toptermpaper.com

Freedom to say what you want

To me, the right of freedom of speech in the first amendment or correction in the Constitution is a standout amongst the most significant rights American natives have. It implies that I can voice and express my individual assessments and maintain the first objectives of our administration. To start with, this provides for me the right to voice and convey what needs be wherever and at whatever point I pick, as long as I don’t meddle with any other individual Constitutional rights. Second, the United States might be in a to a great degree frail state if nationals didn’t have the right to Freedom of speech. Without Freedom of speech in our Bill of Rights, individuals couldn’t remain up for what they have confidence in (Kanovitz, 2010). I imagine that if an individual has an idea or point they need to voice they ought to have the ability to without anything remaining in their direction.

Besides, not having this right might imply that it might be almost outlandish for specific associations to structure on the grounds that they wouldn’t have the capacity to express their perspectives. Additionally, since the United States has the freedom of speech, natives have the capacity to have a bigger voice in their legislature (Kanovitz, 2010). These individuals who voice their conclusions can influence their legislature authorities’ position on present issues.

Freedom of speech is an imperative good on the grounds that it permits presentation toward oneself, and at last gives worth to the single person. I accept that free discourse amplifies past the logos-based contention and I accept that free discourse involves more than that of what Peter guarantees, that there is to be no former control. I accept that the method of reasoning based off of Peter; most satisfactorily speaks to the idea of free discourse. This is on account of Peter is not at all like whatever possible savant; he centers his philosophical establishing on the thought that there is not a flat out destination truth. Diminish avows the thought that if there is no total truth then no two people will recognize esteem and truth in the same way; hence, Peter infers that the reason that we communicate is for our own particular fulfillment toward oneself. Dwindle grounds his convictions on the singular and the esteem that discourse has on him or her. He doesn’t accept that Freedom of speech as well as interpretation is a methods in which people can work to make an aggregate great, or profit social order overall, yet opportunity of discourse is an intends to enhance one’s own particular self (singer, 1994).

It is my conviction that discourse ought to keep on being ensured under the laws of the Constitution and the Harm Principle in light of the fact that by restricting discourse government will be compelled to comply with what social order esteems to be regularizing practices, subsequently defaming the convictions of the individuals who don’t fall under the dominant part. The Harm Principle is dependent upon this conviction that “The main reason for which power could be legitimately practiced over any part of a humanized group, without wanting to, will be to avert mischief to others.” (Law publish, 2011) I accept that this is amazingly huge on the grounds that it is difficult to control a distinctive feelings; it is inadequate to say that what will terribly insulted one man will likewise horribly irritate an alternate. Since nobody will have the same enthusiastic pain it is difficult to control utilizing any hypothesis that builds its discipline with respect to discourse that insults.

I accept that free speech ought to dependably be ensured. It is just when discourse shows an immediate peril that distinct activities ought to be constrained. At last what we need most is the security of people. With a specific end goal to accomplish this it is important to ensure the residents from immediate mischief while additionally taking into account opportunity of outflow to happen. Free discourse eventually gives worth to the distinct notwithstanding if the discourse is disrespectful, rebellious, or passionate as long as it remains peaceful then it ought to remain ensured under the First Amendment (First Amendment in History, 2010). Nonetheless, in cases that do instigate some ethical or physical mischief it is important to take a gander at this nearly; it is essential for the administration to give a forcing motivation to manage or rebuff the discourse.

I accept that the regulations that I have actualized ought to be the most extreme measure of regulation on free discourse. This is on account of people ought to have the right to talk their psyche and communicate anyway they need. Government ought not to be permitted to place regulations on representations as long as it doesn’t physically impel hurt and the administration does not have the power to limit free-gliding plans. At last the flexibility to convey what needs be is dependent upon the quality of the discourse to the single person. Nonetheless, I don’t accept that it is sensible to accept that all nations will utilize my model as a foundation. This is on account of I accept that nearby society will play excessively incredible of a part. In this way, I accept that this model ought to be actualized as an objective for all countries to attain. The base measure of free discourse to be secured might vary from mine (Tueber, 1988).

All in all, I accept that freedom of speech is an extremely fundamental piece of our administration’s relationship between residents and government authorities. In the event that we didn’t have freedom of speech, our administration wouldn’t be “of the individuals, by the individuals, for the individuals” (Monk, 2003); government authorities might be settling on all the choices. To emphasize, Freedom of speech might be something that can help a unique express their idea on something or it can help and singular damage an alternate race/type of individuals without results because of the boundless opportunity of discourse. In the event that Freedom of speech was restricted, it might help control a great deal of separation and the mobs on the grounds that they can get charged for it and be captured. At last, that is the thing that opportunity of discourse intends to me.

Works Cited

First Amendment in History. (2010). Retrieved from Illinois First Amendment Center: http://www.illinoisfirstamendmentcenter.com/history.php

Kanovitz. (2010). Freedom of Speech. New Providence (pp. pp. 42-87). New Jersey: Matthew Bender and Company, Inc.

Law publish. (2011). Retrieved from Advertising is Protected by the First Amendment: http://www.lawpublish.com/amend1.html

Monk. (2003). First Amendment. Retrieved from Interactive Constitution: http://72.32.50.200/constitution/details_explanation.php?link=120&const=08_amd_01

singer, P. (1994). Ethics. Oxford.

Tueber. (1988, March). Original Intent or How Does the Constitution Mean? Retrieved from The London Review of Books: http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/origintent.html

Introduction

“I have no great quickness of apprehension or wit…my power to follow a long and purely abstract of thought is very limited… (but) I am superior to the common run of men in noticing things which easily escape attention, and in observing them carefully” Charles Darwin, Preface to “The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals”

Participant observation (PO) is one of the more fruitful methodological approaches to studying crowd behavior in the normal society. Obviously, PO includes two main parts, there are participating and observing. Form the first moment people was born, it already been used. People use observation to watch the world around them and try to participant in it, in other words, people grow up in company with participating and observing. There are two main aspects in this assignment as well. The first aspect is to explain the context and identification of Participant Observation; in second aspect, I will focus on the ethics and reactivity of the four forms which is outlined in Norris’ work. In this part, I will combine the fourfold categorisation which developed by Gill and Johnson (2002) with the four roles mentioned in Norris’ work, and then conclude my own ideas about the ethics and reactivity in PO research.

What is Participant Observation?

Participant Observation is a qualitative method with the roots in traditional ethnographic research. PO is “the researcher attempts to participate fully in the lives and activities of subjects and thus become a member of their group, organization or community. This enables researchers to share their experiences by not merely observing what is happening but also feeing it ” (Gill and Johnson 2002:144). Form this identification, it is not difficult to find out that PO is not only a sample data collection as questionnaire; it is also an ‘insider’. When researchers doing their task, as Delbridge and Kirkpatrick (1994:37) notes that PO means ‘immersion in the research setting, with the objective of sharing in peoples’ lives while attempting to learn their symbolic world’. The mean process of Participant Observation is to understand and feel people’s subtle behavior in normal lives and ‘attempt to learn their symbolic world’. So just making sense about some basic role of human behavior or observing those behaviors is not the key point of PO, PO process include more than just observe, it also has data collection and note-taking and so on.

To be honest, according to Bryman (1989): “many definitions of ethnography and participant observation are difficult to distinguish form each other”. Speaking in theory, Ethnography is a holistic research. MaCall and Simmons define ethnography as:”…some amount of genuine social interaction in the field with the subjects of study, some direct observation of relevant event, some formal and a great deal of informal interviewing, some systematic counting, some collection of documents and artefacts; and open-endedness in the direction the study takes.” So that is why I said that PO is a qualitative method with the roots in traditional ethnographic research in the beginning. In other words, PO is included in ethnography research. “Ethnography literally means ‘a portrait a people’. An ethnography is a written descriptions of particular culture —- the customs, beliefs, and behavior – based on information gathered through fieldwork” (Marvin Harris and Orna Johnson, 2000). So the ethnography is a multidisciplinary research including ‘intensive language and culture learning, intensive study of a single field or domain, and a blend of historical, observational, and interview methods.’

The four forms of PO outlined in Norris’ work

Norris’ work considered to some ethical considerations on Field-Work in the context of his own research on police culture.

Covert research vs. Overt research

Cover research takes place in the situation that public are not aware of the people as a researcher and the researcher process, the researchers conceal themselves to the public. On the contrary, overt research take place in the situation that researchers reveal the true identity of themselves to the public and let the experimenters know the process and purpose of research even let them know the potential risk of research. However, the distinction between overt and covert research is not evident. There is a case provided by Glucksman (1994), who in the 1970s left her academic post to work on a factory assembly line to explore the reasons why feminism appeared not to be relevant to working-class women. In a sense, she was a covert observer, but her motives for the research were primarily political and she says that, at the time she was undertaking the research, she had no intention of writing the book that subsequently appeared and that was published under a pseudonym (Cavendish 1982). After the book’s publication, it was treated as an example of ethnographic research.

Every research method has the merit and demerit, so the cover and overt research are not exception. The merits and demerits of both forms conclude three main points: reactivity, ethics and access.

For covert research, one of the merit aspects is the reactivity is not a problem, using the covert research could reduce the reactivity of experiments, because they are not aware of being researched. The less reactivity research got, the more validity core data gathered. The other merit aspect of covert research is easy to access. Because of the stealth of PO practice, people do not know “the person conducting the study is a researcher. Therefore, they are less likely to adjust their behavior because of the researcher’s presence.” (Alan Bryman and Emma Bell, 2003:320). The demerit of covert research is the ethical problems. The process of research is undercover; some researches focus on some privacy of people’s behavior, so research gathered data without the experiment granted during the research. The experimenters do not get the right of “informed consent” as well, the ethical problems such as violation of the principle of privacy happened inevitably.

For the overt research, ethics is a prominent merit compared with covert research. Using overt research could give the experiment sufficient right to understanding the purpose and process of the study and the potential risk they possibly faced with. But the demerit of overt research also very obvious. The access can be arduous and timely even may not be granted; the high degree of reactivity to the research is not good to the validity of data collection.

Characteristics of Four Forms of PO

According to Norris’ work, Van Mannen divided the PO process into four parts, there are ‘SPY’, ‘VOYEUR’, ‘FAN’, ‘MEMBER’. The divide of those four forms depend on two dimensions, there are active and passive. Actually, those four roles in Norris’ work developed by Van Mannen on PO research is the some thing as Gill and Johnson’s fourfold categorization of PO, there are complete participant, complete observer, observer as participant and participant as observer.

‘SPY’ is identified by Van Mannen as ‘active and covert’ type. It is the same meaning as complete participant in Gill and Johnson’s fourfold categorization. The complete participant role “sees you as the researcher attempting to become a member of the group in which you are performing research” (Saunders, M. et al., 2008). The research concealed their true identity and purpose of research to public. During the research process, researcher will participant in the group and gain trust from he or her colleagues and make friend with experimenters. Doing like that could reduce the researchers’ access without too many problems of gather core data and take notes more easily. As Norris said: ” when observer excused himself to the toilet, hurriedly to scribble down notes, he felt like the ‘Spy’.”

‘VOYEUR’ is a ‘covert and passive’ type which is mentioned in Norris’ work, it is a complete observer role as well. Norris said in his work: “When observer deliberately placed in a position to overhear private conversations between officers, observer would feel like a ‘Voyeur’.” The complete observer is the role that researcher have any communication with people. For example, one observer wants to research the proportion of green bag using when people shooing in the supermarket. What he or she would do is just one thing: having a seat near the exit of the supermarket or check-out counter, gather the number of people who was carrying a green bag in hand when they finished shopping , and then written a recorddown on the notebook. In this observing process, no participant taken by the researchers and no reactivity reflected by the customers.

‘FAN’ is an ‘overt and passive’ type defined by Van Mannen, Gill and Johnson called this type as observer as participant role. In this role, the researchers seems like an interviewer. As Norris said: “When observer was attending incidents on the street, passively listening and watching, he was the ‘Fan’. ” this role has less participant and more observation. The researchers reveal themselves to public; people are not remained under cover.

‘MEMBER’ is identified by Van Mannen as ‘active and overt’ type. It was called participant as observer in Gill and Johnson’s findings. The participant as observer is similar as complete participant, just the complete participant is the cover role, and ‘MEMBER’ is the overt role. In this role the person reveals his or her purpose as a researcher. So in this process, the researchers should make more efforts on gaining trust form their colleagues and take part in the group actively. In Norris’ work, “when I was left guarding a prisoner, introduced as a fellow police officer, or helped in the arrest of a violent and disturbed drug-user, I was, to all intents and purpose, cast in the role of a police officer.” This role may be leads to another advantage which concluded in Robson’s study: “this is that key informants are likely to adopts a perspective of analytic reflection on the processes in which they are involved.” (Robson, 2002)

According to the analysis of those four roles outlined in Norris’ work, I concluded that it has no clear boundary among those four roles. The distinction of those four roles depends on the degree of participating and observing. So it is more likely to a subjective method that could be inflected by some factors such as the individuals’ willing or extent of reactivity and so on.

Reactivity Principles in four forms

It has different degree of reactivity in different roles. “SPY” type and “VOYEUR” type both are the cover research, so it has low extent of reactivity in those two types. In another side as well as the overt research role- “MEMBER” and “FAN”, the high degree of reactivity took place. As it is mentioned before, the low degree of reactivity took place, the high validity of core data gathered. Reactivity presents a threat to the internal and external validity of PO research.

In the covert research, the experimenters are unaware of the research process, so their behavior which researchers want to observe is the unvarnished behavior; this is a key point of gather validity data by the researchers. In the overt research, this advantage which in the cover research is disappeared. When the experimenters know the researcher’s true identity and process of research, they will raise the level of alertness on the researcher and then make decision. Even if the experiment grants to participant, their behavior will not be the same as the unvarnished behavior.

Ethical principles in four forms

There are a number of ethical problems should to be considered during the process of one research. Every research methods will meet the ethical problems including the PO. In Norris’ work, three main principle of ethics of the research role outlined: informed consent, the invasion of privacy and the trust and deceit.

Informed Consent

The doctrine of informed consent is the general principle has been used to justify taking an ethical view of the behavior of social research. Informed consent is a legal right which given to the person who was invited to participate in social research activities. The right include the experimenters should be told by the researcher about a clear appreciation and understanding of the facts, implications and future consequences of the research, including the potential risks within this research. After they know the whole thing, they also have the right to decide whether they will cooperate or participant.

“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person concerned should have legal captivity to give consent, should be so situated as to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any elements of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overteaching or any other ulterior form of constraint or conversion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.” (Homan, 1991:69; see also Katz et al., 1972:292-306). For instance, the informed consent always be used in the medical experiments. Before a surgery or other kinds of medical treatments to be taken, the signed consent form is required. the patients must understand the potential risks of the treatment an decide whether they will grant or not.

The invasion of privacy

Bulmer has written: “To insinuate oneself into a particular setting on false pretences in order to gather material for research violates the rights of the individual to be let alone, to control his personal space, and information about himself” (1982:219). People have the right of protecting their own privacies; infringing people’s privacy is an unethical act. But using covert research in the process of PO, the invasion of privacy is not so easy to be avoided. For example, if a researcher want to investigate people’s anomaly behaviors in normal lives, using covert research is necessary. Because people’s abnormal behaviors usually is private, covert thing. No one would like to share and discuss their anomaly behaviors in public. And we couldn’t design an experiment to let people show their anomaly behaviors, so the researcher must use the covert research to observe this object. In this process, the people who was observed by researcher is in the situation that his or her privacy were being infringed.

But we also have the measures to reduce this ethical problem. Because of the definition of privacy is depended on individuals, someone’s mind is not open enough to share their privacy to others, but someone not. In other words, in modern society, the privacy becomes a commodity which could be sold and bought. This ethical also could be reduced by changing the covert situation to the overt situation as well. Researcher should make friends with the experiment and gain their trust, and then tell them about the researcher’s true identity and purpose of the research and get their permit. Although it is likely to be a little time consuming, but it is a good way to access in the settings and practice PO research without guilty.

The trust and deceit

In theory, trust and deceit is the opposite side in social activities, but they are not the absolutive opposite side in social research, especially in PO research. Although the researchers have the obligation to tell the unvarnished truth to the experiment, but think about this question: “Do doctors tell the truth to dying patients?” Sometimes the truth-telling has not benefits to the healthy and safety in terms of experimenters rather than access and data collection in terms of researchers.

