
Working from home? It's so much nicer if you're a man
This stopped me in my tracks. Not because it's my experience: my husband and I are lucky enough to have an office each, and mine is bigger and objectively nicer. I get the garden view; he has the ballet of Openreach and Amazon vans. (See – not all men.) It's not Stanley's experience either: she uses the spare bedroom; her husband has half the living room, she told the Cut's Book Gossip newsletter.
Rather, I was struck because having just read the Australian writer Helen Garner's recently published diaries, How to End a Story, this is exactly the irreconcilable, constantly rehashed point of contention between her and her ex-husband, anonymised in the diaries as 'V'.
V, also a writer, insists not only on appropriating the available room in their shared apartment for his office, but on Garner leaving while he works, her presence incompatible with his sacred need for silent isolation. Garner describes the quotidian pain of this situation (she wants to potter, play music, cook, see friends; her creativity is fuelled by these ordinary kinds of life), and the growing realisation of what it said about their relationship with shocking, powerful eloquence. V is aware of, but apparently unmoved by, her distress. They argue about it regularly.
Garner's experience was so egregious as to be eye-poppingly enraging, but this happens more often in quieter, easier-to-overlook ways. I read and enjoyed Consider Yourself Kissed too – it's a romance, but it also subtly builds a picture of the insidious sidelining of women's work as expressed through domestic space. Set between 2013 and 2023, it's particularly good on how this was amplified by Covid: the heroine's political journalist husband sees his career go stratospheric and their spare room 'somehow' becomes his study. He's a nice man; he loves her; it just … happens.
This rang true because it is: it did just happen. Structural pay equalities meant men – habitually the higher earners – staked the more obvious primary claim on working space in locked-down homes. Research shows women experienced more non-work interruptions, compounded when they didn't have a 'dedicated unshared workspace' – their emotional wellbeing suffered, but so did their professional lives. 'My husband locks the room from the inside when he needs to concentrate,' a participant in an Indian study on pandemic working habits reported. 'I don't have that liberty. I have no room of my own.'
In 1929, Virginia Woolf wrote A Room of One's Own as a riposte to the physical and economic exclusion of women from intellectual and professional spaces. In 2025, they can't bar us from libraries, but intimate domestic spaces have proved stubbornly intractable. Back when men had inviolable studies and smoking rooms, there was an assumption that the domestic sphere was feminine, so they 'needed' to escape the noise and mess of childrearing and homemaking. Now we're ostensibly all in it together, doing conference calls in our slippers, but there are still more man caves than women's. Because Risbridger is right: the recently released UK 2024 Skills and Employment survey found 60% of men had a dedicated room for work at home and only 40% of women. We still can't manage to meet Woolf's prescription.
There are not-all-men exceptions and happy endings. Garner escaped, thank God, eventually; and, without spoilers, Stanley's heroine reclaims some space. But in real life, generally, women's work is still given less and worse space, while the gender pay gap narrows agonisingly slowly. The two are surely related. When do we get that room of our own?
Emma Beddington is a Guardian columnist
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
14 minutes ago
- The Guardian
UN climate chief warns Australia not to pick a ‘bog standard' 2035 carbon emissions target
The UN's climate chief has declared Australia's 2035 emissions target will define the country's future, and urged the Albanese government to not pick a 'bog-standard' number but to 'go for what's smart by going big'. Speaking in Sydney on Monday, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change executive secretary, Simon Stiell, cast the government's decision on the target – due by September – as the country's 'one shot' to build an 'on-ramp to the Asian clean tech boom', create hundreds of thousands of jobs and ensure the country's economic security and regional influence. The government is being heavily lobbied by industry and climate-focused organisations as it waits on advice about the 2035 target from the Climate Change Authority, a government agency led by chair Matt Kean, a former NSW Liberal treasurer and energy minister. Stiell, a former minister in the Grenadian government, did not say what the target should be, but said the decision was more than 'just the next policy milestone'. He said climate policy debates could be 'complex and contentious', but urged the country to not 'settle for what's easy'. 'If those debates deliver an ambitious, all-economy plan with public backing and political backbone then, whatever the naysayers might say, every hard-fought inch will be worth it,' he said at an event hosted by the Smart Energy Council, a clean energy industry organisation. 'Bog standard is beneath you … Go for what will build lasting wealth and national security. Go for what will change the game and stand the test of time.' Sign up: AU Breaking News email The Climate Change Authority last year said a preliminary assessment of scientific, economic, technological and social evidence suggested a target of cutting national emissions by at least 65% and up to 75% by 2035 compared with 2005 levels would be ambitious but achievable. Some organisations, including the Climate Council, the Australian Council of Social Service and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering, argue Australia should be aiming to reach net zero emissions by 2035 if it is to play its part in keeping global heating as close to 1.5C as possible – a goal enshrined in the legally binding 2015 Paris agreement. Some business groups, including mining company Fortescue, have locked behind a campaign for a minimum 75% reduction target. They face opposition from other industry lobbyists that suggest the government should set a target that would do little more than the legislated 2030 goal of a 43% cut. The Coalition is considering whether it will go further and abandon its support for reaching net zero emissions by 2050. The former Nationals leader, Barnaby Joyce, has tabled a private member's bill that would abolish nearly all of the country's climate policies and commitments, including the net zero target. Stiell said