes, women should be able to find meaningful work and education outside the home, but we also can’t be operating on a dream that we live in an idyllic system. Systematic change is the only way, we’ve done as much as we could within the system - and it didn’t pan out. So the new objective of feminism needs to be to change the system entirely - into a circular economy that both values women AND all kinds of work.
TW: SA
I’ve got to say, I’m pretty infuriated by this book. I know it was written in 2013, so it doesn’t take our current dystopian 2020 nightmare into account, but alas - I’m fucking mad.
And here’s why…
For a book that purports to be about tongue and cheek criticizing the radical leftist trend of “new domesticity” for its elitism and unattainable aesthetic… as a disheartened millennial who has “just” entered the workforce (not - I’ve been working for almost 9 years… at 24) I have to wonder at the elitism of being able to “hire out” ( the section of the book I’ve just come upon, pg 232).
Writer Emily Matchar talks about “hiring out” traditionally domestic tasks like cooking and cleaning, and yet has the balls to say-but-not-say that it is the aspirants of new domesticity that are wrenching feminism and harking back to yester-year. This looks a bit like Victorian-Era Upper Class use of servants to me… a bit Downton Abbey. Because of course the use of a “domestic class” doesn’t quite register to Matchar. Traditionally “feminine” domestic tasks haven’t disappeared… we’ve simple created a whole new class of servants to provide for these needs - and guess what? They get about as much respect as a 1950s housewife - perhaps less. By outsourcing these tasks, we’ve created a world that is convenient for the elite, but the working class poor (those working these domestic positions) can barely make ends meet. We have failed in feminism in providing respect for ALL kinds of work, and this “servant class” suffers for it.
The failure is not with the consumer, but the economic and political system. There is no closer relationship than feminism and the economy. Women weren’t magically allowed into the workplace because of the fighting power of feminism (as I’m sorry to say) but because the economic system let them in - needed them. The economy needed a larger workforce, and needed families and homeowners to have higher consumerist needs. This is what we saw in the 1980s and 90s - a booming economy, increasing workforce, and increasing consumerism. But around the economic recession in 2008, and the mechanization of labor, the economy realized that it did not need more workers and that consumerism had hit its all-time unmatchable high. And that’s when women started to be pushed out of the workforce, forced to work harder, longer hours, and in a way that is ultimately unsustainable for the human psyche. This led women and young people to seek out servant class jobs - because at that point there weren’t white collar jobs worth having. And yes, a lot of people began to realize that working in the servant class was worse than being a homemaker ever was. But now we deal with the cost of living being so high that it requires a dual-income household - and at that point you start to realize that the rug was slipped from out from under us as we were being distracted with the flashy rights we were receiving.
I am not saying that we need to go back, but instead, the economy and masculinity need to change to allow women to have fulfilling and meaningful lives - whatever that may look like. Listen, I’ve tried to be a career person, but around the pandemic I was just actively forced out because of my gender and age - the obligation to prove myself was entirely unsustainable. Women are now expected to run the household by themselves, raise kids, and have a successful career - and because income is not keeping up with cost of living - most families can’t even afford to “hire out” their domestic tasks. So you have women working around the clock while their boyfriends play Call of Duty and get promotions merely for showing up. Too specific? Sorry, lived experience.
Let’s not forget about the disappearing middle class, or the fact that we are entering a phase where the upper class is completely stamping out the lower or servant class. Why work for the man? Why work for billionaires that exploit and juice us of our life force? Homesteading and the new domesticity may be the only way that women and others can now change the economy - by creating a circular one and cutting off the blood-sucking straw of the billionaire class.
How did your convenience work out for you? How did outsourcing your home work out eh?
It makes me sick to my stomach that someone would blame the consumer, women, the homemaker, the small businesswoman - spend chapter upon chapter with tongue and cheek ridicule while only ever referencing the economy or economic inequality as a sort of shadow in the corner.
Because we have seen the failure of the economy, the food system, and the government this year. We’ve seen it all, and the environmental degradation has only increased. The billionaire class won’t change - they’re off in space anyways. So our answer has to be to cut off their legs- to stop holding them up- to change the tide of history with whatever power we have left - which is increasingly only present in our own homes.
And to be a bit crass - what happened when we told women they can have it all, accomplish everything? We sent them to college where many were sexually assaulted, sent them to the workforce where many were sexually harassed and exploited. We sent them out saying that because they had changed, the world had changed - but toxic masculinity has barely budged, and we can’t expect the world to be hospitable simply because we showed up. Men need to change, the economy needs to change - and we shouldn’t be upset with women who have been burned by the outside world wanting to turn somewhere that feels safe. Yes, women should be able to find meaningful work and education outside the home, but we also can’t be operating on a dream that we live in an idyllic system. Systematic change is the only way, we’ve done as much as we could within the system - and it didn’t pan out. So the new objective of feminism needs to be to change the system entirely - into a circular economy that both values women AND all kinds of work.
I’ve got to say, I’m pretty infuriated by this book. I know it was written in 2013, so it doesn’t take our current dystopian 2020 nightmare into account, but alas - I’m fucking mad.
And here’s why…
For a book that purports to be about tongue and cheek criticizing the radical leftist trend of “new domesticity” for its elitism and unattainable aesthetic… as a disheartened millennial who has “just” entered the workforce (not - I’ve been working for almost 9 years… at 24) I have to wonder at the elitism of being able to “hire out” ( the section of the book I’ve just come upon, pg 232).