Conclusion

Participant Observation as a qualitative method plays an important role in society. Since crowd behavior takes place in a context of social activities, PO may involve having to take sides to gather data. In this assignment, the distinction of ethnography and PO research is not distinctness. They have a closed relationship between each other. After introduction of ethnography and PO, the next session in this assignment as well as the main part focuses on the four roles outlined in Norris’ work. Norris analyses some ethical considerations on field- work with police by using the four forms of PO research. The roles divided according to the covert and overt research, covert research and overt research are the basic approaches in PO. So as to explaining the four roles more comprehensive, the Gill and Johnson’s findings are used as well. In the second session, the reactivity and ethics as the main two aspects are anglicized in detail by several points from different angles.

Participant Observation perhaps is the earliest method in the world. However, the participant observation was not lost its own glory because of its ancient. Although the modern technology and research methodology develop in a high speed, Participant Observation is still the most basic commonly method which could continue being used in the future.

References:
Bryman, A. (1989) Research Methods and Organisation Studies. London: Unwin Hyman.
Bryman, A. and E. Bell (2003) Business Research Methods, Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Darwin, Charles (1872) The expression of the emotions in man and animals, London: John Murray, pp.374
Delbrige, R. and Kirkpatrick, I. (1994) ‘Theory and practice of participant observation’, in V.Wass and P.Wells (eds) Principles and Practice in Business and Management Research, Aldershot: Dartmouth, pp.35-62
Ditton, J. (1977), Part-Time Crime: An Ethnography of Fiddling and Pilferage (London: Macmillan).
Gill, J. and Johnson, P. (2002) Research Methods for Managers (3rd edn). London: Sage
Gilbert, N. (1993) Researching Social Life (3rd edn). London: Sage.
Harris, M. & Johnson, O. (2000). Cultural Anthropology, (5th ed.), Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Homan, R. (1991) The Ethical of Social Research. London: Pearson Education.
Saunders, M. et al. (2008) Research Methods for Business Students (5th ed.) Harlow : Financial Times Prentice Hall
Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers (2nd edn). Oxford: Blackwell.
Norris, C. (1993) ‘Some ethical considerations on field-work with the police’, in Hobbs, D. and May, T. (1993) Interpreting the field : accounts of ethnography.

Understanding Dawn & Dusk: The Evolution of Capitalism from the Perspectives of Fordism and Post-Fordism.

The pursuit of profit was not a science born perfect. Instead, as one technological or organizational invention after another led to ever increasing rates of incremental improvement in the efficiency and effectiveness of the enterprise. These improvements either reduced the cost structure, increased the market demand or both. It was just such an ‘incremental’ improvement in the early twentieth century that led Henry Ford and his Model T to begin an era of ‘namesake’ capitalism that dominated until the 1980’s and persists even today. The methods that began the period of capitalism known as Fordism was not so much just the additional of an assembly line but rather a line that moved to the worker rather that the other way around. This technology of this method was not new, having been utilized in Chicago slaughterhouses since at least the 1890’s but it was the first time that it have been used on such a scale to consumer goods with the end effect of making the automobile affordable. Perhaps even more importantly, the application of this method to automobile production, enabled the use of additional organizational technologies to be deployed. For example, bottlenecks and other production issues could be readily identified and solved and it became possible for a smaller number of managers to ‘control’ the output of a larger group of workers (Grint, 1991, p. 294-295; Clarke, 1992, p. 17). Because of the organizational paradigm shift, these methods were quickly and successfully adopted at other companies in a many different industries.

Together, changes introduced in technology and management paved the way to broader sociological changes. At the heart of these was the rise of “management” as controlling influence upon workers. While Taylorism implemented strict measures of control and efficiency to the workers, the organizational impact of Fordism harnessed individual productivity back into the firm. In some ways, practices at the Ford Motor Company were quite progressive such as his “Five Dollar Day” policy by which workers were paid for their time. While significant from a labor perspective, it also merits commented on based on the fact that this was compensation. Not just “pay” but rather compensation for becoming a cog in a wheel and a so-called ‘factor of production’ under somewhat harsh conditions. While some might consider Ford to be generous to pay his employees so a sum, others might not that it could also be viewed as a particularly shrewd means to decrease absenteeism, work interruptions, poor quality and perhaps most importantly, as a means to fend off interest in trade unionization by workers. In fact, once instituted, the results were dramatic as the following were observed, “absenteeism fell from 10% to less than 0.5%… turnover fell from nearly 400% to less than 15%…. productivity rose so dramatically that despite the doubling of wages and shortening of the workday production costs fell” (Clarke, 1992, pp. 20-21).

With regards to organization and sociological implication, in the past, the dominant method of work was the “craftsman” who was a skilled worker and spent [his] time on creating specialized and unique projects and the family was, in a sense the primary economic unit of production (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 191). Ford needed relatively few craftsmen but rather he needed many comparatively unskilled workers that were willing to submit to Tayloristic-type management in exchange for “…regularly rising wages… as well as general guarantees of employment security” (Freidman 2000, p. 60). The widespread employment of an emerging American middle class by a growing number of large, vertically integrated oligopolistic firms bred the beginning of mass production. With ever increasing levels of productivity as a result of newer technologies and greater organizational control, more goods were produced at even lower cost levels. Not surprisingly, in return, this brought about new levels of mass consumption of mass-produced products by the burgeoning ranks of the working class (Friedman, 2000, pp. 59-60). This produced a cycle that was both self-reinforcing and self-entrenching.

As the system of Fordism perpetuated itself, it began to create a bit of a monster. Almost by definition, Fordism is epitomized and stereotyped by very large corporations. For example, General Motors, employing the same tactics as Ford (General Motorism does not have quite the ring to it of Fordism), became the largest corporation in world in the 1950’s to the extent that this one firm had a macroeconomic impact on the US gross national product (think of Wal-Mart today with over $250,000,000,000 in annual sales). These companies that made their profits on economies of scale on the consumption of goods that were mass-produced and mass-consumed until they hit a bit of a ‘speed bump’ in the 1970’s. These speed bumps took on the form of a number of historical events as well as growing trends. For example, the oil crisis of the 1970’s, a wheat shortage and unrest among organized labor groups in addition to a “saturation of the market in consumer durables” let to the beginning of the end of what had came to be known as the Fordism era. The economy-wide, these changes were greatest for the types of companies that profited most from the technological and organizational developments that created them. Thus, the changes for ‘big’ corporate America came about through the combined phenomena of changes in markets and changes in labor, ironic but fitting as the very things that made them were undoing them, or, at least, causing them to learn to re-make themselves as conditions changed (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 181).

As America consumers had consumed about all they could, firms began to logically seek out new markets such as Latin America, Asia or European regions that had yet to be hardly touched with regards to US produced consumer goods. This globalization of business introduced a number of ‘new’ concepts to US firms. Perhaps most importantly, that simply selling the same widget may not be a path to profit. Interestingly enough, the corporate giant General Motors, in the now ubiquitous tale, was one of the first to discover this lesson as management noticed very disappointing sales for the Chevrolet Nova automobile south of the US border. Only later did they learn that “No va” exactly translates to “no go”… a hard but valuable lesson as America goes global.

Within the borders of the US, it was not that consumers no longer wanted to make purchases, rather, they wanted new products. Listening to the market was not a strength of the Fordist system. As Henry Ford himself said in regards to the Model T, “… any color you want, as long as its black”, mass production was not noted for being flexible. The idea of flexibility became central to the emergence of what has come to be known as the post-Fordism era.

“Flexibility” is reflected in post-Fordism in a number of ways. In regards to employment, in an effort to cope with changes in demand, corporations began to turn to the notion of flexible employment arrangements in order to avoid the high fixed costs of maintaining a large workforce in times of low demand. This was reflected by a small, core workforce that was supplemented by subcontractors and part-time workers and, temporary workers, if needed (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 183). This is much in contrast to the masses of employees who, either through the employer or the Union, operated on the premise of life-time employment.

Another means by which post-Fordism employed the concept of flexibity in employment was the introduction of ideas such as ‘cross-training’. Rather than having a one person – one specific job mantra, the new era of productivity espoused employees who were trained to do any number of tasks. This flexible functionality in production employees was adopted by companies with the idea of being able to adapt faster to changing demand and by employees in order to enrich jobs and to gain increased employment security (Pietrykowski, 1999, p. 187); Grint, 1991, pp. 296-297). In addition, firms began to outsource non-core functions such as cleaning or security in order to achieve lower costs and reduce the size of bureaucracies often accompanying large companies (Friedman 2000, p. 71).

Overall, the change in markets and market pressures as well as the shifts in labor strategies that began to be noticeable in the 1970’s, marked the transition of the dominance of a few oligopolistic firms from a half century reign of mass-production to the current period of ‘mass customization’. Seemingly at odds with one another, the terms “mass customization” reveal an dynamic tension that is as evident on the factory floor and is in the market place.

As technologies emerged that made it possible to store and analyze large amounts of data collided with the ability to precisely control manufacturing processes, the reality of being able to cost effectively introduced customer-requested variances in the processes of production heralded the birth of mass customization. In stark contrast to a ‘one-option’ Model T, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler (the ‘Big 3’) offered a plethora of models and options ranging from color, upholstery and interior appointments, engines, transmissions and more all for largely the same cost as one ‘off the rack’. This flexibility is easily reflected by a conversation with any US person over age 25 when asked what ordering anything but a ‘stock cheeseburger’ was like in the eighties. Now, the experience is much different with Burger King even going to far as to adopt the slogan, “We do it your way.”

While mass customization continues to grow and flourish, mass production is not dead by any means but continues to be redefined in ways that “modify traditional [Fordism] relationships between capital and labor” (Pietrykowski 1999, p. 194). At the heart of Fordism is the congruence between large, vertically integrated firms competing in oligopolistic markets by striving for cost efficiencies through mass production principles. In contrast, post-Fordism is a combined economy / method that makes great use of the ability to deliver relatively customized goods on a large scale by using multi-skilled workers in firm that is strives to be market-sensitive so as to be able match demand (Friedman 2000, pp. 59-60). Though in many ways Fordism and post-Fordism could be viewed as being antagonistic to one another, by understanding the progression of early management styles and the accomplishments in productivity achieved, the idea that one is the necessary precursor to the other cannot be overlooked. And so, in seeking greater understand of these concepts as periods of time during which there is a changing of dominant paradigms, the analogy of “night and day” is not so appropriate as perhaps “dawn and dusk” in that they are two perspectives on the same entity of the path to profitability.

Works Consulted

Clarke, S. (1992). “What in the F—‘s Name is Fordism”. Fordism and Flexibility. (Gilbert, N., Burrows, R., & Pollert, A., eds.). St. Martins Press: New York, New York.

Friedman, A. (2000). “Microregulation and Post-Fordism: Critique and Development of Regulation Theory”. New Political Economy, (5), 1, pp. 59-76.

Grint, K. (1991). The Sociology of Work. Polity Press: Cambridge, UK.

Pietrykowski, B. (1999, June). “Beyond the Fordist/Post-Fordist Dichotomy: Working Through The Second Industrial Divide”. Review of Social Economy, (LVII), 2, pp. 177-198.

Evaluate the potential implications of the different field roles researchers might adopt when carrying out an Ethnographic study of the workplace. The study of Ethnography, “involves the ethnographer participating overtly or covertly, in people’s daily lives for an extended period of time, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions- in fact collecting whatever data are available to throw light on the issues that are focus of the research” (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995: 1). Ethnography creates a platform to identify various new issues and gives importance to the participant’s opinions and experiences by focussing explicitly on social context. During the Ethnographic research, a number of new questions concerning to the workplace are raised apart from the initial questions. Ethnographic research has some disadvantages like the replication of the work is not possible, purpose of research may not be fulfilled, time consuming, data generated may not be accurate, may contain researcher’s own assumptions and it is challenging for ethnographer to gain access to the research site. (Friedman and McDaniel, 1998) In this essay, I am going to start with defining different field roles in the terms of overt and covert role, which researchers adopt during ethnographic research. Then, I will be discussing various implications of these different field roles with relevant experiences of researchers in their methodological ethnographic study at various workplaces.

There are different roles which researchers adopt during ethnographic study at work. They are Complete Participation, Complete observer, Observer as Participant and Participant as observer. In the complete participant role, the researcher becomes member of the organisation or group which is being studied and doesn’t reveal his or her purpose to the group members but continues to do with the research at work. In complete observer role, the researcher does not reveal the purpose of his or her activity to the members but observes about the activity carefully and carries out research. In this role, there is always a scope for misunderstanding the perspectives of the participants through observing his or her behaviour without knowing actual intentions. These two roles are “Covert” and the other roles like Observer as Participant and Participant as Observer are “Overt”. In Observer as participant role, the researcher just observes by revealing his or her purpose of the research to the members or organisation and in participant as observer the researcher participates directly by revealing purpose. (Saunders et al, 2007)

In the initial days of fieldwork, the researcher is always considered as novice in his new and strange surroundings. The researcher takes overt or covert role depending upon the nature and purpose of his research at different workplaces. The role which the researcher adopts may change in the process of his research to achieve his preset targets. But, the process of obtaining data is always a serious consent in the Ethnographic study. Access to the workplace where research has to be carried out is a critical issue; it is matter of getting permission to become a part of activities of the workers and organisation. In overt role, access to the research is obtained through series of negotiations between researcher and the management. The study of Barbera- Stein (1979:15) on day-care centres for pre-school children illustrates that, even after her repeated requests for permission to observe the staff she has been given limited access to the staff indulged in children puppet play sessions. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995) The major concern of Ethnographic study is not just getting access to the organisation but the acceptance of the workers to contribute for the research. The field work of Jason Heyes (1996:355-356) at chemical plant as observer as participant tells that even though Jason was given complete freedom by management to observe the production process, workers were not so co-operative giving information in initial stages as they found him suspicious. But later when his true purpose was known, workers were more formal and interactive to him. The other argument for not providing complete access is due to lack of trust. Unless the researcher builds up a trusting relationship he can’t gain valid information as participants suspect him as spy or due to little knowledge about social research. Kaplan’s studies on New England fishermen illustrates that she was believed to be either government official or investigator, which made fishermen to be reluctant to her research. (Kaplan, 1991:233)

When the access to the workplace is subsequently blocked by gatekeepers, the researcher takes the covert role in getting access to the workplace. Also, this role is adopted when the researcher feels that workers may provide untypical data due to private reasons. In covert role, the researcher might become one of the members of organisation where he participates directly in production activities. Donald Roy’s research (1952:427) in steel processing plant shows that he joined plant as radial drill operator and carried out research work by recording in his memory and noting them down at end of day without revealing his identity to his fellow workers and management. In this type of research, the researcher has to deceive the gate-keepers, as access seems to be impossible or permission is constrained. But covert role has severe constraints on the research as it will be limited to some extent and experiences great difficult in hiding the identity and maintaining the trust. If the identity of the researcher is known in any circumstances during research, it may lead to greater difficulties and he may face hostility from the organisation or group. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995)

In Ethnographic research, personal appearance is very important as sometimes it is necessary for the researcher to dress in the same way as people being studied. In covert role, the researcher must present himself similar to the participants like that of Wilson (1963), where she took the role of an assembly worker so that her fellow workers don’t doubt her integrity. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995) Even when the researcher takes the overt role, the appearance can be important factor as it helps in developing relationship and gaining trust among participants. With different categories of participants and various social contexts, it is necessary for the researcher to create impression and manage appearance irrespective whatever role he or she adopts in-order to fit in any shifting situations. In some cases, the identity can be developed through skills, knowledge or expertise which the researcher might already posses. In case of Ram’s research (1996) in clothing industry his skills and knowledge about the industry (through working and family business) gave him an advantage to find out the problems in the management activities in relation to market and on the shop floor.

