Marxist feminist have used a number of theories and techniques to explain the sexual subordination of women. The idea that inequality is rooted in capitalism comes from Marxist feminists. Capitalists considered married women as cheap workers and therefore the most useful. Women are not expected to be the major breadwinner and so are paid less. In Marxist Feminist’s explanation, the sexual division of labour within the family explain why women enter the labour market on disadvantageous term and are used by capitalists in distinctive ways.
‘There is a congruence between the sexual division of labour in the domestic sphere, which consigns women to domestic labour, and the needs of capitalism for a distinctive kind of labour force – part time, lowly paid, and flexible. This explains the job segments that are occupied by women in the labour market.
(Beechey, 1976, 1977, quoted by Abbott and Wallce, 1990, pp.147)
However, it can also be seen that Marxist feminism has not entirely, and in some circumstances, not contributed to our understanding of the sexual subordination of women. Therefore, Marxist Feminism is incomplete.
Radical feminists have written only a little on paid employment. It differs from liberal and Marxist views in acknowledging that sexuality is the most fundamental of social divisions. They particularly focus on ‘patriarchy’ as a being universal within the structures of social, economic and cultural systems, which enable men to dominate and exploit women and give themselves material rewards and social privileges. Society can be understood through the process of reproduction (as opposed to production). In bearing children, women are constantly at the mercy of biology. Another source of conflict between genders is a very specific issue of power and control, namely the existence of sexual harassment in the workplace. It can generally be described as unwanted sexual advances. Most forms of workplace control take the form of harassment, sexual bribery, gender based jokes and comments. Women were still under men’s oppression.
Black feminism is a more recent development. They are critical of other types of feminism, believing that they do not consider women of different ethnic backgrounds and societies. Black women have different experiences to white women because they have to experience both sex and race discrimination. Feminists have seen the family as a negative idea for women in most cases, but for black women, it is usually a place of safety and refuge from the racism they experience in society.
Feminist perspectives have changed in post-modern feminism. Women now have got much more respect. They feel they have more power to stand up in front of men and also have more authority. This development has provided the police with more sensitive ways of dealing with women, in such cases as rape, mental illness and domestic violence. Feminists have given publicity to women's interests and issues that need to be raised but have previously been ignored e.g. domestic violence. Inequalities of power have been highlighted. They also noticed that most great famous people in the history of the world have been men; history groups have attempted to reclaim women's history. As well, it is possible that due to the attitudes feminism has brought about, the New Man was created.
Barron and Norris argued that there are 2 not 1 labour market. (Haralambos and Holborn2000) Dual labour market system consists of the primary and secondary labour markets. The primary is made of jobs offering training and promotion, the secondary is made up of insecure and lowly paid unskilled jobs. In the British labour market, women form the secondary-sector and men form the primary.
‘Barron and Norris(1976) explained that this situation is because:
- Sex was an obvious way of segregating the work-force which would raise little opposition from male employees;
- Women would work for less money than men, being not so committed to employment on account of their domestic role;
- Women frequently left work of their own accord and would be easier to lay off at short notice;
- Women were less likely to join trade union.’
(Abbot and Wallace, 1990, pp.146)
Employers used these methods to keep the type of labour they require, so incentives are offered to keep highly skilled, normally male, in the workplace. Secondary sector are seen as dispensable, easily replaced, no incentives for high wages, job security, or promotions is offered to them. The secondary labour market can apply to both men and women but mainly women, who are seen as easy to replace and having no interest in learning new skills and less concerned with high wages. Normally once a woman begins secondary employment there is little chance she will progress to the primary sector. Men are still seen as the major bread winner and women’s seen as having low status in society and not normally belonging to unions is one of the reasons why they are not likely to aim for primary sector employment. (Haralambos and Holborn, 2000, pp168)
Sylvia Walby did not agree with these general views, she has a different view on women’s position. Her argument of the change from private patriarchy to public patriarchy was the main cause for the male-dominance in the workplace. ‘The change from private to public patriarchy involves a change both in the relations between the structures and within the dominant structures.’(Walby, 1990, pp.24) Private patriarchy, which is happened in a family, father is the most important, he is responsible for earn money, making decisions, and mother is responsible for raising children and taking care of the family. Family reinforcing private patriarchy and the distinctive male/female roles creates inequality between the sexes and promotes the interests of men. Women has got used to the role they perform in the family, so in the workplace, women are naturally or placed in an inferior role. They admitted their status automatically.
