They Call It Love: The Politics of Emotional Life

by Alva Gotby

The work of love is a feminist problem, and it demands feminist solutions

Comforting a family member or friend, soothing children, providing company for the elderly, ensuring that people feel well enough to work; this is all essential labour. Without it, capitalism would cease to function. They Call It Love investigates the work that makes a haven in a heartless world, examining who performs this labor, how it is organised, and how it might change. In this groundbreaking book, Alva Gotby calls this work “emotional reproduction,” unveiling its inherently political nature. It not only ensures people’s well-being but creates sentimental attachments to social hierarchy and the status quo. Drawing on the thought of the feminist movement Wages for Housework, Gotby demonstrates that emotion is a key element of capitalist reproduction. To improve the way we relate to one another will require a radical restructuring of society.

Genres: Nonfiction, Feminism, Politics, Theory, Love, Philosophy, Essays

192 pages, Paperback

Published February 20, 2024

Reviews

[Sunny Lu · Rating 4 out of 5]

A dense (yet quite approachable!) literature review of the wages for housework movement and research in emotional labor in the formal economy and in the private home. Look forward to delving into Alva Gotby’s next book!

[Malcolm · Rating 5 out of 5]

At just shy of 150 pages, this is a deceptive little book. On the one hand, as a discussion of the gendered character of life and labour, of domestic experiences, and everyday existence, I expect that there is much that many, mainly women, might be inclined to say – ‘OK, tell me something I don’t already know’… Yet, what Gotby does superbly is take those banalities of ‘service’ and build a sharp, insightful, conceptually and analytically sophisticated argument.

She grounds this exploration in two strands of work that had their highpoint in the 1970s and early ‘80s, have never quite gone away and in recent years have begun to reappear in political and scholarly work. The first is the 1970s’ Marxist-feminist debates that became known as the ‘domestic labour debate’, taking an activist strand in the Wages for Housework movement. The second emerged in early 1980s sociology, focused on Arlie Hochschild’s work, especially her The Managed Heart that gave us the notion of emotional labour. I recall the ‘domestic labour debate’ having a profound effect on my thinking about gender, and especially the work of historical sociologist Wally Seecombe where explored what he called ‘the wage form’, but also recall thinking that these discussions seemed structurally rich but experientially impoverished. This impoverishment was compensated for, a little, by related work of the era such as Michèle Barrett and Mary McIntosh’s The Anti-Social Family .

Gotby’s insight is two-fold, as a consequence of grounding in this genealogy. The first part comes from her shift in focus from domestic and reproductive labour to highlight emotional labour as a key under explored component of the question. The second, in a focus more comfortable for those of us who have this earlier grounding in these debates, is her focus on the need to disestablish the patriarchal nuclear family. These come together late in the piece, where in a discussion of the limitations of approach that recasts the nuclear family as not necessarily heterosexual, she argues: “What we need is not an expanded and more inclusive understanding of romantic love. Instead, we need to counter the organisation of life that makes romance and familial ties the precondition for access to emotional and material forms of care and resources.” (p143)

Through all of this I especially appreciated her exploration of the material bases of emotion as gendered practice, and with it rebuttal of any sense that emotional dispositions and styles are inherently gendered. This is a compelling case against women’s ‘caring nature’ even as it is one of the most demanding aspects of her analysis. Yet it is this materialist basis of emotion, of the affective, that gives Gotby’s argument its power, integrating emotion into reproductive labour in a way that sees it as core to its operation, rather than epiphenomenal or as a consequence.

It is also this materialist understanding of reproductive emotion and labour, these materialist politics of care, that underpin Gotby’s argument for the abolition of the family as the principal site of reproduction. To be clear, this is not an argument against familial networks or a rejection of kinship, but an argument that rejects the heteronormative, capitalist patriarchal family as necessarily the structural site of reproductive labour. This leads to her closing discussion which recognises that whatever new forms there are to be developed will emerge from struggle and social and political change while also noting that these struggles go better when there are options, forms, or ideals in mind – that is to say, are better when there is some utopian thinking in practice, not as prescriptive models and goals but as options other than the ones we current live in and with.

By highlighting emotional reproduction, grounding her analysis of affect in a materialist analysis, and therefore emphasising the extensive reach of reproductive labour Gotby has developed a clear basis for abolition of the nuclear family as the necessary precondition for care and emotion. In doing so, she has also provided a compelling justification for ways to recast and reconceptualise changes in gender relations. That’s a lot for such a short book to carry, but it is a weight it carries well. I can’t help but see this as an important contribution to essential debates in Marxist-feminist analysis and practice.