Due to nature of its process, Ethnographic study is always time consuming process and it has great scope for researcher’s interests to get diverted from actual objectives. During the fieldwork the personal experiences of the workers sometimes not only influence the researcher’s objectives but also it may result in rise of new questions concerning their activities. Piore’s (1983) research in factories on worker’s acquisition of new skills concludes that his views about process of acquiring new skills by workers were irrelevant after listening to them. Moreover, his research discovers that the social relations among workers which make them to acquire new skills from each other. In covert role, due to complete participant in production activities it sometimes leads to over rapport between researcher and the workers, which may affect the data collection. Even in overt role, over rapport with any particular group in organisation may lead to problems of rapport with other groups and may also limit researcher’s rapport with the management. In his study of local union leadership, Miller (1952:98) outlines his problem due to close relationship with union leaders. In order to obtain more information about union groups, his friendly relations with some union leaders not only resulted in limited data collection but also lead to problems of rapport with other groups. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995)

In Ethnographic study, the personal characteristics of the researcher like age, gender, race, religion and ethnicity are absolutely determinate. Irrespective of the role adopted these personal characteristics form serious implications of the research. The research work of Linda Dickens (1998) on “gender equality” points out the implications of gender in the workplace in terms of participation, pay for work, work time, flexibility. The effects of gender can be obtained by focusing on the roles of women researchers, where gender stops them from entering into activities which are accessible to men. In same way, male researchers find difficult to get access to women’s world especially where cultures are bonded with religion. From the experience of Rainbird (1990:78), I can draw that even though her dressing appearance made her to attend meetings like that of men but she was restricted from drinking. On the other hand, she had good access to women’s activities. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995) In similar way race, ethnicity, religion and age can also set limitations and lay problems for the researchers.

The role of complete participant seems to be very attractive as it avoids the need for negotiations, provides genuine information and obtain inside knowledge. But, becoming member of the organisation or group sometimes may place researcher in great strain, especially if his identity is blown out. This may lead to hostility, it will be difficult to complete entire work and sometimes it may result in severe embarrassment for researcher itself. With all these implications, the concept of reflexivity is argued by researchers like Jules- Rosette (1978a & b) which evokes the necessity of total immersion in “native culture”. It suggests that researcher should not be just passing member for the organisation or group when intending to do research, but actually he should become real member. This makes reflexivity a significant feature of social research. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995)

In Ethnographic study, the levels of stress and strain at fieldwork are considerably high for the researcher irrespective of the role he adopts. In covert research, there is always a sense of insecurity while maintaining his cover on identity along with making of research opportunities. In overt research, there is strain of living with an unclear and uncertain position provided research is carried out in ethical manner. The researcher might induce to wide range of feelings like safety, fear, anger, frustration and sensitivity. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995) In Ethnographic research, the degree of new issues arising from the research process is high and unique depending on particular context. But these issues and experiences are not so easy to replicate, merely impossible due to which data validity and selective reporting is a concern. For instance, Burawoy’s research (1979) at same steel plant where Roy (1954) had worked for several years, had failed to reproduce same findings and perceptions of the workers. Thus, even though ethnography generates new insights every time in research but it always have a concern in proving history, which raises a question about validity and reliability of research findings. (Friedman and McDaniel, 1998)

There are some ethical issues which are concerned around social research concentrating mainly on the behaviour of the researcher and participants. In covert research, the researcher carries out research without knowing to other participants. This issue always raises the question of deception and manipulation which occurs due to obtaining access by hiding identity. Even in overt research, sometimes researcher may not reveal his true purpose in-order to obtain valid information. Research participants should be given enough assurance on their privacy and respect to their feelings. The issue of privacy is also serious concern for ethnographic study as the researcher in any role might get access into private data at workplace which are intended to be secretive. The information which researcher collects during his fieldwork should provide benefits for the organisation or group than creating any harm, creating positive and outright human benefits. (Hammersely and Atkinson, 1995)

Conclusion

In ethnographic study, direct participation and interaction with workers at workplace makes its contribution unique. It provides detail analysis, perceptions of participants and scope for new issues which cannot be achieved through other studies. In the process of Ethnographic research, researchers adopt overt or covert role which has set various implications like access to workplace, building trust, negotiations, selective reporting, personal characteristics, validity and reliability of the data which are stated in the essay. Even though study is time consuming and risky, it has an important role in research as it provide insights to changes in workplace, reliable and unbiased information by considering the perceptions of the participants and experiences of the researcher in a social context. Thus, various implications of the overt and covert role are discusses in the essay with relevant experiences of other researchers.

Introduction and Background

In most places throughout the world, the term “migrant” conjures images of men, while the phrase, “migrants and their families” introduces women and children into the picture. Yet, statistics show that half of all migrants globally are female and studies document that women are active participants in migration, both within and between countries (Boyd, 2006).

Philippine migration started as early as 1900s during the time of American colonial rule. The first Filipinos to migrate came from Ilocos and they worked in pineapple plantations in Hawaii, agriculture in California and fish canneries in Washington and Alaska in 1920s. During 1960s, different category of Filipino workers migrated to America, Canada, and some European countries. They were the so-called professionals working as nurses, doctors, and medical technicians.

In 1970s, Filipinos were in demand in industrialized countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan, and Malaysia. They filled up the labor shortages in these countries and worked as construction workers, nannies, domestic workers, nurse and entertainers. The phenomenon in Philippine labor migration started during these years since large numbers of workers leave the country for employment.

However, in 1980s a different trend in Philippine labor migration has emerged called feminization of migration. (Explain why?) This means that more and more women participated in the area of labor migration. (Add further explanation) A lot of factors attributed to the proliferation of women migration. In the previous studies, women migration could be a result of poverty, globalization, and pressure from family, among others. But the most common reason of these women who wants to find better opportunities in their chosen countries of destination is poverty. To escape poverty, these women leave their work and try their luck overseas. Some of them are professionals while others are a mere high school graduates working mostly in the services sector. However, the basic question lies in their welfare and protection in the third country.

Hence, this study is conducted to identify the common issues and concerns encountered by these women and try to examine the Philippine government policy thru the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) to ensure the welfare and protection of these women in their chosen country of destination. If possible, this study will try to influence the DOLE policy makers by presenting sufficient data to justify the need to formulate policies specifically for women migrant workers (if there is none).

Theoretical Framework

Several theories are presented in this section to help the readers understand or gain insights on the migration of Filipino women migrant workers. Below are some of the theories:

Feminist theory, according to Wikipidia (13 April 2009), aims to understand the nature of inequality and focuses on gender politics, power relations and sexuality. While generally providing a critique of social relations, much of feminist theory also focuses on analyzing gender inequality and the promotion of women’s rights, interests, and issues.

Based on the same source mentioned above, the feminist legal theory is based on the belief that the law has been instrumental women’s historical subordination. The project of feminist legal theory is twofold. First, feminist jurisprudence seeks to explain ways in which the law played a role in women’s former subordinate status. Second, feminist legal theory is dedicated to changing women’s status through a reworking of the law and its approach to gender.

One of the theories that best describes the outflow of Filipino women abroad is the theory on globalization. Globalization (Wikipedia, 11 April 2009) in its literal sense is the process of transformation of local or regional phenomena into global ones. It can be described as a process by which the people of the world are unified into a single society and function together. This process is a combination of economic, technological, socio-cultural and political forces. Globalization is often used to refer to economic globalization, that is, integration of national economies into the international economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, and the spread of technology.

Another theory that explains migration is the neoclassical economic theory (Sjaastad 1962; Todaro 1969). It suggests that international migration is related to the global supply and demand for labor. Nations with scarce labor supply and high demand will have high wages that pull immigrants in from nations with a surplus of labor (family.jrank.org, 2009).

The segmented labor market theory (Piore 1979) argues that First World economies are structured so as to require a certain level of immigration. This theory suggests that developed economies are dualistic, they have a primary market of secure, well remunerated work and a secondary market of low wage work. Segmented labor market theory argues that immigrants are recruited to fill these jobs that are necessary for the overall economy to function but are avoided by the native-born population because of the poor working conditions associated with the secondary labor market (family.jrank.org, 2009).

World systems theory (Sassen 1988) argues that international migration is a by-product of global capitalism. Contemporary patterns of international migration tend to be from the periphery (poor nations) to the core (rich nations) because factors associated with industrial development in the First World generated structural economic problems, and thus push factors, in the Third World (family.jrank.org, 2009).

In the Todaro-Harris model, the decision to migrate is largely determined by the individual’s expectation of earning a higher income, with expected income being defined as actual urban income multiplied by the probability of obtaining employment (Ullah, 2004).

Conceptual Framework

Figure 1 presents the research paradigm of the study.

Figure 1: Research Design

As shown in the diagram, Filipino women migrant workers are also experiencing some issues and concerns in their chosen country of destination. This study will find out how these issues and concerns will affect the formulation of Philippine labor policy.

Statement of the Problem

This study deals on the Feminization of the Philippine Labor Migation as well as its implications on the country’s policy on workers’ welfare and protection.

Specifically, this study aims to answer the following questions:

What is the personal profile of the respondents based on the following:

Age

Marital Status

Level of Education

Employment Status

Nature of Employment

Length of Contract

What are the common issues and concerns encountered by migrant women in the receiving/destination countries?

What are the roles of the government particularly the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) in ensuring the well-being of the Filipino women migrant workers?

What is/are the policy/ies of DOLE in dealing with the migration of women in terms of:

Welfare

Protection

With reference to question 2, what are the implications of these common issues and concerns in the formulations of labor policy/ies directed to Filipino migrant women?

Hypothesis

The following hypotheses were considered by the researcher in the study:

The common issues and concerns encountered by migrant women in the receiving/destination countries are not significant.

The roles of the government particularly DOLE are minimal in ensuring the well-being of the Filipino women migrant workers.

The policy/ies of DOLE in dealing with the migration of women are not significant in terms of:

Welfare

Protection

With reference to question 2, the implications of these common issues and concerns are not significant in the formulations of labor policy/ies directed to Filipino migrant women.

Significance of the Study

Since the onset of the phenomenon called feminization of Philippine labor migration in 1980s, a number of researchers attempted to determine the factors that trigger Filipino women from leaving the country in search for a better opportunity abroad. This study will try to delve into the implications of the common issues and concerns encountered by migrant women in the destination countries to the formulation of labor policies/programs by DOLE.

Further, the conduct of this study will acquaint the public on the difficulties encountered by the Filipino women migrant workers abroad. This will also serve as a guide to the Philippine government thru DOLE to formulate policies addressing specifically the issues and concerns of the women migrant workers.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

This study focuses on the common issues and concerns faced by Filipino migrant women and its implications on the formulation of government policies to ensure their welfare and protection.

The respondents shall be the women migrant workers employed in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). In 2008, KSA was the top destination country for newly hires Filipino migrant workers with a deployment of 76,148. Of this figure, 24,508 were female workers. To save time and money, Slovin’s formula shall be employed to determine the sample size of the population.

Particularly, this study shall concentrate gathering data in Alkhobar, KSA wherein one of the two POLOs in Saudi Arabia is located. Sets of questionnaire shall be disseminated to the respondents with the assistance of POLO-Alkhobar. The distribution of questionnaires shall be done in the POLO office wherein the respondents paid visit to request for assistance, asking for an advice and other grievances among others.

The researcher shall also use interview method with the concerned government officials, non-government organizations (NGOs), private sectors and internet to facilitate the conduct of the thesis.

Definition of Terms

The following are the common terms used in this study. The terms were defined according to the context of the study. Some terms were taken from the DOLE and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) Glossary for Migration:

Country of Origin

A country where the women workers permanently resides.

Feminization of Migration

The increasing participation of women in the field of labor migration.

Labour Migration

The movement of persons from their home state to another for the purpose of employment.

Philippine Overseas Labor Office (POLO)

The POLO serves as the DOLE’s overseas operating arm in the implementation of Philippine labor policies and programs for the protection and promotion of the welfare and interests of Filipinos working abroad.

Push-Pull Factors

Push factors are the reasons that trigger the workers to migrate in their chosen country of destination whereas pull factors are the attracting forces that lead them to migrate.

Receiving Country

The chosen country of destination by the worker.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This chapter presented the different literature and studies conducted by different authors both local and foreign to support the concepts and theories of the phenomenon called Feminization of Labor Migration.

Related Literature

In a study entitled, The Feminization of Philippine Migration in Europe (05 March 2009), the Philippine Migration is brought about by a combination of socio-cultural, economic, and political factors in the Philippines that push Philippine women to migrate, as well as factors in Europe that pull them to immigrate. The economic crisis in the Philippines has led to an increasing unemployment and underemployment, with practically “no work available” within the country.

According to that same study, it was mentioned that as migrant workers, Filipinas experience a host of problems related to their employment situations. Because they are women, who come from the so called “Third World”, they are allowed to work only in the lowest job categories. They are particularly vulnerable to various forms of exploitative labour practices, being employed in jobs, which make use of their highly skilled and qualified labour at very low cost.

The fact is women migrants are indeed subject to various forms of abuse when they work overseas – they are paid low wages if they are paid at all, they work in terrible working conditions, and are subject to various forms of physical, sexual and psychological violence – calling for necessary interventions on the part of the state (Rodriguez, 1995).

With reference to the study entitled The Feminization of Philippine Migration in Europe (05 March 2009), it was stated that the withholding of wages and documents such as passports, low pay, long working hours, the lack of opportunities for meaningful career advancement, and the lack of work benefits and job security, are only some of the problems, which Filipina migrant workers experience in the work place.

Many believed labor export exposed women migrants to harsh forms of sexual violence. Others believed that the out-migration of women was weakening the Philippines’ social and moral fabric and still others, believed that the out-migration of Filipinas as domestic workers and entertainers threatened the Philippine state’s subject status on the world stage (Rodriguez, 1995).

The feminization of Philippine overseas labor migration, which had been male-dominated until the 1980s, belies the failure of women’s empowerment in society. The increasing out-migration of women indicates a decline, or continuing limitation, in the share of work available to women in the production process; employment opportunities remain restricted and income insufficient. The majority of female OFWs are still in “traditional” reproductive work such as domestic work and cultural entertainment, health care and nursing, where the pay is low and the nature of the work involves a higher exposure to physical, sexual and other abuse. This in turn underscores the international division of labor, in which the Third World, or the South, does the labor-intensive and lower-paid work. It also demonstrates a persistent gendered division of labor at the global level, with the South taking on the menial aspects of reproductive work, which are thereby “feminized,” secondary, subservient, and inferior to the “masculine,” dominant North (de Guzman, 2003).

The increased understanding of the situation of migrant women should provide the basis for the formulation of policies and programmes that promote their equality with migrant men and that safeguard their well-being (UN, 2004).

Related Studies

For a long time, the typical migrant has been viewed as male and until 3 decades ago, female migration was generally overlooked. Since the middle of the 1970s, there has been a growing interest in women’s immigration, first with the increase in family reunification, especially in Europe and from the 1980s, until today, the growing recruitment of migrant women for labour market needs especially in service (Casas and Garson, 2005).

In recent years the term feminization of migration has become commonplace, even entering the public domain through media reports (INSTRAW, 2007).

According to Nancy V. Yanger, in her study on the Feminization of Migration (2006), there has been a change in the international migration patterns of women: more are moving from one country to another on their own than to join their husbands or other family members. This feminization of migration raises several key policy concerns about women’s security and human rights in sending and destination countries.

About half of all migrant workers are now women (IOM, 2008), with more women migrating independently and as main income earners rather than accompanying male relatives (Martin, 2005).

Insofar as men are increasingly unable to fulfill their traditional roles as economic providers to their families, and the demand for female caregivers continue to rise in the industrial countries, the pressure on women to seek new survival strategies for their families will continue to fuel the increase of female migrants worldwide (INSTRAW, 2007).

The feminization of migration had also produced specifically female forms of migration, such as the commercialized migration of domestic workers and caregivers, the migration and trafficking of women for the sex industry and the organized migration of women for marriage (UNESC, 2006).

Women are often recruited internationally to do reproductive work in other people’s houses or for service sector jobs such as waitressing or entertainment that are poorly and marked by high instability and turnover. Many of these jobs are unregulated because they are of borderline legality (such as sex work) or because they are not included in the scope of the destination country’s labor laws, which primarily cover productive work. The unregulated nature of reproductive work, which allows no recourse through the legal system, places many women migrants at risk of exploitation in the form of low wages, poor working conditions, or physical or sexual abuse (Yinger, 2006).

Perhaps the most notable feature of female migration is the extent to which it is founded upon the continued reproduction and exploitation of gender inequalities by global capitalism. For the most part, female labor migrants perform women’s work as nannies, maids and sex workers – the worst possible occupational niches in terms of remuneration, working conditions, legal protections and social recognition. In this way, gender acts as a basic organizing principle of labor markets in destination countries, reproducing and reinforcing pre-existing gender patterns that oppress women. But it is not only women who perform these jobs, but women of a particular race, class, ethnicity and/or nationality – i.e. gender cross-cuts with other forms of oppression to facilitate the economic exploitation of women migrants and these relegation to a servile (maids) and/or despised (sex workers) status (INSTRAW, 2007).