he believed Australians knew unchecked climate change was 'an economic wrecking ball', and that climate disasters were 'already costing Australian homeowners $4bn a year – and that figure is only going one way'. He cited analysis that found the country could lose $6.8tn in GDP by 2050, and living standards could fall by more than $7,000 per person a year. But he said the 'global clean energy race' was under way, with trillions of dollars at stake, and with China and India investing in renewables at a level that was 'off the charts'. He said an ambitious target in Australia could 'anchor future industries – green hydrogen, clean metals, critical minerals – in policies that give investors confidence, give communities certainty [and] create good jobs paying good wages'. He said it would send a message 'so clear the world can't miss it – this country is open for clean investment, trade and long-term partnerships'. Stiell is in Australia as part of a global trip as governments weigh new commitments for 2035 before the Cop30 climate conference in Brazil in November. He arrived in Sydney after visiting Indonesia and Turkey. Turkey is vying with Australia and the Pacific to host next year's Cop31 summit. A decision will need to be made by Cop30, at the latest. It had been expected last year, but the UN operates a consensus process and Turkey has remained in the race despite most members of the deciding group of Western Europe and Other States having declared their support for the Australia-Pacific bid. Stiell was due to visit Canberra on Tuesday for meetings, including with the climate change and energy minister, Chris Bowen. He will be joined in the capital by the prime minister of the low-lying Pacific atoll nation of Tuvalu, Feleti Teo, who is speaking at the Australian National University and meeting with the prime minister, Anthony Albanese. More than 80% of Tuvalu's population of about 11,000 have entered a ballot for an Australian permanent residency visa, established as part of a climate-related treaty between the two countries. Under the deal, 280 places will be offered to Tuvalu citizens in the first year.


Times
30 minutes ago
- Times
Dated? CS Lewis's Christian clarity is as relevant as ever
A hundred years ago Clive Staples Lewis, known to his friends as Jack, was elected a fellow and tutor in English language and literature at Magdalen College, Oxford. It would be his academic home for the next 29 years, a period when he became a Christian and produced most of his best-known works. The author of the Narnia stories, Miracles, Till We have Faces, Surprised by Joy and so many others lived close by his college, attended its chapel, made Oxford and its pubs and walks his home, but was never fully embraced by the university. It's one of the reasons he'd leave for Magdalene College, Cambridge, in 1954 and be extremely happy there. Part of the cause for Oxford's qualified reception, then and now, was Lewis's Christian faith, and also the fact that he was commercially and publicly successful. There were far more Christians on the teaching staff at Cambridge and they were excited rather than embarrassed by Lewis, the popular apologist.


Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Pauline Hanson's urgent wake up call for Anthony Albanese: 'I will not stand by while Australia is driven into the ground'
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson will introduce an urgency motion calling on the government to ditch its 'disastrous' net zero emissions target. Senators are expected to vote on the motion on Monday afternoon, adding pressure to calls from within the Coalition to scrap the policy. Ms Hanson wrote to Senate President Sue Lines on Monday morning, advising of her intention to introduce the motion 'as a matter of urgency.' 'I recently spoke to a small business owner who told me they're paying $10,000 a month just for electricity, on top of rent. It's no wonder 30,000 small businesses have shut their doors in just three years,' she said. 'Net zero is a scam. It's destroying our industries, gutting our manufacturing, crippling farming and food production, driving up the cost of living and pushing families into poverty, homelessness and despair,' she said. 'We are being led by fools. Shame on every politician who continues to push this madness. I will not stand by while Australia is driven into the ground.' While the motion is expected to be defeated, Ms Hanson said it was about forcing Coalition senators onto the record. 'We know where Labor and the Greens stand, but I want to hear where those in the Coalition stand on this,' she said. 'It's an urgency motion and anyone who abstains from this is a coward.' Net zero has emerged as a fracture point within the recently reconstituted Coalition, with Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce teasing a private members bill to do away with it. On Wednesday, The Australian reported Nationals leader Michael McCormack would support Barnaby Joyce's bid, undermining the Coalition's ongoing net zero review. It was a shot across the bow for the senior Coalition partner, signalling to its more moderate members the Nationals were not prepared to retire the issue. Ms Hanson said welcomed the move by the two Nationals MPs, adding her party had known 'all along' that net zero was a 'bad idea'. 'While some National Party members have come to the realisation that net zero has been a bad idea that has hurt productivity, cost of living, and the agriculture sector, we've been saying this all along,' she told the Daily Telegraph. 'Barnaby Joyce to his credit seems to have turned the leaf and recognised that these issues are having an impact and he's attempting to reverse the damage he and his Coalition did in government.' In place of the policy, she wrote the government should 'prioritise providing Australian families, farmers, businesses and industry with cheap and reliable energy.' She said it would help to 'protect jobs, ensure energy security, lower the cost of living and restore Australia's economic competitiveness'. Ms Hanson added Australia's ambitious target of carbon neutrality by 2050 was difficult to square with its relatively minor impact on overall global emissions. 'While China and India are exempt from cutting emissions until 2060 or 2070, and the USA refuses to play ball, we're punishing our own country for contributing just one per cent of global emissions,' she wrote. 'Between them, those three nations emit over 50 per cent but it's Australians who are made to suffer.' According to the CSIRO, Australia contributes just over one per cent of global emissions while China, India and the US comprise a combined 52 per cent.