[Anastasiia Mozghova · Rating 4 out of 5]

this is an intense stretching exercise for one's worldview on how our lives are organised in terms of human relationships in all areas of life. it's well-researched, complex, and thought-provoking. a lot of the ideas seem totally unrealistic, but as with all aspirations they can serve as a guiding light rather than a definite end-goal.

[Rawan · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 stars

the text was really dense and overly repetitive. felt like i didn't learn a lot more beyond what I already know. I wouldve liked if gotby provided more examples and case studies to cite more real world examples of proving the points brought up. also wish gotby provided more substantial solutions and I wouldve been curious to hear that. I found myself repeatedly asking the question and what do we do about that? only to find that unanswered

[Dimitra]

I can't remember the last time I read something so structuralist. Subjects with no agency bound by the limits of processes of gendering happening exclusively somewhere outside their everyday experience; with no desires; facing no other forms of oppression or limitations (e.g. migrants with no rights)...
Furthermore, it is a very repetitive book, with underdeveloped arguments about emotions. It is better to read directly the original literature that the book uses, e.g. Arlie Russel Hochschild and the Wages for Housework feminists.
I expected more, given the endorsements and the publisher. I was disappointed.

[Maja · Rating 3 out of 5]

Idk I liked many of the ideas but the language was just quite convoluted I felt I had to re-read every sentence at least once to keep track and if I spaced out for a second had to go back to figure out what was going on. Also could’ve prob been made more accessible with some case studies and tangible examples to explain and develop the arguments. Overall it felt a bit unclear who the book was targeting because the language was complex and used certain theoretical concepts (like gendered/feminine subjectivity) without explanation but at the same time went through very basic Marxist theory on surplus value as if the reader was expected to not know abt it?

[imaani · Rating 4 out of 5]

enjoyed the second half emphasizing how we can queer emotional labor.

[Marie · Rating 4 out of 5]

hm… i really enjoyed certain aspects of this book (specifically, thinking about how certain ‘natural’ or ‘innate’ traits of humanity are actually / can be functions of capital- love, the nuclear family, romantic relationships, child rearing) and generally agree with the call to abolish these systems when we are reimagining a life post- capitalism , and don’t get me wrong i’m all for thinking on SYSTEMS levels lol, but when it comes down to how we actually get there / how these things operate on an individual level, i find it more difficult to reckon with (i.e., not sure if i agree with her bold claim that all heterosexual relationships are oppressive, not sure if i see “stop smiling unless your doing waged work” as an adequate solution to uprooting these systems?)

anyways still a lot to think about - going to follow this with abolish the family bc i think it’ll add on a layer … overall impressed w her marxist feminist analysis and the historical examples of organizing she pulls from, maybe i am just being naive and not ~~~radicalized enough ~~~ to get fully on board with all ideas, but either way i will be thinking about it for a long time to come ….

[huda 💋 · Rating 3 out of 5]

okay so I love this book and the ideas behind it. I think thinking about love and care outside of the private and intimate is really powerful and allows you to actually imagining a world outside of capitalism, heteronormativity and patriarchy. I do think that it is quite theory heavy which made me re-read some sections a thousand times and i think this could have been a little more accessible. I was also missing a more practical approach on how to practice these more radical approaches to love and care - because I agree with the idea and the theory but it seems just so impossible to achieve for me. I wouldn’t know how to start, really. Builds a lot on abolitionist theory, the nuclear family, emotional labour and queerness! Would love to discuss this book so whoever read pls let me know cuz i got questionsssss
xxxx

[Rebecca Lynn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Appreciated how the author explained the way emotional bonds have been commodified through capitalism and all the content on household labor and gender.

[nkp · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super great. I’m such a theory guy now I’m reading theory.

[Inez Gallagher · Rating 3 out of 5]

Idea wise this book was a 10/10 - drawing light to emotional labour and social reproduction and then how mobilise and use this recognition for new world making - v cool stuff!! In practice, though, I found the arguments harder to follow than they should have been.. (I’m clearly just not a Marxist feminist…). I also think overreliance on some examples? And under reliance on the literature out there! Flipping between queer as in Lgbt and queer as in queer theory is also just frustrating and imo lazy… enjoyable nonetheless and did make me think! Cheers iz for bday prez

[dullah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Feels incredibly hopeless to read this book alll the way up until maybe the last few pages. It is a lit packed into less than 200 pages which perhaps doesn’t leave room for nuance with each topic addressed but still serves as a great place to start and be radicalized.
I also think this book is directed to non-men almost exclusively. However, it still helped me understand and look at some things differently.