In the north, the growing involvement of immigrant women in paid work is mainly the result of an increase in the demand for labour in unskilled and poorly paid jobs in the service sectors in immigrant-receiving countries. Domestic service, hotels and restaurants and personal care are all sectors that have large recourse to foreign migration labour and the development of exclusively female migration flows (Sassen, 1993). Immigrant women work in those jobs that are abandoned by the receiving country nationals (Casas and Garson, 2005).

INSTRAW’s Columbia case study found a significant number of middle-age women whose main reason to migrate was not related to economic or family reasons (as their children are already grown up) but rather to the expectation that new relationship opportunities are easier to come by in Spain than in Columbia, where women their age have a difficult time finding new sexual partners. Both the Columbian and the Dominican case studies found that unsatisfactory marriages factored in many women’s decision to migrate, as it was easier for them to end the relationship after they had moved to another country (which contradicts the common assumption that the migration itself is the cause of the marital break-up) (INSTRAW, 2007).

The studies have revealed the 2 dimensions of the role played by immigrant women in the economies of both their sending and their receiving societies: an active role on the labour market, sending remittances, becoming heads of household, etc. Certain academic and political circles would see to have established a link between feminization of migration, the active role of women as economic and development agents and empowerment. It is important to note that even though immigrant women participate in the economics of their countries of origin and destination, by sending large remittances and maintaining transnational households, this role as social and economic agents does not necessarily imply an increase in their status (empowerment) (Casas and Garson, 2005).

As INSTRAW’s (2007) (and many other) case studies show, by allowing women to become economic providers for themselves and for their transnational families, migration can increase their self-esteem, personal autonomy and status. Migrant women often measure their achievements only in terms of the benefits they are able to provide to their families and they are praised by others in similar terms.

Migration can provide a vital source of income for migrant women and their families, and earn them increased autonomy, self-confidence and social status (IOM, 2008).

In a study conducted by Monica Boyd entitled Women in International Migration: The Context of Exit and Entry for Empowerment and Exploitation (2006), women migrant workers who are admitted legally but temporarily, may be poorly protected by existing labor law in destination countries and they may have little recourse to state protection if abuse occurs.

In countries of origin and also in countries of destination (IOM, 2008), female migrants may be victims of negative attitudes about women working at all, attitudes that affect their rights to leave the country without permission to receive further education or training and to engage in certain occupations. Globally, the International Labour Office (ILO) reports that the most frequently encountered issues regarding the working conditions of women migrant workers are low remuneration, heavy workloads with long working hours and inadequate rest periods, limited training facilities and poor career development. In some countries such workers also lack freedom of movement. Women migrant workers’ jobs are normally located very low on the occupational ladder and usually not, or only inadequately covered by labour legislation or other social security or welfare provisions (ILO, 1999).

The broader theoretical approach to the analysis of networks as a factor behind migration now extends to the role of women in migration. A further factor that favours the increased visibility of female immigration is that migration is no longer considered to be the result of an individual decision but rather is best viewed as an integral part of family and community strategies (Stark, 1984) (Casas and Garson, 2005).

Women migrate to work abroad in response to gender-specific labour demand in countries of destination that reflects existing values, norms, stereotypes and hierarchies based on gender. Thus, although laws regarding the admission of migrant workers are generally gender neutral, the demand for domestic workers, nurses, and entertainers focuses on the recruitment of migrant women. Moreover, in countries of origin as well, female labour supply is the result of gender norms and stereotypes that gear women to certain traditionally female occupations. Recruitment intermediaries, whether private or official, also contribute to reinforce gender segregation in the labour market (UN, 2004).

Women have always been present in migratory flows, traditionally as spouses, daughters, or dependents of male migrants. Nowadays women are increasingly migrating as the main economic providers for their households – meaning that they migrate autonomously as breadwinners – a contribution that has served to increase their visibility within migratory flows (UN-INSTRAW, 2006).

The global demand for migrant labour now prioritizes women’s specific skills and traditional roles, such that: a) paid domestic work is increasingly performed by women who leave their own countries, communities and often their families; b) domestic service draws not only women from poor socio-economic classes but also women of relatively high status in their own countries; and c) the development of service-based economies in post-industrial nations favours the international migration of women workers. In the developed world, the combination of women’s increased participation in the labour force and the failure to develop family-friendly labour policies and child, elderly, and disabled care options have lead to a strong demand for migrant women workers. Migrant women are thus a central support system for women’s freedom in the developed world – and they make a contribution that is under-recognized and undervalued (UN-INSTRAW, 2006).

The increasing feminization of the Philippine labor export industry suggests that women’s desperation to overcome the hardships brought about by worsening socioeconomic conditions in the country is the major push factor that drives them to leave, to bet on a brighter future abroad – while turning almost a blind eye to the risks involved (Philippine Migrants Rights Watch, 2004).

The feminization of international labor migration in the Philippines can be seen from several vantage points. For one, it can be seen as an extension of the freedom of mobility afforded Filipino women. For another, the involvement of Filipino women in international labor migration can be seen as a response to the demand for women workers in the more developed countries. The demand for women migrant workers also came at a time when the demand for male workers was slowing down in the Middle East, which was the major destination of migrant workers in the 1970s and the early 1980s. Countries of origin such as the Philippines were poised to respond to the demand for women migrant workers given the experience they had gained with large-scale overseas employment in the 1970s (Guerrero, et. al, 2001).

Although women give different reasons why they consider overseas employment as a work option, these reasons invariably boil down to economic or financial considerations. Migrant workers mention the following specific or immediate reasons: “to get a job”, “to support family needs”, “to send siblings and children to school”, “to pay for medical treatment of parents”, “to pay debts” (Villalba, 2002).

Compared to other countries of origin, the Philippines has, in fact, instituted various measures to ensure the protection of women migrant workers. Early on and several times thereafter, the government had instituted several bans on the deployment of domestic workers (1982 for Saudi Arabia, which did not push through; a general ban in 1987 and the gradual lifting of the ban as better conditions obtain in the receiving countries; ban for Singapore in 1995) and in the deployment of entertainers to Japan in 1991, in the hopes of stopping the migration of women migrant workers. Bans, as our experience showed, do not work; instead they only lead to irregular migrations, which puts women migrant workers in greater danger. Under the circumstances, the government instituted various approaches to protect women migrant workers (Guerrero, et. al, 2001).

Republic Act No. 8042 (POEA, 1996) popularly known as the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995 is an act instituting the policies of overseas employment and establish a higher standard of protection and promotion of the welfare of migrant workers, their families and overseas Filipinos in distress, and for the other purposes. Specifically, Section 2, paragraph d (Declaration of Policies) stated, “The State affirms the fundamental equality before the law of women and men and the significant role of women in nation-building. Recognizing the contribution of overseas migrant women workers and their particular vulnerabilities, the State shall apply gender sensitive criteria in the formulation and implementation of policies and programs affecting migrant workers and the composition of bodies tasked for the welfare of migrant workers.

In addition, Section 4 (Deployment of Migrant Workers) declared, “The State shall deploy overseas Filipino workers only in countries where the rights of Filipino migrant workers are protected. The government recognizes any of the following as a guarantee on the part of the receiving country for the protection and the rights of overseas Filipino workers: a) it has existing labor and social laws protecting the rights of migrant workers; b) it is a signatory to multilateral conventions, declarations or resolutions relating to the protection of migrant workers; c) it has concluded a bilateral agreement or arrangement with the government protecting the rights of overseas Filipino workers; and d) it is taking positive, concrete measures to protect the rights of migrant worker (POEA, 1996).

Implications of the Reviewed Studies and Literature to the Present Study

The reviewed studies and literature were presented to support or refute the theories and concept employed in the study. Further, it is one way to appreciate the reasons behind the out-migration of women since 1980s and the risks and hardships involved.

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Method of Research

The researcher shall made use of the descriptive research. According to Calderon and Gonzales (1993), descriptive research is a purposive process of gathering, analyzing and tabulating data about prevailing conditions, practices, beliefs, processes, trends and cause-effect relationships and then making adequate and accurate interpretation about such data with or without the aid of statistical method.

Population and Sampling

The respondents in this study shall be the Filipino women migrant workers employed in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) as professionals and household workers among others. To determine the sample size of the population, the researcher shall employ the Slovin’s formula. In 2008, 24,508 women workers were deployed in KSA. Using Slovin’s formula, the sample size of 24,508 is 100 respondents. Alkhobar, KSA is the preferred place for the conduct of this study wherein one of the two POLOs in Saudi Arabia is located.

The researcher shall made use of the Convenience Sampling in survey questionnaire in the selection of respondents and Purposive Sampling Technique in identifying the interviewees.

Data Gathering Tool/s

Primary and secondary instruments shall be utilized to aid the researcher in gathering data/information. A questionnaire shall be constructed that details the profile of the female migrant workers as well as the common issues and concerns encountered by Filipino women migrant workers. Webster Dictionary defines questionnaire as a set of questions for obtaining statistically useful or personal information from an individual. The questionnaire shall be presented in a question-answer format with suitable answers so that the respondents can easily indicate their response by placing a checkmark on the space corresponding to the answer.

The researcher shall also conduct interviews on DOLE officials, non-government organizations, and Filipino women migrant workers here and abroad to solicit views necessary for the conduct of this study. Books and electronic data/information were also sourced out in this study.

Data Gathering Procedures

Questionnaires thru the assistance of POLO-Alkhobar shall be disseminated to the respondents by June until August 2009. Interviews shall follow after the result of the survey is finalized.

The Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) deployment statistics shall be utilized to identify the Filipino women migrant workers deployed from 1980s to 2008. The same data shall be used to also identify the sector dominated by Filipino women mi

The feminist perspective is the political stance of someone committed to changing the social position of women to bring about gender equality (Pilcher and Whelehan, 2004), whilst gender is described as the characteristics taken on by males and females in social life and culture through socialisation. Gender is a process and not a permanent state, implying that gender is being produced and reproduced, whereas inequality refers to the unequal rewards or opportunities for different individuals or groups within a society (Wharton, 2005). This essay will define how the feminist perspective has influenced the sociological study of gender inequality. It will summarise how the three founding fathers of sociology viewed men’s oppression and women’s subordination and discuss how earlier feminists viewed their counterpart’s attitudes.

In the late 19th and early 20th century sociology remained a male dominated discipline with the classical theorists Marx, Durkheim and Weber. This was surprising due to the fact that the pre-existing patterns of gender inequality brought about modernisation. Women’s labour contributed vastly to industrial capitalism. Although the classical theorists had literature and theories of contemporary feminist movements they never addressed the gendered process of modernisation, they saw women in more traditional roles within the family (Bilton et al, 2002).

According to Giddens (2009) Marx viewed gender differences in power and status between men and women in the divisions of class. Gender inequality only appeared when industrial capitalism was formed; men went out to work and controlled the family income and the women stayed at home doing the housework whilst looking after the children. Fulcher and Scott (2003) noted that Marx viewed women’s oppression as serving the capitalists society.

Durkheim (1897 cited in Simpson 1952) viewed gender inequality as entrenched in society. In his discussion of suicide, Durkheim stated that men are a product of society while women are a product of nature. Durkheim suggested that women and men have different identities because women are less socialised then men. Likewise, Giddens (2009:91) stated “Women’s social position and identity are mainly shaped by their involvement in reproduction and childrearing.” Durkheim (1897 cited in Simpson 1952) argued that women bear and rare children whereas men are active in the public spheres of politics and work. Yet, today feminists would argue that women are shaped as much as men through socialisation.

Waters (1994) pointed out that Weber’s theory on gender inequality is confined to a system of organisational domination rather than power. Weber used the word patriarchalism rather than patriarchy to describe his category of traditional domination, where a person in authority inherits a particular status at birth. Weber indicated that the power of the man in the household is unimpeded and that women and children are his property. Women, Weber (cited in Roth, G. & Wittich, C. 1968:1007) argued, are dependent because “of the normal superiority of the physical and intellectual energies of the male.” According to Waters (1994) Weber viewed the status of women and children under patriarchalism as similar to slaves in that they are capable of being bought, sold and rented.

The first wave of feminism coincided with the classical theorists Marx, Durkheim and Weber. Giddens (2009) highlighted the fact that from 1800 to 2000 there had only been five feminist sociologists: Harriet Martineau 1802-76, Simone de Beauvoir 1908-86, Betty Friedan 1921-2006, Judith Butler 1956 and Vandana Shiva 1952. Martineau, the earliest sociologist and feminist was famous for introducing sociology to Britain through her transcript of Comte’s thesis of sociology. In Giddens (2009) Martineau argued that if a society is to be studied, sociologists must focus on political, religious and social institutions. Secondly, that a society must include an understanding of women’s lives. Thirdly, issues of marriage, children and domestic life should be left unchallenged and that sociologists must do more than view but act in ways to benefit society.

Erstwhile influential figures of first wave feminism were Mary Wollstonecraft, Harriet Taylor Mill and her husband John Stuart Mill. Wollstonecraft (1792 cited in Abbott and Wallace, 1990:191) emphasised that “inequalities between men and women were not the outcome of natural (biological) differences but due to the influence of the environment, and especially the fact that women were excluded from education”. Wollstonecraft argued that it was essential to educate women and change society so women and men were seen as equal (Abbott et al, 2005).

In Harriet’s essay, ‘The Enfranchisement of Women’ 1851, published under her husband’s name she campaigned that women should be given equal rights to the same jobs as men and that women should not live in separate spheres. Harriet’s views were seen as more radical than that of John’s however, they both argued in their book ‘The Subjection of Women’ 1869 that women should have the same rights as men under law (Mill 1851, 1869 cited in Abbott, Wallace, 1990).

The suffragettes and other campaigners of the 19th and 20th century campaigned for change. In 1839 women won the right to custody of an infant child, in 1882 the right to own their own property, in 1918 the right to vote and in 1934 they won the right to divorce on the same grounds as men. The 19th and 20th century feminism was all on the subject of change and having the same legal rights as men. Although women did not achieve equality with men in the 19th or early 20th century, most rights had been won. This first wave of feminism saw social change and therefore sociologists could no longer ignore gender inequality (Abbott, Wallace, 1990).

Whilst the feminist theories had developed independently to sociology, the study of gender in sociology came from the second wave of the women’s movement. Academic subjects like sociology appeared to ignore women. Women were rarely the subjects of research, and activities dominated by women such as house work and childcare received little interest. Oakley (1972) criticised sociology for generating knowledge more to do with men’s lives rather than women’s. At the time sociology was expressed in a quote by sociologist Jessie Bernard (1973 cited in Wharton, 2005:4) “Can sociology become a science of society rather than a science of a male society?”

According to Waters (1994) feminist sociologists used the expression malestream to illustrate the mainstream discipline of sociology. Feminists implied that sociology was blind to gender and that it viewed gender difference and male oppression as symbolic, thus, sociological explanation was not needed. Giddens (2001) pointed to the fact that feminism and the women’s movements had forced fundamental changes in sociology. Feminists argued that men and women had different experiences and viewed the world differently they did not build their understandings in equal ways. According to Waters (1994) women’s experiences are intentionally ignored and the ways in which men dominate women is seen as natural. Additionally, when women were included in research, they were presented from a male perspective.

Oakley (1972) suggested sociology had been biased from the beginning. Sociology was predominately a male profession and the principles of gender resulted in assumptions about differences between males and females. She argued that despite the criticism of the discipline for its malestream views little has changed over the years. Although women are studying the subject, the majority of lecturers are male. According to Abbott & Wallace (1990) there has been some change in that sociologists can no longer afford to ignore the feminist perspective and there has been converse about the changes needed for male bias in sociology to be overcome.

It has been noted that gender is a generally formed perception which contributes differing social roles and identities to males and females. According to Giddens (2009) gender differences are rarely neutral and that gender is a significant form of social stratification. Giddens (2009: 614) emphasised that “gender is a critical factor in structuring types of opportunity and life chances faced by individuals and groups, and strongly influences the roles they play within social institutions from the household to the state.” Fulcher and Scott (2003) stated that for many feminists, social stratification has been seen as entrenched in relations of sexual power that are built around natural differences of sex. Similarly, Giddens (2009) stressed that even though men and women’s roles vary from society to society, there is no known society in which women are more dominant than men. Men’s roles are usually highly rewarded and valued more than women’s. Firestone (1971) argued that societies are separated into opposed sex classes and that all men oppress all women, thus the struggle between men and women is the driving force in human history.