Writer Emily Matchar talks about “hiring out” traditionally domestic tasks like cooking and cleaning, and yet has the balls to say-but-not-say that it is the aspirants of new domesticity that are wrenching feminism and harking back to yester-year. This looks a bit like Victorian-Era Upper Class use of servants to me… a bit Downton Abbey. Because of course the use of a “domestic class” doesn’t quite register to Matchar. Traditionally “feminine” domestic tasks haven’t disappeared… we’ve simple created a whole new class of servants to provide for these needs - and guess what? They get about as much respect as a 1950s housewife - perhaps less. By outsourcing these tasks, we’ve created a world that is convenient for the elite, but the working class poor (those working these domestic positions) can barely make ends meet. We have failed in feminism in providing respect for ALL kinds of work, and this “servant class” suffers for it.
The failure is not with the consumer, but the economic and political system. There is no closer relationship than feminism and the economy. Women weren’t magically allowed into the workplace because of the fighting power of feminism (as I’m sorry to say) but because the economic system let them in - needed them. The economy needed a larger workforce, and needed families and homeowners to have higher consumerist needs. This is what we saw in the 1980s and 90s - a booming economy, increasing workforce, and increasing consumerism. But around the economic recession in 2008, and the mechanization of labor, the economy realized that it did not need more workers and that consumerism had hit its all-time unmatchable high. And that’s when women started to be pushed out of the workforce, forced to work harder, longer hours, and in a way that is ultimately unsustainable for the human psyche. This led women and young people to seek out servant class jobs - because at that point there weren’t white collar jobs worth having. And yes, a lot of people began to realize that working in the servant class was worse than being a homemaker ever was. But now we deal with the cost of living being so high that it requires a dual-income household - and at that point you start to realize that the rug was slipped from out from under us as we were being distracted with the flashy rights we were receiving.
I am not saying that we need to go back, but instead, the economy and masculinity need to change to allow women to have fulfilling and meaningful lives - whatever that may look like. Listen, I’ve tried to be a career person, but around the pandemic I was just actively forced out because of my gender and age - the obligation to prove myself was entirely unsustainable. Women are now expected to run the household by themselves, raise kids, and have a successful career - and because income is not keeping up with cost of living - most families can’t even afford to “hire out” their domestic tasks. So you have women working around the clock while their boyfriends play Call of Duty and get promotions merely for showing up. Too specific? Sorry, lived experience.
Let’s not forget about the disappearing middle class, or the fact that we are entering a phase where the upper class is completely stamping out the lower or servant class. Why work for the man? Why work for billionaires that exploit and juice us of our life force? Homesteading and the new domesticity may be the only way that women and others can now change the economy - by creating a circular one and cutting off the blood-sucking straw of the billionaire class.
How did your convenience work out for you? How did outsourcing your home work out eh?
It makes me sick to my stomach that someone would blame the consumer, women, the homemaker, the small businesswoman - spend chapter upon chapter with tongue and cheek ridicule while only ever referencing the economy or economic inequality as a sort of shadow in the corner.
Because we have seen the failure of the economy, the food system, and the government this year. We’ve seen it all, and the environmental degradation has only increased. The billionaire class won’t change - they’re off in space anyways. So our answer has to be to cut off their legs- to stop holding them up- to change the tide of history with whatever power we have left - which is increasingly only present in our own homes.
And to be a bit crass - what happened when we told women they can have it all, accomplish everything? We sent them to college where many were sexually assaulted, sent them to the workforce where many were sexually harassed and exploited. We sent them out saying that because they had changed, the world had changed - but toxic masculinity has barely budged, and we can’t expect the world to be hospitable simply because we showed up. Men need to change, the economy needs to change - and we shouldn’t be upset with women who have been burned by the outside world wanting to turn somewhere that feels safe. Yes, women should be able to find meaningful work and education outside the home, but we also can’t be operating on a dream that we live in an idyllic system. Systematic change is the only way, we’ve done as much as we could within the system - and it didn’t pan out. So the new objective of feminism needs to be to change the system entirely - into a circular economy that both values women AND all kinds of work.
somehow I think the author simply overlooked the fact that people support this lifestyle because they simply like to do these things. I found her whole argument harsh, judgmental, and one sided. while there were many interesting arguments made that I had not considered before this book (hence the 3 star rating) overall this book just irked me. I garden, can, knit, bake my own bread because I find it enjoyable and relaxing; it really bugs me when people only address extremes when making an argument.
I really appreciated reading this critical take on many of my life choices (opting out of the traditional workforce, cooking from scratch, hanging laundry, etc.). It was a good practice to zoom out and think of the larger implications of the choices I am making. She did not convince me to do anything differently, but I am glad I read it and thought through the issues from a different perspective. I found the later chapters (parenting, work/life balance, homesteading) to be more interesting than the earlier ones (blogging, selling on Etsy).
This was recommended to me by a friend when I mentioned I’d checked out Radical Homemakers by Shannon Hayes. That one was more of a manifesto and not as well written. In Homeward Bound, Emily Matchar did a good job of blending cultural critique with observing trends and you can tell she had a solid background in journalism. It was very readable and had a good mix of personal asides and anecdotes to go with the well researched data points.
Excellent read about the "New Domesticity." While repetitive at times, the last recap- reality check - chapter makes up for it.