[Neeyati · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5*

[Sydney ⸙ · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting (except for some bits that maybe went on longer than needed) and has inspired me to read more of the works cited

[Colleen Grablick · Rating 4 out of 5]

energizing little read. and finally someone calls attn to the man problem on the left! (but productively)

[Rika · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was very academically written. Provides a clear and comprehensive exploration of the politics of social and emotional reproduction in society and sketches alternative modes of sociality and de-privatisation of care (i.e. outside of the heteronormative nuclear family). highly recommend for a dense, detailed breakdown of queer feminist & socialist politics

[Kristin Kharrat · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this in two sittings at two separate shifts at work (it's a short read). I wish I was in my gender philosophy class right now. (3.5 stars)

[Masey Bishop · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5!!!

[Morgan Holdsworth · Rating 4 out of 5]

thought provoking short read on the invisible labour of women and how this contributes to up holding other values. i found the idea that certain labour occasionally shows more than love alone can really interesting to consider also

[reem]

halfway through the book and perhaps i might be too uneducated at the moment to understand the marxist-feminist jargon…will be rereading soon hopefully when I’m more well-rounded and well-read🥸

[Alienated Cú Chulainn · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5? Gotby started in on "proletarian shopping" discourse and I had to surgically unroll my eyes from my head. Ended up skipping to the final chapter, which made some decent points - the nuclear family is harmful, we need to move to communalized family units based on kinship over blood, this can't happen in the current system because it would lead to a worsening loneliness epidemic and starving children so this is a long term project, yada yada yada. I agree. She then kneecapped herself by adding in completely asinine suggestions. I dare Gotby to walk up to a random stranger and try to convince them that cultivating bad feeling is good, actually, or that we shouldn't smile at people unless they're paying us. Why is it so hard for family abolitionists to contend with reality? This line of theory is so proscriptive - everything is reduced to absolutes completely ungrounded in any understanding of how normal, everyday people think and function. We're all just dumb puppets being manipulated by the invisible hand of cisheteropatriarchal imperialist capitalism. Even the phrase "family abolition" sounds terrifying, conjuring images of babies being snatched from parents to be raised by an uncaring and incompetent state. Whoever decided that translating aufheben as Marx and Engels used it as "abolish" really fucked any chance at this line of thought being taken at all seriously despite how its basic core is solid. M & E are rolling in their graves.

Touch grass, Alva.

[Alana · Rating 2 out of 5]

2.5 I feel incredibly lukewarm about this book.

I'm going to start with the positives. I think the book had a strong introduction, and that Gotby's descriptions of the political economy of love and gendering work were good descriptions. She presented a lot of information that I kind of already knew, one way or another, but by compiling it to present it in a comprehensive way, it got me to think about these things in ways I hadn't before.

My main critiques of the book are the way it was written and the depth Gotby goes into. Starting with the depth, I don't think this book presents any groundbreaking information. Like I said, it was mostly information I had heard of or read of before. It didn't seem to me that Gotby did more than compile this information, like it never felt like a grand conclusion was reached. I don't feel Gotby contributed anything of her own to the discussion.

The second critique is that it is hard to read. There is absolutely a time and a place for really convoluted and academic writing. Specifically, I think if you are creating new theory, then that kind of writing is necessary to get a detailled and accurate portrayal of your new theory. Gotby does not write about anything unique enough to justify making this book as inaccessible as it is.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

“There can be a lot of work involved in creating a spirit of niceness at family dinners and holidays, where conflict needs to be held at bay. It is also a key feminine task—soothing over conflict, soothing hurt feelings, creating a spirit of relaxation and wellbeing. Women are called to perform these tasks in their families, at work, and among friends and acquaintances. Niceness is a bourgeois family value which women are compelled to create through both domestic and emotional labor.”

Whew. I went into this book thinking I was getting “An Idiots Guide to Getting Your Husband to Share the Emotional and Mental Labor of Raising a Family” and instead I got “A Marxist Argument for the Abolition of the Family” and I’m not mad about it.

This was a really smart book, rooted in history and intersectional in its feminism, arguing for an approach that learns from queer and trans norms and Black feminist movements and traditions. It was honestly a bit too smart for me (I could’ve benefited from simpler language at times), but I loved learning about the author’s perspective and how the topic of emotional labor has evolved and been approached in the past.