Although women have made a number of advances around the globe, gender differences serve the foundation for gender inequality. There are many academic perspectives relating to gender inequality and how men dominate women in the public and private sphere (Giddens, 2009). The functionalist theory searches to show that gender differentiation contribute to social stability and integration. According to Waters (1994) Parsons and Murdoch studied the family in industrial societies and how children were socialised. They noted that the stability of the family contributed to successful socialisation. Parsons argued that the family operated more efficiently were women acted in an expressive role, caring for the children and offering them emotional support. Whereas the men performed better in an active role by going out and earning money for the family, Murdoch added that males and females are best suited to the roles they are biologically determined to perform. According to Giddens (2009) Feminists argued that women are not prevented from occupations on the basis of biological features, they suggested humans are socialised into roles that are culturally expected of them and there is nothing natural about the distribution of tasks in society.

Liberal feminists looked for explanations of gender inequality in social and cultural attitudes. They also fought for the equal rights of women through democratic means (Waters, 1994). The Liberal theory came to light with the suffragist movement in the early 20th century and fought against laws that gave rights to men and not women. They campaigned to pass laws to outlaw discrimination against women and to give women rights in the workplace, educational institutes and the media. Abbott et al (2005) criticised liberal feminists of not dealing with core issues of gender inequality, they do not acknowledge the nature of women’s oppression.

According to Bilton et al (2002) radical feminists alleged that men had an interest in controlling women through various tactics, including rape, genital mutilation, domestic violence and sexual harassment. The violence that women were exploited to showed a source of male supremacy. Giddens (2009) noted that radical feminists concentrated on the family home as one of the primary areas of women’s oppression. Radical feminists argued that men exploited women by relying on unpaid domestic labour. Firestone (1971 cited in Giddens, 2009:617) expressed that “…..because women are biologically able to give birth to children, they become dependent materially on men for protection and livelihood.” Radical feminists argued that men see women as sexual objects whose main purpose is to entertain and please them. Additionally, radical feminists see patriarchy as a phenomenon. They suggest gender equality can only be gained by overthrowing the Patriarchal order.

Marxist and socialist feminists argued that women’s oppression was a symptom of capitalism rather than patriarchy. Like radical feminists, Marx feminists argued that the household was the location of women’s oppression arising from the fact that women took part in unpaid work in the private sphere, that is, caring for the labour force and raising the next generation of workers to benefit the capitalists at no cost to them (Bilton et al, 2002). However, Marx had little to do with gender inequality, according to Giddens (2009) it was Engel’s who did more than Marx’s in relation to gender inequality. Engel’s did so through the Marxist perspective. Engel’s (in Giddens, 2009) argued capitalism strengthens patriarchy by putting wealth in the hands of capitalists which underpins women’s subordination to men. Both Marxist and radical feminists saw how capitalism effected gender relations in both the public and private spheres. They wanted to see a restructuring of the family and an end to domestic slavery, however Marx argued this would only be achieved through a revolutionary change.

hooks (1981 cited in Haralambos & Holborn, 2008) criticised white feminists of failing to acknowledge how race and racism impacts on women’s experiences. She argued that white feminist theories of oppression applied to all women; therefore this institutionalised racism. Giddens (2009) pointed out that although black feminists stood next to their suffragette counterparts for women’s rights they realised race could not be ignored. Black women were at a disadvantage on the basis of their colour, race, gender and class position. Black feminists concluded that if gender equality is to prevail then racism needed to be addressed in mainstream feminism.

Post-modern feminism came about in the 1980’s and challenged the definition of modern feminism. Post-modern feminists argued that ‘woman’ is a debatable category, complicated by issues of class, ethnicity, sexuality and other facets of identity. They rejected the claim that there is a grand theory that can explain the position of women in a society because each society has complex social relations and women do not actually have a fixed identity. Post-modern feminists accept that there are many different points of view that are all equally valid (Marsh and Keating, 2006).

Characteristics of Masculinity and femininity differ from one society to another, not only do the characteristics differ but so do the sexual activities in which people engage. Connell (1995 cited in Macionis & Plummer, 2008: 366) described this as part of a gender order in which “societies shape notions of masculinity and femininity into power relationships.” Connell argued that femininity and masculinity were arranged around hegemonic masculinity and suggested that men produced and maintained gender inequality. According to Giddens (2001) Connell used pragmatic data on gender inequality to show how women were kept in subordinate positions to men. Connell categorised society’s gender order into three facets: labour that referred to the sexual divisions of labour in the home and place of work, power that referred to domestic violence within the home and cathexis which related to the mechanics within emotional sexual relationships.

According to the Office for National Statistics (2010) the pay gap for full-time employees in 2009 is down from 12.2% to 10.2%. For women, full-time earnings increased more across the bottom 10% of the distribution with a growth of 1.8% compared to 0.8% for their male counterparts. Similarly, the hourly earnings of the top 10% women went up by 2.1% compared to the 0.8% for men. In addition, the Office for National Statistics (2008) noted that in 2007/08 women were five times more likely to suffer from domestic violence than men, this accounted for 85% of women compared to 15% of men.

Up until 1970, crime and deviance like other areas of sociology had ignored women. Sociologist, Carol Smart (1979 cited in Haralambos & Horn 2008) criticised criminology for being male dominated and sexist. She argued that because women committed fewer and less insignificant crimes then men, women were undeserving of research. The Office for National Statistics (2008) reported that in 2006 males where more than likely to be found guilty of crime than women. In England and Wales between 82% and 94% of males were found guilty of a violent crime and 97% of males were found guilty of sexual offences.

Criminologist Otis Pollock (1950 cited in Haralambos & Horn 2008) claimed that women were more deviant then men. He argued that statistics on crime and gender were deceptive and that certain crimes women committed were likely to go unreported. Firstly, Pollock stated that the police and magistrates tended to be men and were chivalrous. Secondly, women were clever in hiding their crimes; Pollock linked this to female biology. Thirdly, Pollock saw women’s domestic role as an opportunity to commit crime in the private sphere and that this type of crime went undetected. Although, Pollock’s theories have been heavily criticised by other criminologist, his critics do give him creditability for being the first to say statistics did underrate female criminality.

In summary, it is evident that in the 19th century men dominated society, early sociological theories ignored gender issues in particular women. Feminists such as Martineau fought against these sexiest ideologies arguing that malestream research did not relate to the lives of women or indeed their concerns. Feminists stressed that society could not be fully understood without taking women into consideration. The first wave of feminism was all about how men viewed and marginalised women and equal rights.

As feminism developed in sociology, individual theories formed within feminism thinking. These theories highlighted and explained how women viewed gender inequality and how men oppressed women in the public and private sphere. Feminists believed that developing such theories would help them understand their subordination and help liberate themselves from men’s control. Feminism has also helped sociologists understand how masculinity and femininity is arranged around the dominance of men and how the power relations of gender order keep women in subordinate positions within the home and at work.

Whilst the feminist perspective has influenced the study of gender inequality by obtaining the same civil rights as men, acquiring rights in the workplace, the home and in politics. Some feminists still argue that there needs to be a total rethinking of sociological theory around the issues of women, although some progress has been made. It would appear that women still have a considerable way to go in closing the gendering gap and having the same equal opportunities as men. Yet, it remains to be seen if women will ever break through the glass ceiling and reach the top of the social mobility ladder or earn the same wage as men in high flying positions.

A Woman/s Place Was in the Home: Has Feminism Finished the Family?

Government debates and some religious discourse harks back to what Finch (1989) has described as the myth of a golden age of the family. Various studies on the family tend to suggest that in Western societies family forms have differed depending on wider social events such as the Industrial Revolution and also demographically. In England for example, family patterns in rural areas and in poor areas differ from those in more affluent areas. In poorer areas families are more likely to involve wider relationships such as grandparents and aunts and uncles. During the nineteenth century the idea of the nuclear family became the most prevalent. This is what is often referred to as the traditional family and the source of what have been called traditional values. It is this family form that has attracted the most criticism, especially from feminists. Even without a feminist critique there have been widespread experiences of changes in the UK and other Western countries during the last forty years concerning marriage, household, and family forms. These are changes that would have been unimaginable before the Second World War (Giddens, 2001). People wait longer before getting married and more people are less likely to marry than used to be the case. What has been called second wave feminism began in the 1960s. Many of its opponents argue that it is feminism which has led to a drop in the number of marriages, greater divorce rates among those who do marry, and a consequent rise in the number of single parent families. Before the late 1960s having a child out of wedlock was still a source of great social shame but during the closing years of the twentieth century the number women who had children but were not married continued to rise. Figures available for 1997 indicate that at that time this group made up 42% of all lone parent households (Social Trends, 2000). Although feminism has been cited as the cause of such changes, this criticism is based on the view that the ‘traditional’ family was an eternal form until women challenged this view.

This paper will begin with a definition of key concepts. It will then look at the concept and history of the family. It will examine the notion that a woman’s place was in the home until the advent of feminism. It will look at different family forms and then assess whether feminism has brought about the end of traditional ideas of the family.

Family

Murdock 1949 describes a family in the following way:

The family is a social group characterized by common residence, economic co-operation and reproduction. It includes adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, and one or more children, own or adopted, of sexually cohabiting adults (Murdock, 1949).^[1]

Family forms vary across societies but theorists maintain that the most prevalent form is the nuclear family described below. Larger family units are referred to as extended families.

Feminism

Women have argued for equal rights with men since the 18^th Century when Mary Wollstonecraft (1792) wrote her Vindication of the Rights of Women. Other women followed in her stead, the most famous being the Pankhurst sisters and the suffragettes who fought for women’s right to vote (Abbott andWallace, 1997). Modern feminism began in the 1960s with the work of American writer Betty Frieden (1965) and this has come to be known as second wave feminism. Alister McGrath (1993) has written that,

Feminism has come to be a significant component of modern western culture. At its heart, feminism is a global movement working towards the emancipation of women. The older term for the movement-‘women’s liberation’- expressed the fact that it is at heart a liberation movement directing its efforts toward achieving equality for women in modern society, especially through the removal of obstacles-including beliefs, values, and attitudes- which hinder that process (McGrath, 1993:111).

The Concept and History of the Family

The family is the primary place of socialization and the place where children are introduced to the norms and values of a given society (Talcott Parsons,1951). Parsons work referred to what has come to be known as the nuclear family. Nuclear families consist of parents and children living together, family members ostensibly provide mutual love and support. It is this support that enables individual family members to contribute to society and lead productive lives (Giddens, 2001). In the nuclear family one of the adults is employed outside the home and there should be an unrestricted sharing of income (Cheal, 1991).Theorists such as Murdock (1949 cited in Giddens, 2001) have argued that traditional concepts of the family are to be found in all societies and that the family is a necessary and central institution in society.

Whether one regards traditional notions of the family as being pertinent to all societies depends largely on how the family is defined, certainly it might be argued that the nuclear model is no longer the norm in contemporary society. Willmott and Young (1957) undertook what has come to be regarded as one of the most important studies on the sociology of the family in Britain. The work investigated families and family life in East London during the 1950s. The study was undertaken at a time when housing policies and greater financial rewards meant that when a couple married they were able to set up home on their own. Increased geographical mobility also meant that many young couples lived a good distance from their families. As a consequence of this and the fact that more women were working outside the home it was argued that the division of labour in the home was changing, as more women went out to work so men would take on more domestic chores. Willmott and Young (1957) believed that the family would become a more democratic institution where work, finance, and family responsibilities were shared. Willmott and Young maintained that with the passing of time the family would become more symmetrical i.e. that the changing nature of men and women’s roles would mean that their family roles would become interchangeable (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Feminists challenge this view Walby (1990) maintains that the family is still a site of oppression for women and that this is the place where their roles are perpetuated. Furthermore, feminist writers such as Abbott and Wallace (1997) have argued that the nuclear model of the family is too narrow. They also claim that such a concept neglects the fact that not all family members experience life in the same way, or receive equal measures of support. Goode (1963)argues that social systems such as the family, are powerful agents of control because to some extent their existence is founded on force. Within social systems such as the family this is often unrecognized, because it is hidden it is effective. Gittens (1992) is of the opinion that in modern Britain:

Ideals of family relationships have become enshrined in our legal, social, religious and economic systems which, in turn, reinforce the ideology and penalise or ostracise those who transgress it (Gittens, 1992, p.74).

The Family and Ideology

In pre-industrial society most of the household chores were undertaken by children. There was little distinction between home and work, the private and public spheres, families generally worked the land and they did this together. The rise of industrialization and the growth of the towns brought massive changes to what had constituted the family and family life up until that time. Oakley (1981) maintains that the coming of the factories replaced the family as the unit of production. In 1819 the Factory Act was introduced and this resulted in the growing dependence of children, and also to women’s increased dependence on men and their restriction to the private sphere. During the 19^th and early 29^th Centuries there was a growing resistance to the employment of married women as wage earners. This was because working women were perceived as threatening to male employment and so there was pressure to keep them at home (Hacker, 1972). The nineteenth century witnessed the embedding of gender roles which were epitomized in men’s idealisation of the feminine. Women were seen to be both physically and emotionally weaker than men and therefore not suited to the same roles. The following is a rationalization for men’s idealistic views of women and why they were confined to the home.

No woman can or ought to know very much of the mass of meanness and wickedness and misery that is loose in the wide world. She could not learn it without losing the bloom and freshness which it is her mission in life to preserve (Quoted in Hudson, 1970:53-4).

Victorian ideology said that women were created to help men and this became the rationalization for their confinement to the home. To start with this primarily affected the middle classes, as the century progressed, however, the working classes were also subjected to this ideology. Oakley (1981) maintains that this had the effect of locking women into the housewife role, further cementing the growing ideology of gender roles. Murdock (1949 in Giddens, 2001) argued that gender roles are the natural result of the biological differences between men and women. Such differences, he maintained, made the sexual division of labour the most sensible way of organising society. This view became endemic in society and has affected much Government policy. When Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979 the Conservatives were calling themselves the party of the family. They maintained that people should be discouraged from cohabitation or from homosexuality and supported the patriarchal nuclear family where the father was the person to enforce behavioural standards. Even though single parent families, extended families and reconstituted families were becoming more prevalent at the time these were not regarded as the norm or as desirable (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Barrett and McIntosh (1980) have argued that ideas centred on a man being able to earn enough to support a family benefited the capitalist economy and the working man at the expense of women. They maintain that this idea of a family wage is still embedded in society and has been a major aspect of women’s inequality with men. The idea that a man was entitled to earn a family wage but women were not has meant that women have, (and still do in a number of areas) earn less than men. Furthermore, the low pay which accompanies what is often termed ‘women’s work’ means that women’s choices are restricted and their economic power within marriage has been reduced.

Changing Work Patterns

Even though there had been widespread resistance towards women working outside the home Oakley (1981) maintains that this began to change after the first World War, and between 1914 and 1950 the number of women working outside the home showed a steady increase. In spite of this their primary role was still seen in terms of being a housewife. Since the 1960s women have been struggling to achieve participation in paid employment which is equal to that of men. This has been the case for women from all walks of life (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). These struggles resulted in the introduction of the Equal Pay Act in 1970 which meant that women were entitled to the same pay as men if they were doing the same job. In 1975 it became illegal under the Sex Discrimination Act to discriminate against women in education, in employment, and in the provision of goods. The European Court demanded a strengthening of the Equal Pay Act in Britain in 1982. This was followed by a further amendment in 1984 which allowed that women were entitled to the same pay as men in their organisations providing they could prove that their work involved the same kinds of decision making and skills as their male counterparts. Women should have equal access and an equal chance for promotion. Some jobs were regarded as outside the confines of the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act e.g. only women could work in a women’s refuge (Haralambos et al 2000).

Feminist Criticisms of the Family

Since the 1970s and 80s the main sociological focus on families has been concerned with the experiences of women and children, furthermore, the highlighting of these experiences has generated a growth in awareness that the family is an ideological form that does not always work in everyone’s best interests. Feminists have highlighted the fact that for centuries women have been the subordinate sex in society and that this subordination is largely a result of their biology i.e. the fact that they have been born women rather than men. Feminists maintain that there is a disjuncture between women’s experiences of being in a family as wives and mothers and ideologies of domesticity. For a long time many women have felt extremely dissatisfied with the role ascribed to them once they are married and it was this dissatisfaction that Betty Friedan (1965) was seeking to express when she referred to the experience of American housewives in the 1960s as suffering from ‘the problem that has no name’. For some women the ideal of family life is seen as desirable, but their experiences within their own families, falls far short of that ideal (Stanley and Wise, 1983).

