“A halfway dull day at home is still better than an interesting day at work” – this sharepic with a quote from Nadia Shehadeh, sociologist and author of the book “Anti-Girlboss”, makes me smile every time it pops up in my timeline. Which is telling: Because most of the working people would probably ask at this point where the joke is supposed to be. Of course, a dull day at home is better than one spent lugging crates of drinks up the stairs, assembling cars, wiping floors, or doing piecework at the discount store.
The fact that work is something that not only brings in money and, in the best case, is also useful for society, but also serves to form one’s own identity and self-realization, is a middle-class male narrative that dates back to the 19th century: only the gentlemen realized themselves back then professionally, the ladies had to confine themselves to the domestic sphere, while the proletarians did the physically demanding work.
In the meantime, the idea of living out one’s personal identity at work has become democratized and an ethical imperative for everyone.
In an interview with Brandeins, three book authors explain why this story doesn’t fit in the first place and why it ultimately harms people and society: in “Anti-Girlboss” the sociologist Nadia Shehadeh calls for the whistle on a career, the journalist Sara Weber who quit her job after burnout, propagated in “The world is ending and I still have to work?“ shortened working hours, the feminist author Teresa Bücker drafts in “All time“ the utopia of a new work culture that leaves room for relationships, self-care and social commitment.