This is the question posed by the American sociologist Allison Daminger in her new book “What’s on Her Mind: The Mental Workload of Family Life“.₁ The author addresses an issue that affects many couples in their daily lives but is rarely discussed openly: cognitive labor, better known as mental load.

The fact that it is mainly women who take on this invisible, yet potentially burdensome cognitive work is not a fundamentally new insight. To analyze the mechanisms behind mental load, Daminger conducted 94 interviews with heterosexual and homosexual American couples over a period of eight years. The findings suggest that a “female” domain has emerged. Relationship maintenance, time management, shopping, cleaning, doing laundry, and childcare—as well as the constant monitoring of these tasks—fall within the cognitive work sphere of women.

It is precisely this “monitoring” that functions as a burdensome, ongoing background job in women’s minds. For example, while women less often handle technical repairs themselves, it is still they who remind their partners that something needs to be fixed in the first place.

Overall, a clear picture emerges: 75 percent of the couples surveyed are “female-led,” meaning that women bear a significantly greater share of the cognitive load. An imbalance in cognitive workload is also evident in same-sex couples. The difference compared to heterosexual couples is that same-sex partners tend to divide their cognitive work based on efficiency and individual strengths, negotiating it independently of gender.

 

But why do women have a higher mental load?

Daminger identifies two central narratives that push women into this role: gendered socialization and personal essentialism.

“Structural and cultural forces,” according to the author, ensure that girls and women learn early on to regard housework and organization as their “gender-typical” responsibilities. “Cognitive labor leaders are largely made,” the book states. In romantic relationships, this dynamic appears in comments like “She’s just way more organized” and “He’s more of a go-with-the-flow guy.” Femininity is associated with efficiency and organization, while masculinity is linked to less structure and relaxation.

This creates a vicious cycle: those who learn early on to take care of organization are more likely to assume this role later in relationships and often pass it on to their own children. Or as Daminger aptly puts it: “One gets good at cognitive labor by, well, doing cognitive labor.”

To make these structures more tangible, Daminger outlines two archetypes that are distributed unequally between the genders:

• The “Superhuman”: Most often women, who keep track of everything, organize, and thus carry the greatest mental load.
• The “Bumbler”: Often men, who tend to lean back and take a passive role.

This pattern is also reflected in the narrative of “personal essentialism.” According to Daminger, this refers to the tendency to explain differences between men and women not as the result of internalized and socialized gender roles, but as personal traits. For example, women might say, “I am who I am,” while men might say, “My brain just naturally rejects... non-essential information.”

This personal essentialism serves two functions: First, it prevents conflict by providing seemingly “good reasons” for the unequal division of labor. Second, it stabilizes existing inequalities while simultaneously maintaining the image of an egalitarian partnership. For instance, women are considered “naturally more nurturing” due to internalized gender roles and therefore take on childcare quite naturally. In truth, this is not an innate trait but socially shaped expectations.

In this way, gender-specific inequalities become not only invisible but also legitimized. For Daminger, it is clear: personal essentialism is not just an excuse; it is an accomplice that conceals and simultaneously cements inequalities.

 

What needs to be done to make gender-specific inequalities visible and reduce mental load?

Daminger's answer is surprising. She does not advocate for a 50/50 split but for a conscious and reflective handling of cognitive labor within the couple's relationship. The central goal is to no longer use gender as a predictor or justification pattern for tasks and ways of thinking.

This requires three strategies:

1. Recognition and visibility: Invisible work must be named and appreciated before it can be changed. Helpful for this are, for example, mental load tests that measure the burden of mental load based on self-assessments.₂

2. Cultural change: Stereotypical notions of “female” and “male” must be transformed.

3. Reduction of cognitive burden overall: It is not only about a fairer distribution of cognitive tasks but also about reducing mental burden overall.

To achieve this, Daminger identifies three levels:

1. The institutional level: For example, political measures that relieve parents and families of their cognitive workload. At this point, the author mentions measures that overall reduce economic inequalities, support employees, and thereby provide direct support to families.

2. The organizational level: Employers must create structures that make cognitive work visible and prevent it from becoming a career obstacle. Additionally, Daminger appeals that childcare facilities must be linked with employment structures to make it easier to combine work and family life.

3. The individual level: Couples must recognize inequalities and openly negotiate how they can make their cognitive work fairer.

Daminger vividly shows how invisible and yet shaping cognitive labor can structure and burden our everyday lives—especially the daily lives of women. The author makes it clear: it is not about pedantically aiming for a 50/50 split, but about awareness, recognition, and change on all levels. Or, to conclude with Allison Daminger’s words: “None of this change—political, organizational, or personal—will be easy. But if we are serious about creating a world in which one’s gender is a poor predictor of both mind-use and time-use, it’s work worth doing.”

 

SOURCES:

₁Daminger, A. (2025): What's on Her Mind. The Mental Workload of Family Life. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press.

₂For example, the mental load test by klischee*esc e.V., available as mental-load-home-de.pdf