The gender roles that women have been assigned are constructed on the basis of this biological difference rather than such roles being innate (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Gender roles are socially constructed and reinforced through the family and the education system. This is done through the different ways that authority figures have of relating to boys and girls, and the fact that there is a tendency to give girls dolls and tea sets, and to give boys toy cars and construction sets (Firestone, 1971). However, Connell (1987) has argued that this view tends to ignore the capacity of individuals to accept or reject the social expectations that are embedded in gender roles. Thus Connell maintains that boys and girls may choose elements from each others roles e.g. the tendency of some girls to become involved in competitive sports, and boys dressing in drag when alone. Connell (1987) has said that this may result in males and females building themselves a fantasy life that is in contradiction to their public actions, thus gender roles can be interchangeable. Feminists have also pointed out that gender socialization is evident in a hidden curriculum in the education system where books that represent males and females in ‘traditional’ roles reinforce the view that men and women have different paths in life. Until the late 1980s girls were less likely than boys to achieve the requisite number of A levels to enter university. In recent years the focus has tended to be on the growing underachievement of boys because girls are matching or exceeding boys across the curriculum and thus there are more women entering higher education. This does not, however, give them much advantage in the job market where they are disadvantaged in comparison with males who have the same qualification levels

(Epstein, et al, 1998). Despite these things Moore (2002), maintains that things are changing, men are taking on more domestic responsibility than they were 20 years ago and often have a much greater involvement with their children than in the past. This has gained official recognition through the introduction of parental leave. In the past, although mothers were entitled to maternity leave, fathers did not have paternity leave. Parental leaves allows both parents to legitimate time off, however, unless men have sympathetic employers, this leave is unpaid and so often not taken. Changes within families has also meant (as mentioned earlier) that the structure of the family itself is changing.

As it has already been noted, women’s subordination increased with the rise of industrialisation and the separation between public and private spheres (Oakley 1981). The continuing erosion of this distinction over the latter half of the 20^th Century has been a significant factor in the changing nature of the family. There are a number of forces at work in the decline of what has been called the traditional family. Feminists have highlighted these changes while at the same time exposing the unequal power relationships that exist within society and within the family (Harding, 1987, Walby, 1986). They relate this inequality to the patriarchal nature of society. Rich (1976) has argued that patriarchy is a social and ideological system where men determine the roles that women should or should not play in society. Oakley (1981 and Pahl (1983)^[2] have cited the division of roles, both within the family, and in the wider society, as a major site of oppression for women. Traditionally the man has been seen as the breadwinner once children arrive and this puts the woman at a disadvantage as research has shown that there is a relationship between money, power and inequality (Vogler, C and Pahl, J.1999)^[3]. Because the family has been seen as the primary site of socialization (Parsons, 1951), it is also a useful place for social conditioning where obedience to authority lays the foundation for the submissive workforce that capitalism requires. Delphy (1977) has argued that gender differences are socially constructed and they tend to serve the interests of the dominant groups in society. Delphy further contends that women should be treated as a separate class because the categories of man and woman are not biological, but political and economic categories. Therefore women form a class who are exploited by men, and this is particularly evident in the nuclear family. Thus, Delphy writes:

While the wage-labourer sells his labour power, the marrie woman gives hers away; exclusivity and non-payment are intimately connected. To supply unpaid labour within the framework of a universal and personal relationship (marriage) constructs primarily a relationship of slavery (Delpy, 1977:15).

Marxist feminists argue that while Marxism may give an explanation of exploitation by the capitalist system it does not explain the inequalities between women and men, as Delphy (1977) maintains gender and sexual inequality should be the fundamental categories of feminist analysis. Marxism alone does not explain for example why women should be seen as responsible for household tasks and capitalism could just as easily still profit if men stayed at home The Community Care Act of 1990 has imposed further responsibilities on women in the role of informal carers, this places considerable stress on women’s health, particularly as nowadays many women who have a family also work outside the home. Dalley (1988) argues that much Government’s policy making, particularly the idea of community care is based on outmoded notions of the ideal family, where most married women do not go out to work, and b) it is the woman’s duty to assume the caring role. Under such circumstances it is widely assumed that the caring that women do in the home is a natural part of women’s role within the family even though many more women work than used to be the case.

Changing Family Structures

Since the Second World War there has been a dramatic rise in women’s participation in the workforce, although a lot of this has been part-time employment. The 1991 Census shows that the workforce was 47% women although there were regional and ethnic variations and single women are more likely to be employed than are married women. This is largely because women’s participation in the labour market is affected by their domestic responsibilities (Abbott and Tyler, 1995). Many women spend time out of the labour market when they have young children and then may work part time while children are at school only returning to full employment when their children are older. Few women have continuous careers as a result of their domestic responsibilities. Although child care arrangements do have an effect on women’s working patterns, lack of proper child care is not the only reason women do not participate more fully in the workplace. For example, while the number of women in work has continued to rise only a third of single mothers with young children are economically active (HMSO, 1999). This is due to the fact that, despite Government initiatives such as Sure Start Centres, most lone mothers do not have either sufficient extra support to return to the workplace, or can only take low paid work which may leave them worse off than they were on benefits. In addition to this the welfare system was formed on the basis that the traditional nuclear family, with a man at its head, should be the norm. It is not, therefore, set up to deal with the increasing number of single parent households (Moore, 2002). Government continued concentration on the notion of the traditional family, tends to make single parent families appear as deviant, when in fact this type of family has become more prevalent as have other family forms.

Gittins (1993) maintains that there are a wide variety of domestic relationships and that although relationships may be universal, the can take an infinite variety of forms. Besides the nuclear family there is the extended family, often a feature of minority ethnic groups. There are also many single parent families, whether through death, divorce or choice. Second marriages that often result in what is known as reconstituted families, e.g. where one or both partners have children from other relationships, are also becoming more prevalent. The last twenty years have also seen a rise in the number of people living together, or cohabiting, without the bonds of marriage. Different family relationships are also more evident due to the different ethnic groupings that now make up the UK (Giddens, 2001). Different attitudes towards those people who are not heterosexual has meant that an increasing number of gay and lesbian men and women now choose to live together as couples, and may or may not have children.^[4] According to Hartley-Brewer (1999) contends that the family (as we have known it) is evolving, rather than the emphasis being on mother and father it should be on nurturing parents of whatever sex. It might therefore be argued that the home may soon cease to be the specific place for women and could become the place for dependent children and caregiver, who may not necessarily be a biological parent.

Conclusion

This assignment has looked at the concept and history of the family and at feminist criticisms. As noted earlier an increasing number of families are matriarchal or matrifocal, this is often the case in Caribbean families. This has generated debates about whether fatherless families are the source of an increasing number of social problems. Dennis and Erdos (1992) maintain that without adult examples of the proper conduct in relationships the children from families with absent fathers will not have the ability to become effective members of a social group. It is further argued that if a boy grows up without a father present then he will struggle to be a successful parent himself. Blankenhorn (1995) has argued that the high divorce rates of Western nations does not mean simply the absence of fathers from the home but the erosion of the idea of fatherhood, and that this will have lethal consequences. Fukuyama (1997) maintains that the roots of the disruption of society and of the traditional family can be attributed to the rising numbers of female employment. This, he argues, changes men’s perceptions of women, they now perceive women a being more capble and independent and thus able to care for a child without a man’s help. It is Fukuyama’s (1997) contention that the emancipation of women can lead to the further abdication of responsibility by men. Clearly a number of social and historical forces have contributed to the changing nature of the family. Many of these forces have been highlighted in feminist work, whether or not feminism has brought about the death of the family is a matter of opinion. On the evidence presented above it might be argued that feminism itself was the result of social, historical, and economic processes and it is these processes, rather than feminism, that is changing our view of what constitutes a family.

Bibliography

Abbott and Wallace, 1997 An Introduction to Sociology: Feminist Perspectives. London, Routledge

Abbott and Tyler 1995 Ethnic variation in the female labour force: a research note”in British Journal of Sociology 46 pp 330-353

Allan, Graham and Crow, Graham 2001 Families, Households and Society: Basingstoke: Palgrove

Barrett and Mcintosh 1980 “The family wage: Some problems for socialists and Feminists” Capitlalism and Class 11 pp51-72

Blankenhorn, D 1995 Fatherless America New York, Basic Books

Cheal,m D 1991 The Family and the State of Theory Hemel Hempstead, Harvester, Wheatsheaf

Connell, R. 1987 Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics Cambridge, Polity

Coontz, S, and Henderson, P. eds. 1986. Women’s Work, Men’s Prosperity. London, Verso.

Crow, G. and Hardey, M. 1992 “Diversity and ambiguity among lone-parent households in Modern Britain” in Marsh, C. and Arber, S. eds 1992 Families and Households: Divisions and Change. London, Macmillan.

Dalley, G. 1988 Ideologies of caring: Rethinking Community and Collectivism London, Macmillan

Delphy, C 1977 The Main Enemy London, Women’s Research and Resource Centre

Dennis, N and Erdos, G 1992 Families without Fatherhood London, IEA Health and Welfare Unit

Epstein et al 1998 Failing boys: Issues in Gender and Achievement Buckingham, OUP

Finch, J 1989 Family Obligartions and Social Change Cambridge, Polity Press

Firestone, S. 1971 The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution London, Cape

Friedan, B 1965 The Feminist Mystique, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth

Fukuyama F. 1997 The End of Order London, Social Market Foundation

Giddens, A. 2001 4^th edition. Sociology. Cambridge, Polity Press.

Gittens, D. 1993 The Family in Question: Changing households and familial ideologies London, Macmillan

Goode w. 1963 World Revolution and Family Patterns New York, Free Press

Graham, H. 1993 Hardship and Health in Women’s Lives Hemel Hempstead, Harvester/Wheatsheaf

Hacker, H. 1972 “Women as a Minority Group” in Glazer-Malbin and Waehrer eds. 1972. Woman in a Man-Made World. Chicago, Rand-Mcnally

Haralambos,M. Holborn, M. and Heald, R.2000. 5^th ed. Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London, Harper Collins.

Hartley-Brewer, J. 1999”Gay couple will be legal parents” Guardian 28^th October 1999

Hartmann, H. 1981. “The unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism: toward a more progressive union” in Sargent, L. ed. 1981 The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: A Debate on Class and Patriarchy. London, Pluto Press

HMSO 1999 Social Trends 29 London, HMSO

Hudson, K., 1970. The Place of Women in Society. London, Ginn.

McGrath, A 1993 Modern Christian Thought, Blackwell, Oxford

Moore, S 2002 Social Welfare Alive (3^rd ed) Cheltenham, Nelson Thorne

Murdock, G. 1949. Social Structure. New York, Macmillan.

Oakley, A. 1981. Subject Women. Oxford, Martin Robinson

Parsons, T. and Bales, R. 1955. Family, Socialisation, and Interaction Process. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press

Parsons, T. 1951 The Social System New York, The Free Press

Stanley and Wise 1983 Breaking Out London, Routledge

Walby, S 1986 Patriarchy at Work, Cambridge, Polity.

Walby,S. 1990. Theorising Patriarchy. Blackwell, Oxford.

Walby,S. 1997. Gender Transformations. London, Routledge

Willmott and Young 1957 Family and Kinship in East London London, Harmondsworth

Wollstonecraft, M 1792 The Disenfranchisement of Women, in Schneir, M (ed.) 1996 The Vintage Book of Historical Feminism, Vintage, London

1

This paper examines the distinctive contribution of a feminist methodology in social science research. The Introduction outlines both the historical and future perspectives. The paper is then divided into two distinct parts (1) Feminist Research – What this means in terms of social science research, the methods used together with the challenges and choices involved. Concluding with the epistemological issues raised by doing feminist research (2) considers the different perspectives and critique of conventional research. This illustrated by appropriate case study examples. Most researchers in sociology tend to agree that there is no single distinct feminist methodology. There is more a collective consciousness that was born from feminist movements in the 1960’s and 1970’s where a group of women talked openly, developing a mode of inquiry that challenged the conventional norms of research. These women collectively became known as feminists and enlightened individuals that formed a new basis for knowledge. Although the original works were conducted outside of an academic setting, it soon became apparent that there was a lack of feminine representation in mainstream sociology or social science. (Devault 1996). Over the last 25 years female sociologists have made significant advances in pushing back the prejudices against women and in general interpreting the workings of society. Feminism was essentially born from a movement and a belief in resolving gender inequalities.

Within the general claims to male dominance in social theory, three challenges have emerged (i) the criticism against that of female knowledge and its’ inability to demonstrate adequate work that illustrates scientific or unbiased knowledge. This resulted in feminists coming under scrutiny in order to demonstrate abilities to rationalise knowledge, perform verification, subjectivity and freedom from political bias. Secondly, how different influences shaped women’s lives. Examples cited included that of “cultural divisions, social divisions and power relations” (Caroline RamazanoClu 2004). The danger here is one of stereotyping and simply branding women as one gender that provides a uniform result. The third challenge intertwines that of knowledge and gender whereby in essence women are taken for granted.

In 1987 Sandra Harding (Harding 1987) provided insight into the difference between that of Method, Methodology and Epistemology. She equated Epistemology to that of a theory of knowledge with the objective of answering specific questions. Further, that there are two distinct epistemologies namely that of a ‘Feminist empiricism’ and a ‘Feminist Standpoint’. The empirical part is that where a response is provided to bias and traditional responses (Harding 1987). Whereas, standpoint refers to a specific feminist opinion founded upon an explanation of knowledge. In order to understand and complete a feminist standpoint the reader needs to become more involved with the “intellectual and political struggles that a women’s experience is built upon Sandra Harding’s views on Standpoint Epistemology focused more on the concepts of objectivity. Harding advocated a new concept of ‘strong objectivity’, as opposed to that of the weak concept which she referred to as ‘objectivism’. She stated that objectivity must contain all social values and interests from the research that is carried out. She was aware that certain social values could adversely impact the research and cause potential distortions. As such Harding viewed traditional research concepts and objectivity as the denial of cultures best beliefs (knowledge), whereas the new version fully embraces both political and historical origins.

Harding believed that her new theory holds validity, particularly from the feminist standpoint i.e. women are part of an oppressed group and as such they approach research problems in a less arbitrary way. They are more likely to evaluate theories that might otherwise be overlooked or denied by more traditional concepts or viewpoints. Harding states that that the standpoint has a substantial foundation in the empirical experiences of women and although this may not constitute a foundation of knowledge, nevertheless it does create a more diverse contribution leading towards increased objectivity.” (Stanley 1990).

Historically the most common expression of female action has been associated with that of liberation and the emancipation of women. This has ranged from the concept of radical insistence, to clarifying the purpose of research and ultimately to transformation in terms of political action. It was Maria Mies that proposed feminist research should be consistent with the overall political goals and aspirations of women. Hence, there needs to be a full integration of social and political; action appropriate to the emancipation of women. (Mary Margaret Fonow, Beyond methodology: feminist scholarship as lived research 1991).

FEMINIST RESEARCH

Feminist research can essentially be defined as research conducted by what has become known as ‘feminists’, essentially drawing upon experiences of women in what is perceived as a male dominated world. The objective of research is based the creation of useful knowledge in order to make added contributions by different perspectives of thought. Feminism is based upon a praxis of women sharing the same agenda with men and overcoming the struggle relative to gender, race and class. The foundation of this was really built in the 1980’s. Feminist research has since become more focused on how the lives of women have become materially altered by men and the development of strategies in order to resist this process (Mary Maynard 2005).

Feminist research in general terms has had a lack of agreement to what precisely defines feminist theory and practice. As such there is not really a single unifying theory. It was Patricia Maguire (Breyton 1997) that offered the premise that feminism is (i) An understanding and belief that women face some form of oppression (ii) A commitment to understand female oppression and exploitation in all of its forms (iii) A commitment towards elimination of all forms of female oppression. (Breyton 1997).

FEMINIST METHODS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH: Feminist methods may have four main objectives: (i) the ability to uncover and overcome types of bias in research (ii) The ability to detect and create social change (iii) a concept or method to illustrate human diversity (iv) An acknowledgement of the credentials and position of the researcher. In order to create social change any method must include and respect the participants as change agents. The method needs to acknowledge diversity and that not all women see the social world in the same way e.g. the method approach to interviews and inquiry that explore the experiences of different religions. (Sprague 2005)i.e. evidence has been presented to support theory presented.