Employment trends, Great Britain, 1961- 88
Source: Calculated from Employment Gazette: Historical Supplement, Feb 1987, (Walby, 1990, pp.26)
In the table above, we can see women’s paid employment had increased dramatically during 1961 and 1988, Since Second World War, the employment of women rose steadily. One reason was that women’s role of “reserved army”. Men went to the battlefield so that women replaced them to do men’s work. In 1961, 7,586 women were working, and constitute 34.8 in the workforce. In 1988, the figure rose to 10,096, women constituted 45.7 percent, to nearly half of the total paid workforce. Whereas men’s employment fell from 14,202 to 11,908. The increase is mainly in the part-time job, from 33.5% in 1971 to 42.8 in 1988. Another reason is the increased demand for service-sector jobs. This increase can be seen as a development of women’s paid employment. Braverman claimed that women spent less time in the home due to the manufacturing of domestic appliances.’ (Braverman, 1974, pp.38)New technologies created facilities to reduce their domestic work and enable them to work for paid employment Since then, women, especially married women, were no longer responsible only for domestic work and childcare,
Although the employment rate of women increased, the area of work and the level of work were still very different between male and female workers due to occupational segregation. The former is horizontal segregation and the ladder is vertical segregation as I have explained. The Equal Pay Act enforced that men and women must receive same pay rate when doing the same kind of work. Thus vertical segregation declined. But
Source:http://www.strath.ac.uk/Departments/HRM/teaching/classes/41315/Overheads/lecture2.PDF
Horizontal segregation shows contrary trends. The table clearly shows that women occupied most of the unskilled or semi-skilled service sector jobs and men were mostly in highly-skilled jobs. Women entered different kinds of jobs but remain in a lower status. ‘High levels of segregation have been considered to be a significant factor in the discrepancy between the wages of women and men, to impose constraints on careers, and generally to be at the root of gender inequalities’ [1]
In conclusion, women’s role in workplace has improved dramatically but still not as equal as men. Biological differences have first determined women’s behaviour and social position. Liberal, Marxist, Radical, Black and Post-modern feminists have explained gender inequality of employment in different views. Personally, I am in favour of Walby’s view of Patriarchy. The change from private to public patriarchy was the main barrier to women’s employment. Husband’s and wife’s roles in a family were segmented: Husband was the breadwinner so that wife was dependant economically on husband. So husband was the family leader and wife just takes all the housework and childcare. Women’s role in the family makes them naturally and spontaneously be under male dominance in the workplace. Men were also capable to use sexual harassment to control women, but women cannot enforce it on men. In some heavy industries like coal mining, women were not capable to do such work. Therefore, women’s physical and psychological factors had already formed barriers to and restriction within their employment, let along in a male-dominated society. It is the social development that improved women’s status. The second table also suggests that women do work as managers, but in different sectors. Women’s rights of pursuing high education, the development of technology and decline of sex-discrimination are the main reasons. Generally, women are more civilised, they are able to choose their subjects without previous limitation, they are also able to forward to high-education, learn relative skills, and get employment in “men’s job”. But prejudices are inevitable. Patriarchy still exists and it is influential in nowadays society. While majority or all of the office staff are women, the supervisor or manager will normally be a man. Women are not suitable for leading jobs. They are unlikely, in most cases, to work as managing directors in multi-nation companies. They could be vice-managers or secretary, which are a lot lower. I believe that women’s status will continuously rise, though not physically developed, through development in intellectual and psychological aspects. Women’s potentiality of work and ability to adapt the competitive market are immeasurable. Male-dominance and patriarchy will gradually become less effective. Women’s future will be bright ever after.
References
[1]Occupational gender segregation has been at the heart of debates about gender inequality. High levels of segregation have been considered to be a significant factor in the discrepancy between the wages of women and men, to impose constraints on careers, and generally to be at the root of gender inequalities (e.g. Fox and Fox, 1987; Hughes, 1990; Reskin and Roos, 1990). The inequalities of segregation are primarily located in market employment, but they spill over into all aspects of life. Thus, the subject raises significant questions of social justice, of the efficient utilisation of human resources, of the structuring of labour markets, and of wider social aspects of work and family life. While there may be a wide consensus about the importance of the subject, there is less agreement about precisely what the term ‘segregation’ encompasses. This situation can lead to disputes over substantive matters. Furthermore, even when there is agreement about what should be measured, there are disagreements about how best to do this. Accordingly, our purpose here is to clarify some of the conceptual and measurement issues. (Blackburn R and Jarman J, Occupational Gender Segregation, )
Bibliography
-
Abbott, P and Wallace, C (1990) An Introduction to Sociology: Feminist Perspectives Routledge, London
-
Barron, R.D. and Norris, E.M.(1976) Sexual Divisions and the Dual Labour Market Longman, London
-
Bradley, H (1989) Men’s Work, Women’s Work: A Sociological History of the Sexual Division of Labour in Employment Polity Press, Cambridge
-
Braverman, H (1974) Labour and Monopoly Capitalism Monthly Review Press, New York
-
Crompton, R (1997) Women and Work Oxford University Press, Oxford
-
Crompton, R and Sanderson, K (1990) Gendered Jobs and Social Change Berne Convention, Published by the Academic Division of Unwin Hyman Ltd, London
-
Haralambos, M. and Holborn, M. (2000) Sociology: Themes and Perspective HarperColliins, London
-
Oakley, A (1972) Sex, Gender and Society Maurice Temple Smith Ltd, Hants
-
Oakley, A (1974) Housewife Penguin Books Ltd, London
-
Mitchell, J (1973) Woman’s Estate Penguin Books Ltd, Middlesex, England
-
Walby, S (1986) Patriarchy at Work Polity Press, Cambridge
-
Walby, S (1988) Gender Segregation at Work Open University Press, Milton Keynes
-
Walby, S (1990) Theorising Patriarchy Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford
