GreenTeaRedFlag

so if they didn't hook up they wouldn't be doing labor anyway, they just wouldn't be having sex.

If they were never going to be in a serious relationship then they aren't avoiding the problems of a relationship through hookup culture. They wouldn't be doing that anyway. I think there's also always been a certain amount of the population that hooks up because they don't want a relationship but do want sex. That's not the same as hookup culture because that's referring to the pervasiveness of this style of living, and (I would argue) the use of apps and social media to being in more anonymous partners.

I also don't know to what extent people don't get into serious relationships due to hook up culture. It's probably on a case by case basis, there may be some general trends, but based on what I've seen people do it between relationships. How long this means very much depends on the person and circumstances, and it probably does space out relationships longer, but it doesn't necessarily lead to less work in a lifetime. The thing which would do that is setting boundaries in the relationship and not dating men who don't put in their fair share.

being on strike is specifically refusing to do a job until the other party corrects conditions, being unemployed is just not doing any job with no bargaining power over the other party. Being on strike has demands, being unemployed just means you don't have a formal relationship with an employer. In the same way, if women are trying to avoid their undo amount of labor through hooking up, they're just deferring it to later, not changing it.

Yeah, but there's a difference between having a strike and just being unemployed

I don't see how hookups rebel against this. They might not be doing the work but that leaves the expectations there

?

I had to eat in that shitty country for a bit this summer, I will show them the kindness they showed me.