Feminist studies use both qualitative and quantitative research techniques, although qualitative research is more readily used. The term methodology relates to more of a process of how to conduct research i.e. what you need to select, empirical study of what to observe, what to measure and how to conduct analysis. The method id more related to the precise technique of carrying out the study. (Sprague 2005) A common assumption has been that methodology and epistemology are identical. This has created a relatively narrow technical approach towards carrying out and conducting research. The concept of methodology essentially opens the way for conducting choice i.e. the implications of what we should do and how we might do it. It facilitates questions on data collection and assimilation. As such methodology paves the way for critical reflection and creativity within the social sciences.

THE CHALLENGES AND CHOICES: Feminist researchers have taken very different approaches to the adoption of methodology. As such they have adopted differing means to the acquisition and validation of knowledge. This has tended to lean towards a more scientific and evidential base of presenting knowledge. This has avoided the more serious challenges of refuting feminist research and rejecting it on the basis that it contains no scientific method. The example being the study into child abuse, as such it never becomes a clear cut case but contains many complex shades of grey and is nearly always disputable. In many situations feminist researchers are particularly vulnerable in this regard. (Caroline RamazanoClu 2004).

In current terms it is important to recognise that a large number of women are employed in science, engineering and academic positions. As such they offer a diverse range of opinions on a wide range of subject matter. The female positions tend to have two distinct types of focus (i) that engaged with the sciences and (ii) that focused upon society. Researchers have emerged from former marginalised groups and as such have had a profound way of changing the pattern of inquiry and thought process. There are still those however that holds the opinion that feminism is a threat to the objectivity of science. Sandra Harding pointed out that if all knowledge is socially constructed it will pose a major threat and challenge to science. For example with most scientists “the notion that their views of the natural world are subjective is counter to their professional training”. (Wyer 2008) It is important to note that the feminist researchers have made a significant impact over the last thirty years. This has included a significant contribution to methodologies in the social sciences; particularly responding to the challenge of how women have been silenced in both society and research. The feminists have obtained significant success in bringing about social change and creating a degree of equity in both professional and personal lives. Whilst much of the success has been in the first world countries, there still remains a significant challenge for women in the third world and those emerging economies. In particular the native women of Africa, the women in the Islamic communities and others in the emerging countries like India and China.

LEADING CONTRIBUTIONS: Early contributions in the 1970’s were made by feminist sociologists that include the likes of Marcia Millman and Rosebeth Moss Kanter. [1] They made a number of suppositions in sociology that focused on issues or problems with existing use of sociological methods. In essence they objected to how assumptions to sociological theories manifested themselves. They challenged the empirical views of male sociologists and demonstrated a new vision as seen purely from the female perspective. (Harding 1987).

The researcher and author Carol Gilligan [2] [In a different voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development] agreed the point that conventional theorists are wrong to dismiss the wisdom of women on grounds of lower maturity. Gilligan asked that we listen to women in their different views and not try to compartmentalize them but credit women for the significant contributions over many disciplines in the sciences and the arts. (Harding 1987).

Evelyn Fox Keller [3] had completed a great deal of ground breaking work that exposed sexual bias in the sciences. She predicted that women needed to be careful in rejecting concepts of objectivity and rationality as they would not be regarded as the icons for creating a new frontier but were more likely to be doomed and marginalized outside of the political mainstream. Fox herself later found herself in the dilemma of having to choose between feminism and science. Fox stated that the more we questioned methodology the greater it generated papers on epistemology and as such methodology became an end-in-itself. (Winnie Tomm 1989).

Maria Mies [4] (McDonald 2004)concluded that “the quantitative survey method is itself not free from androcentric bias”, further “there is a contradiction between the prevalent theories of social science, methodology and the political aims of women” (McDonald 2004). Meis argued that if we revert to these old traditional concepts they will again be turned into instruments of repression – “new wine should not be poured into old bottles” (McDonald 2004)

One of the most influential people in the field of standpoint epistemology was that of Dorothy E Smith. Smith is famous throughout the world as a developer of theories and as such she has advanced the academic position from a feminist standpoint. Smith developed theories and concepts around the subject matter of gender and particularly that of the ‘ruling texts’ of man. She advocated that many texts were compiled from the male perspective and as such were responsible for defining gender. She further advocated that such rules written by men determined the rules of society and defined the way in which we live and conduct our lives. Amongst the books that Smith referenced were the US Constitution, The Holy Bible and the Communist Manifesto. Smith stated that the rulings defined in many of these books were completely opposite to the manner in which women conducted their lives today. Such obsolescence creates the way for transformation of thinking and revision in these areas. – Ryan B Johnson (Johnson, Standpoint Epistemology Summary 2010).

EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES OF FEMINIST RESEARCH:

Epistemology of feminist research broadly refers to the value of knowledge or the scientific method applied in order to conduct the research. An example being that of empirical or qualitative research. One of the important issues relates to the variation between quantitative and qualitative techniques in feminist research. The historical association that exists between the two research methods have been documented; however the logical associations remain debateable. As such feminist methodology cannot be firmly anchored to either camp of quantitative or qualitative style of research.

Gilligan [5] pointed out that qualitative research represents the voice that is most consistent with female research values. Equally the researchers often use the perspective of a ‘different voice’, this being done in order to provide the distinction between that of a male opinionated voice. The female voice seeking to be far more evident in defining in the definition of connection and relationships. Mie’s stated that because women have been well versed in repression they have greater objectivity than men in this subject area. This is evident when they are involved in researching exploited groups. In essence women have more empathy and are able to better understand the important issues in a different light or perspective. (Janet Holland 2010).

There is also the concept of stereotyping all women as feminists. Many female researchers have been primarily trained in traditional qualitative methodologies and despite the fact that they may have alternate or other views are most likely to revert to the traditional methods of carrying out research. Psychologist Laurie Rudman has completed research that has changed the views on negative stereotyping of women. Rudman’s research found that negative stereoptypes of women are very widespread and even include educated young women. Her research further substantiated that “strong independent women have satisfying romantic lives and their men are happy too – as opposed to the widely held convention that feminists are man hating harpies” (Branson 2007)

SUMMARY PERSPECTIVES

Female researchers have made a number of distinctive contributions to feminist methodologies in social science research. It remains questionable however as to whether a distinct feminist methodology exists, rather it is an approach to which female researchers have enlivened the debate by bringing fresh perspectives and valuable new insight, thereby challenging traditional methods. There have been some outstanding contributions to social science research from leading female researchers – “Goelting and Fernstermaker, [6] 1995; Orlans and Wallace, 1994 and Thorpe and Laslett, 1997? are to name but a few. (DeVault 1999)

Many sociologists agree that the original feminist movement had a core objective of changing the method of consciousness that was historically rooted in concepts of empirical research. Women became more aware of an alternate base for knowledge and the concept of introducing ‘the women’s experience’ into the methodology deployed. The early movement thereby highlighted the omission of this perspective. In addition, the group highlighted the racism that was faced by African/Americans in the USA and how white women had an advantage in obtaining academic research jobs. From these early beginnings female researchers have learnt to respond to the issues in social sciences and improve the overall field of inquiry.

The female approach has been compared to that of ‘excavators’ (DeVault 1999)where female researchers have been used to identify gaps or missing components in research or that which has been ignored. The unique voice of women often lends itself to a more empathetic approach to those delicate research areas i.e. child abuse, drug or substance abuse, juvenile crime etc. This often results in a more holistic and complete enquiry than would otherwise have been obtained from the traditional male dominated approach. (DeVault 1999).

The emancipation of women in social science would provide women with an increased knowledge of their own social circumstances within society. Any feminist methodology therefore needs to be grounded in objectivity in social science. The feminist movement, in achieving liberal values, must not itself become an instrument of repression against the male community. As such the concept goes beyond methodology to more of a process of transformational change and make research more inclusive and objective. Feminist research is therefore aimed at the liberation of women. In achieving these objectives they increase the base of knowledge and add value to the overall method approach in social research and inquiry. (Mary Margaret Fonow, 1991). “All the decent people, male and female, are feminists. The only people who are not feminists are those who believe that women are inherently inferior or undeserving of the respect and opportunity afforded men. Either you are a feminist or you are a sexist/misogynist. There is no box marked ‘other’.- Ani DiFranco”. (M. P. Johnson 2005).

3406

Course Diary Entry 1

Liesbet Van Zoonen: ‘Feminist Media Studies’ (chapter 6, pp 87 – 104)

1. ABSTRACT

The sixth chapter of Van Zoonen’s book ‘Feminist Media Studies’, ‘Spectatorship and the Gaze’, provides a compelling introduction to the area of feminist film studies, more specifically, to different issues surrounding the concept of the ‘gaze’. Van Zoonen draws on the arguments of Laura Mulvey’s work, who used psychoanalytic tools in explaining why women are presented in the media as being looked at and men as the ones who act. Van Zoonen stresses the difficulty of the proponents of psychoanalysis to explain the pleasures of female spectatorship, which, nevertheless, can be accounted for by employing different perspectives on media studies. After discussing ideas regarding the male gaze, Van Zoonen turns her attention to the way images of men are presented in popular media, emphasising the fact that, out of fear that their image could be homosexualised, different methods and narrative codes are employed in order to make the objectification of male bodies less evident. Hence, the traditional perception of men being the ones who have the power and women the ones who are looked at is still in place in patriarchal cultures, even though there are signs of trying to put it aside.

2. OUTLINE
women are constructed in western popular media as being the passive object of the male gaze, whereas men as being the ones who act; the psychoanalytical paradigm was employed to explain this state of facts

a) Laura Mulvey used psychoanalysis in her study of gender media representations as a useful tool in explaining the pleasures of male spectatorship, though failing to explain the independent female pleasure of looking at men

‘scopophilia’ – the deriving of sexual pleasures simply by looking
‘narcissistic identification’ – the desire of men to identify themselves with other men, presented on the screen as flawless characters
the film industry is linked to patriarchy, according to Laura Mulvey; both ‘scopophilia’ and ‘narcissistic identification’ are achieved by the way filmmakers frame the action, including the objectification of women – the male gaze
fear of castration – the trauma suffered by boys when discovering the physical gender differences is diminished by the way male spectators take control over women’s bodies in the film industry
one of the problems of the way Mulvey employed psychoanalysis – it equates masculinity with being male and femininity with being female

b) Mary Ann Doane contends the impossibility of reversing the gender roles (i.e. men becoming feminine and women masculine)

no preconditions of voyeurism in women – in childhood women do not experience the distancing from their mothers that boys do because of the sexual differences
the female spectator can become masculinized by identifying with the male characters in the film or narcissistically identifying with objectified female characters

c) criticism of the psychoanalytic paradigm: it reinforces the patriarchal norms by excluding the possibility of women to derive pleasure from viewing media products

Women derive pleasure by looking at other women – the psychoanalytical paradigm and beyond

a) some argue that the bonding between girls and their mothers creates the pre-conditions of finding pleasure in looking at other women

b) women have coexisting latent homosexual and manifest heterosexual desires – Chodorow’s theory of female development

c) Arbuthnot and Seneca assert that the psychoanalytic theory is concerned with male spectatorship and thus not appropriate to examine female experiences and motivations

Women derive pleasure by looking at men

a) Christianity repressing the abundance of nude representations of men made the patriarchal order imperceptible, whilst it still is the substratum of most societies

b) the female gaze – which is masculine by definition – looking at the male body is less dangerous than the homosexual gaze

c) narrative and visual techniques lessen the degree of subjection of the male body to the gaze of the female spectatorship

e.g. staring back at the viewer, looking up or away from the camera, the text accompanying the images personifying male bodies and thus creating characters
men presented as active (e.g. signs of physical activity or labour) and in control, just happening to be looked at, not as posing specifically for being viewed by female or male spectators
male bodies presented like romantic objects, not sexual ones (e.g. Playgirl)
3. LITERATURE REVIEW

The three chapters I have chosen – Kaplan’s (1983), Stacey’s (1988) and Van Zoonen’s (1994) – which do not offer a comprehensive discussion of the issue of the ‘gaze’, draw on the psychoanalytic explanations of the male gaze and attempt to explain which are the pleasures derived by female spectators watching media products. Hence, all authors use Laura Mulvey’s and Mary Ann Doane’s ideas as a starting point for their discussion; Kaplan argues that psychoanalysis is ‘a useful tool […] [, but not] necessarily uncovering essential ‘truths’ about the human psyche’ (1983: 23). She further argues that it can explain only the current structural organization of society, which, I would argue, is a Marxist perspective; in her view, cinema is seen as a means of releasing the tensions created by the industrial society and psychoanalysis as a necessary means to understand the causes of these (Kaplan, 1983). Stacey (1988) identifies the gaps in Mulvey’s line of argument, more precisely the discussion of the male as an erotic object (which Van Zoonen analyses) and of female homosexuality, and exploits the latter to address one of the issues tackled in little depth by Van Zoonen (1994): female homosexual pleasure, which has been ignored by studies within the psychoanalytic framework. Stacey (1988), like Van Zoonen (1994), draws on Mary Ann Doane’s idea that women’s pleasures are not related to fetishism and voyeurism, as men’s are and further acknowledges Mulvey’s argument according to which women oscillate between male and female identifications.

In discussing possibilities for understanding and explaining the female gaze, all three authors argue that the reversal of roles is impossible without losing the specific gender identification; the female spectator becomes masculinized and vice-versa, and thus the structure remains basically unchanged (Kaplan, 1983). Stacey (1988), as does Van Zoonen (1994), rhetorically asks if women necessarily have to occupy feminine positions and men – masculine ones. I would suggest that ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ actually refer to a set of characteristics associated with men and women respectively only because it has traditionally been thought that they occur more often in the specific gender from which their names derive. Hence, they are not intrinsic to men or women. However, there remains the problem that they are in opposition, not on equal terms. Moreover, if these names which refer to gender and sexual roles would be disregarded, I think it would not be a problem for female spectators to adopt an ‘active’ (‘masculine’) stance anymore.

Further discussing the feminine and masculine spectatorships, Stacey (1988) contends that the subjectivities of spectators should be also taken into account, even if their standpoint is seen as ‘masculine’. Kaplan notes, drawing on Mary Ann Doane’s argument, that if attempting to confer female spectatorship an active role and not masculinizing it, there is the danger of denying pleasure and of ‘disembody[ing] their spectator’ (Kaplan, 1983: 28). An active main female character nearly always loses her traditional feminine characteristics in so doing – ‘[…] of kindness, humaneness, motherliness’ (Kaplan, 1983: 29). The problem with this statement is that all these characteristics of ‘femininity’ are actually constructed in the same way as concepts like ‘active’, ‘sexually desirable’ etc are. Therefore, Kaplan’s statement does no justice to the role of the female spectator.

The dominant images of women, all male constructs, as Kaplan (1983) emphasizes, are the objects of male fetishism and voyeurism, as all three authors mention. In addition to Van Zoonen’s (1994) overarching discussion of these Freudian concepts, Kaplan (1983) points at three male gazes in popular media, identified by Laura Mulvey: that of the film-maker, of the film viewer and of male characters in the film. According to this explanation of female’s position in the film framework, Kaplan argues, ‘the man owns the desire and the woman’ (1983: 27), whereas female spectators only ‘receive and return the gaze but cannot act upon it’ (1983: 31). Hence, male and female spectatorships are different in essential respects.

All three authors have a feminist standpoint in common from whence they look at the representation of women in popular media. Stacey (1988) is probably the most dedicated of all three to the feminist cause, discussing issues which are taboo for other scholars (feminist or not): the homosexual female spectatorship. The arguments they bring forward overlap, being complementary in the respect that all offer new information. However, they do not discuss each other’s contribution to the feminist debate mainly because all three (Stacey to a lesser degree) offer an overview of the arguments brought forward by Laura Mulvey and Mary Ann Doane. All three concluded by pointing to the need of further discussing the sources of pleasure for female spectators both in relation to men and to other women. Moreover, the problem of confounding gender identifications with sexuality in film studies has also been stated as being an issue.

4. CROSSCUTTING THEMES

The issues concerning the representation of genders in the media is one of the most important areas of concern for feminist scholars because of the many assumptions hidden under what comes across as common-sense. Nevertheless, this is only one of the issues in which feminists are interested. Among the general concern with the resources of conferring women a secondary role in patriarchal societies, feminists address issues of work and employment, and of motherhood. These two themes have several links with those raised by Van Zoonen’s chapter on the male and female ‘gaze’ in popular media.

