Becker's work has attracted and continues to attract criticism from Feminists on empirical
and conceptual grounds (see, e.g., the papers in Haddad, L., Hoddinott, J., and Alderman,
H. (eds.), 1997, Intra-household Resource Allocation In Developing Countries: Models,
Policies and Methods, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, and several essays in
FEMINISM CONFRONTS HOMO ECONOMICUS:  GENDER, LAW & SOCIETY, by Martha Albertson Fineman
and Terence Dougherty (eds). Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005).
     
I am really amazed by the discussion on this list. Aren't economists (as a group) taught
that whenever they make conceptual/theoretical decisions about how to individuate and/or
aggregate entities (or create index numbers) and how to represent these mathematically
they run the risk of introducing/disguising gendered or other contested values? (Leaving
aside the further problem with statistical practices that also introduce assumptions about
what will count as normal, as data/noise, etc.) The 'individual', the 'household', the
'national economy', etc. are contested and contestable entities--even when our current
best practices are...objective.
     
Best,  
Eric Schliesser