Although the video was a
little outdated, it really put into perspective the lack of recognition for
women’s work in the economy. I completely agree with Marilyn’s view that just
because a mother’s work at home isn’t paid or doesn’t generate cash value does
not mean it is not beneficial or productive. I was upset after watching the
video because it brought light to the fact that disasters are considered
constructive for the economy’s growth while a woman working at home is
considered not to be contributing to the economy. The message I most took home
with me from the video was the idea of identifying time as the new currency
instead of actual money. This would then mean that women who work around the
clock at home would get credit for all their work even though it is not income
generating. I really liked this way of
thinking because it means that all work will be accounted for and not just that
work that creates money.
One of the things that I
found the most shocking was when she spoke about the International Trade and
Arms being the biggest growth industry of all. She spoke about how the top
people of the trade and arms will always want war because it means generating a
benefit for themselves in the face of environmental and human destruction. It
was ridiculous to find out that the amount of money some countries allocate to
military spending is more than what is allocated for educational spending. The
example she gave of the cost of a single new nuclear submarine being equal to
the annual educational expenditure budget of 23 developing countries with 160
million school aged children was preposterous. Even though I knew form previous
economic classes that women who weren’t employed in income earning occupations
were considered to be unproductive, after watching this video it put it into
more perspective. The statistics and facts that she noted were hard to believe
but I think it is better to know the difficult than not knowing at all.