[Brit · Rating 3 out of 5]

An eye-opening look at the invisible emotional work undertaken by women that serves to uphold capitalism, heterosexuality, the nuclear family, and gendered subordination.

[Majić Vusilović · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant and accesible contribution to the SRT, family abolition and radical queer politics. I will be re-reading this book as well as looking forward to read more of Alva Gotby's writings.

[Nora · Rating 5 out of 5]

As its name suggests, this book is about the politics and political effects of emotion and emotional reproduction. It is about the meanings and limitations of our current understandings of emotion, then moves further to criticize these understandings and eventually imagines a future that cultivates and accepts completely different understandings, creations, and uses of emotion. It also reads slightly “manifesto-y,” especially in the last chapter. At first I thought the book would be relatively easy to read, but this turned out to be wrong; the book is heavy in theory and dense in arguments, both of which require quite some mental muscles to conquer. Plus the author didn’t write the book in the most accessible way… I gave it five stars because it really pushed my understanding of emotion, emotional reproduction, and everything around them. Basically I was able to learn new things on almost every single page. Although the author's language was not the easiest to unpack (she used too many nouns), she did explain many complex issues and situations accurately and clearly, and by reading through, I gained plenty of new knowledge. I feel the book could be clearer in its structure, but I’m not sure if this was because I read it on kindle. My biggest personal learning is that by understanding what emotion means more holistically in our society, I’d be able to see my own emotions through a new set of eyes, and thus better understand myself. Overall the book is radical, and I’d recommend it to anybody who enjoys radical readings.

[Abbi · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a dense and theoretical book about the labour that is love and care. Gotby constructs emotional care as a form of exploitation, considering the way that unpaid care work in the household can be a means of upholding and ensuring the continuation of capitalism; she suggests that without the sphere of familial love outside of paid employment, capitalist society simply could not function. She also explores the exploitation of paid care workers, who often come from marginalised communities, as well as the "double shift" that many women are made to work as employees in the workplace and unpaid carers at home, while men are often exempted from the latter. Later, she advocates for the abolition of family and gender as a means of emancipation, to be replaced by a politics of friendship and collective caring.
Although this book is short, it is jam-packed with ideas and is clearly thoughtfully researched and constructed. However, it is easy to get lost in the very academic and dry language, especially towards the beginning of the book. I'm glad I continued because some of the most interesting parts were towards the middle, but the final chapter was also a bit of a slog. I was pleased to discover lots of fascinating new ideas, as well as others that I had never been able to put into words, but was in the end unconvinced by the possible solutions. Definitely not light reading, but interesting nonetheless.

[Al Owski · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alva Gotby’s work makes visible that which is not obvious to most of us in our relationships in the workplace and the home. For our present system to continue to work, “emotional labor” is required for “reproduction in the sense of continually recreating an attachment to the world as we know it.” This labor is the work that is required to undergird the relational infrastructure of hierarchical capitalism. It maintains the structure of the home and roles of persons within it. Emotional labor reproduces social hierarchy, defined by race, gender, and class.

The emotional labor that Gotby speaks of is the labor of maintaining “good feelings” both in the home and in the workplace. The expectations of good feelings skews towards the upper classes. This emotional labor is nearly always shouldered by women, whether in families or in service jobs. It is the smile women are expected to wear in the face of obnoxious customers. It is the admonishment to “be a good sport” while being the object of malicious humor. It is the role of smoothing over family conflicts. It is putting up with abuse in the interest of the appearance of family harmony. It is the labor women are expected to perform.

While most of the book is dedicated to raising awareness of emotional labor in modern life, the latter chapters offer possible alternatives to current family and societal structures.

[Zeenah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gotby presents interesting commentary on the "unnoticed," seemingly passive, emotional labor executed by women under the patriarchy, as well as the general commodification of our emotions under capitalism. And while clear to understand, the book was often repetitive. There were a lot of examples references, and references to theory that were helpful (Wages for Housework and Full Surrogacy Now), but there wasn't really a solution provided to tie all of this together, I feel. Just brief hypothetical imaginings about community at the end of the text. And where there were examples used, half of the time it didn't necessarily add to the text. Gotby has nice ideas, but the book comes across as a literature review rather than consisting of her own voice. There were moments where I wish she had expanded on racialized feminization of labor with case study examples i.e. Chinese women and men in forms of reproductive labor like laundromats, and though she didn't have to bring this specific example up, every time I felt like she would get the gears turning in my head, she'd move on without some sort of conclusive point.