One of the most evident crosscutting themes is that of women’s passivity and male activity and control. As we have seen in Van Zoonen’s chapter (1994), female spectatorship is constructed as being passive and to be looked at, whilst male spectators act upon women by looking at their objectified bodies. Witz (1993/1997) asserts that women have traditionally been seen as having the natural duty to do the domestic work, not men, and that feminists struggled to determine the official recognition of this ‘second job’ women performed. At least since the 18th Century, when the Victorian Domestic Ideology constructed women as passive, men have had the active role in a family, working in order to earn a wage for the household. Women, on the other side, have been seen as confined to the private sphere of life and, thus, as being passive since they did not have an active role in the public sphere, as men did. This way of seeing women as inferior to men has survived until the present day, when women have also acceded to work positions, and it can be easily seen in the structure of the labour market and in the representation of women in the media.

The images of women in popular media, as objects of the male gaze, are opposed to representations of motherhood in different cultures. Reynolds notes that ‘the ‘good’ mother is endlessly patient, forgiving, nurturing and, most important of all, unfailing in her love’ (1996: 41); this characterization powerfully contrasts with the images of women as sexualized objects or as secondary characters who only disrupt the narrative. For children, mothers are the main characters of their stories and are entirely feminine (whereas the character of a mother in popular media would be either masculinized or it would be the object of the male gaze). Nevertheless, as Reynolds further argues, the problem is that in reality ‘mothering [is] synonymous with subjugation’ (1996: 42). Moreover, motherhood is linked with psychoanalysis and the way boys suffer a trauma when they discover their difference from their mothers.

In conclusion, the chapters I have looked at on different topics written by feminists share the same view that women are currently oppressed in patriarchal cultures. Women share subordination roles in media, at work, in the family etc. However, the hegemony of patriarchy is most evident in media representations of women.

References:

Kaplan, E. Ann (1983) Women and Film: Both Sides of the Camera, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 125-141

Reynolds, Kimberly (1996) ‘Mothers’ in Madoc-Jones, Beryl & Coates, Jennifer An Introduction to Women’s Studies, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 38-61

Stacey, Jackie (1988) ‘Desperately Seeking Difference’ in Gamman, Lorraine & Marshment, Margaret (Eds.) The Female Gaze: Women as Viewers of Popular Culture, London: Women’s Press, pp. 112-129

Van Zoonen, Liesbet (1994) Feminist Media Studies, London: Sage, pp. 87 -104

Witz, Anne (1993/1997) ‘Women and Work’ in Robinson, Victoria and Richardson, Diane (Eds.) Introducing Women’s Studies, 2nd edition, London: MacMillan, pp.239-58

Discuss critically the contribution of feminist thought to social and legal analysis. Consider the extent to which you regard feminism as a distinctive and coherent approach to these fields of enquiry.

Introduction

This paper will critically examine the feminist contribution to legal jurisprudence and social analysis. The theoretical range and methodologies of feminist dialogue will be investigated in context of legal philosophy and social academic discourse. First, classical social theories of law will be discussed in order to asses the value of feminist analysis of social theories. In particular the feminist investigation of the socio – economic theory of Marxism will be discussed in order to understand the sociological perspectives concerning the role women played in the social order. Secondly, aspects of feminist legal inquiries looking at thematic issues central to feminist thought will be analyzed. In relation to this, internal academic criticisms between feminist factions will be addressed to highlight the sheer diversity of feminist legal jurisprudence. This essay will aim to demonstrate that feminism is a distinctive inquisitive range of inquiry, but it is not a unified approach to legal and sociological fields. In this sense its pluralism and diversity can at times leave the movement fractured and divided. But this essay argues that this does not diminish the ability of the movement to raise important ideas while tackling broad theoretical academic queries.

Feminism thought: contextual origins

Feminism thought originated from a historically wide ranging social debates and theories. It can trace roots back to the women’s liberation movement which gained momentum in the 60’s and 70’s along side other social struggles in the same era, notably the American civil rights movement. Feminist thought is indefinable as a single unitary theory. Feminist thought primarily is a ‘diverse, competing and often opposing collection of social theories, political movements and moral philosophies.’^[1] The innermost guiding issue is to critically discuss the role of women and their experiences in various social, political and economical contexts. Issues of inequality, discrimination, institutional female representation, socialized or biological constructions of gender differences and resulting cultural implications are a just a few lines of inquiry explored by modern Western feminist thought. Thus feminist thinking is a multifarious and pluralistic academic discipline. There is ‘no single form of feminism that represents all feminists.’^[2]

Social feminist theories

Feminist legal thought, it can be suggested, has made a substantial contribution to social analysis. It is a relatively new area of analysis for feminist scholars. Feminist social theory examines social relations between the sexes, expressly looking at how societal actions can be transported into the public domain for the emancipation of women. It is suggested feminist social theory has made pivotal contributions^[3] and changes in modern society. It has worked to revolutionize existing attitudes with reference to social structures. It is argued, that recent social changes have been achieved through the committed agitation of feminist thinkers who fully participating in socially engaged issues such as women’s rights and reform. This has resulted in the ‘increased involvement of women in public life’^[4] suggesting feminist legal thought has in some small way played a part to advance equality of the sexes. In this sense, social feminism is continually evolving^[5] through analytic inquiries to understand female subordination which assimilates issues of class and gender. This includes the consideration of wider factors related to identity, race, and ethnicity. By focusing on such factors, Holmstrom argues social feminist academics aim to ‘help use this analysis to liberate women.’^[6] In this context, feminist thought has been able to add confidently to general social theory. For example feminist inquiries of social theory have helped to change the way sociologists previously conceptualized social theories, by focusing upon reoccurring lines of inquiry. For example, first, feminist social theory discusses biological differences and socialized activity in society. Secondly the interpretative meaning and explanation of what the term ‘social’ can mean has been praised as helping to erect a broader scope of inquiry than exhibited by earlier forms of sociology. As a direct consequence it is argued ‘feminist theories have moved beyond the issue of women and point the way to a more creative form’ of intellectual inquiry.^[7] Thirdly, social feminists have usually examined patterned links between males and females which are socially structured. This can be seen in the work of Catherine Mackinnon discussed below. Finally, the feminist inquiry looks into how particular social relationships are formed and the structural workings of societal institutions.^[8] It’s methods of examining ‘the meaning of the “social”, how a person’s experience affects her understanding of the social world and how males and females relate to each other’ has led sociologists to rethink previously established and influential social theories.^[9]

Critiques of classical social theory

This impact is most noticeably seen in the radical feminist analysis of traditional social theories such as Marxism. Mackinnon ^[10] and Sydie^[11] critically reveal how classical theories of Marx, Weber and Durkheim marginalized women to varying degrees, in order to promote social and economic aspects of their theories. Thus a major criticism leveled at classical theory is that women are fundamentally ignored by male sociologists who were preoccupied with the ‘male activities, experiences and parts of society dominated by males.’^[12] For example, sociological classical theories are formulated within context of industrial society and economies. Feminists argue that capitalism helped to expand the male public sphere of influence through industrial structures. This expansion in turn was balanced by the constraint of females in the domestic private section of society, with almost no engagement in public, political or economic events.^[13] This can be seen in women’s electoral disenfranchisement and the suffragette movement in 18^th and 19^th century England.

Feminist analysis of Marxist ideas

A large area of feminist discourse concerns Marxist ideas. Marxism is analyzed through its historical materiality and approach. It conceptualizes history as distinct ‘succession of modes of production.’^[14] Each stage of society’s historical development will progress through evolving social stages such as feudalism, capitalism and socialism. Such phases are characterized by unique modes of production. Such modes of production within the economy are made up by the integral power relations between the ‘direct producers and the owners of the means of production’ who exploit workers. Holstrom explains that within Marxist theory, issues of inequality and class division are utilized by feminist scholars to extend the range of social inquiry. Further more, they are used to examine societal divisions between the sexes, and the ‘process through which social relations of gender are created organized, expressed and directed’ as such gender relations fundamentally ‘create society.’^[15] For example Mackinnon provided an influential feminist account of the social and economic theories of Marx:

Marxism and feminism provide accounts of the way social arrangements of patterned and cumulative disparity which can be internally rational and systematic, yet unjust. Both are theories of power and social inequality. As Marxism exposes value as a social creation, feminism exposes a desire of the socially relational^[16], internally necessary to unequal social orders.

Thus, Marxist study is focused on the production of commodities for exchange and the subsequent social exploitation encouraged by this phenomenon. Feminist thought argues Marxist emphasis is placed on creative human labour which sustains the productive economy. In analyzing the modes of production and social exploitation, the societal theory neglects females who were not seen to be exploited in the same way as male workers as they did not constitute the oppressed labor force.^[17] A further example of the disregard of women’s contribution to the production of commodities is the female role in the private sphere. It can be suggested that Marx ‘spends little time analyzing goods and services produced in the household and family’^[18] where the trade is non commercial. Thus, feminist theory provided a valuable analytic discourse exposing the fallacy that Marxist ideas discuss all types of labour. It is in fact, limited by the barrier of gender inequalities. It failed to adequately investigate such discrepancies according to feminist criticisms. Such external activities outside the market, such as reproduction which biologically provides the supply of labour from the family, are taken for granted by Marx.^[19] Thus, feminist thought crucially highlighted how Marxism failed to comprehensively debate how a woman’s domestic and familial role aided the value of labor power as an economic commodity in society.

Social theory examines many aspects of gender differences and inequality, factors which the works of classical sociologists developed no such theories about. Feminists revealed deep-seated conceptual weaknesses in such theories. For example Mackinnon’s critique of Marx discusses the notion that within the idea of class relations, women were to Marx defined by nature^[20] and not by society. Therefore Marxism offers no authoritative scrutiny on the role of women within class division of society. Social feminist disciplines are argued by Adams and Sydie to help voice challenging questions which are ‘women centered in perspective, questions core concepts and assumptions of sociology’^[21], and asks how change can produce a more socially acceptable human society for the sexes.

In summary this paper believes feminist thought has performed a pivotal function in reassessing the nature of traditional sociological theories such as Marxism. In doing so, feminist scholars have created new perceptions of sociological theories in relation to discussing women in society.

Feminist Legal and Jurisprudence

Feminist legal theory, developed from the Critical Legal Studies School of jurisprudential thought. Feminist legal theory, aims broadly to:

Analyze the contribution of law constructing, maintaining, reinforcing and perpetuating patriarchy and it looks at the ways in which this patriarchy can be undermined and ultimately eliminated.^[22]

According to the writer Leslie Bender patriarchy is a term used by feminists to address the ‘ubiquitous phenomenon of male domination.’^[23] Discussion of patriarchy allows feminist discourse to examine social and legal power relations, primarily as men have used institutional methods of power to subordinate women. These methods of power ‘manifest itself in the political and economic world that governs families and sexual relationships.’^[24] Freeman argues that this fundamental belief in social patriarchy is the only primary notion which brings together feminist legal theoretical discourse as a whole body.^[25]

Theoretical lines of inquiry stemming from the Critical Legal school, demonstrates that feminist legal thinking also aspires to create a basic critic of the:

‘inherent logic of law, the indeterminacy and manipulability of doctrine, the role of law, in legitimating particular social relations, the illegitimate hierarchies created by law and legal regulations.’^[26]

In this sense, feminist legal theories endeavor to locate and identify the underlying imbalances in legal rules and institutional structures in society, assessing the impact upon women as a whole. In a wider context, feminist thought is seen as an inevitable progression in academic debate into the area of jurisprudence. Ashe argues it is a ‘natural progression of the engagement of female reflection to one more area of discourse’ in view of other feminist studies in sociology, philosophy and history.^[27] Therefore the extent of feminist contributions to legal jurisprudence can not be underestimated. It forms a solid ‘committed inquiry’ according to Dalton^[28] in order to address female subordination, analyzing fundamental questions as to how and why mechanisms operate and succeed in placing women in such social positions. Furthermore feminist inquiry into law is a vital contribution for those studying the field. For example, this author believes continued female expression and analytical work helps promote feminist legal jurisprudence within mainstream discourse. Dalton pessimistically characterizes the belief that from an outsiders view it is ‘beyond the pale’ to be a ‘women who teaches and writes as a woman, expressing women’s concerns.’^[29] This paper would doubt the assertion that the role of academic feminist legal thought is viewed so disparagingly by mainstream society. Feminist legal thought may be thought of as a selective field of inquiry, but it is important for legal jurisprudence that all aspects of the law are examined from a variety of theoretical standpoints. This enables academics to discover and discuss the nature of law as an evolving social institution in a comprehensive manner.

It helps to frame feminist jurisprudential within an inquisitive, exploratory framework which guides such discourse. This enables academics to focus on particular points in the discussion. This can be demonstrated by Heather Wishik,^[30] in which feminist legal inquiry concentrates on answering the following analytical questions to provide a structurally coherent focus within the legal field:

1. What have been and what are now all women’s experiences of the ‘life situation addressed by the doctrine, process or area of law under examination?

2. What assumptions, descriptions, assertions and or definitions of experience –

male, female or gender neutral –does the law make in this area?

3. What is the area of mismatch, distortion or denial created by the differences between women’s life experiences and the laws assumptions or imposed structures?

4. What patriarchal interests are served by the mismatch?

5. What reforms have been proposed in this area of law or women’s life situation? How will these reform proposals if adopted, affect women both practically and ideologically?

6. In an ideal world what would this woman’s life situation look like and what relationship if any, would law have to this future life situation?

Such an analytical framework and inquiry demonstrates the reasoned theoretical approach plotted by feminist legal thought within jurisprudence. Locating specific questions enables feminist legal discussion to examine areas of law with purpose and structure, while sustaining its clear purpose of understanding the position of females operating within social structures.

Feminist Legal Methodology

To understand how feminist thought in relation to law is carried out, it is necessary to discuss the methodology of the academic school. The methodology can be simplified into three main points. First, it challenges the ‘positivist empirical tradition’ arguing that it is assumptive to accept the validity of observation and objective measurement. Feminist legal theorists therefore challenge a firmly established positivist concept within jurisprudence, that through a neutral standpoint the ‘truth or reality will emerge.’^[31] Lacey discusses the ‘supposed’ neutral framework for legal reasoning such as the rule of law which is central to liberal and positivist legal philosophy.

The idea of the rule of law is that it sets up standards which are applied in a neutral manner to formally equal parties. Questions of inequality and power may effect the capacity of those parties to engage effectively in legal reasoning. Gilligan on constructing moral problems in relation to gender has opened up a striking argument about the possible masculinity of the very process of legal reasoning.^[32]

The importance of challenging the conventional legal methodology helps to legitimately question the fundamental instutionalized legal reasoning processes which impact upon society.

Finally, feminist methodology continually asks what is known as ‘the woman question’, investigating the nature of law through probing and recognizing female events which the law regulates in society. K.T Bartlett elaborated on the ‘woman question’ in Feminist Legal Methods^[33] to mean ‘how the law fails to take into account the experiences and values that seem more typical of women than men or how existing legal standards and concepts might disadvantage women.’ Secondly, female practical reasoning stemming from contextual investigation is used to highlight the fundamental differences between people, and recognizes the value of the disenfranchised in society. Freeman suggests female practical reasoning is an interpretative approach^[34] also used by the critical legal methods. Such influence means the interpretative approach is drawn on to ‘emancipate and uncover aspects of society especially ideologies that maintain the status quo by restricting or limiting groups access to the means of gaining knowledge.’^[35] Thirdly, through the tactic of ‘conscious raising,’ sharing and increasing individual awareness of the female life experience is a tool for feminists. Such ‘conscious raising’ enables the exploration of social constructs while challenging the objective truth exhibiting itself as ‘law and the criteria for legal legitimacy.’^[36] The validity of such characteristic feminist methodological traits discussed by Bartlett reveals ‘things which traditional legal methods ignore.’^[37] Such an approach places emphasis on the idea of:

Positionality – a stance that acknowledges the existence of empirical truths, values and knowledge. Knowledge is situated in social contexts and reflects different experiences. Thus they key lies in the effort to extend ones’ limited perspective.^[38]

This methodological standpoint is used as a launch pad by feminists to comprehensively consider different types of knowledge. Through experimental and far-reaching scrutiny, feminist scholars believe such a methodology will lead to heightened responsiveness achieving the goal of self determination and change in society. Freeman argues this point by stating an ‘improved methodology will result in a better understanding and ability to urge transformative practice.’^[39]

Categories of feminist legal thought

Within feminist jurisprudence, there are many theoretical branches focusing on different conceptual points by academic feminists. Freeman identifies four main categories within feminist jurisprudence which have discussed extensive aspects of law’s relationship to the female gender in society. For example Liberal, Radical, Cultural and Postmodern approaches to feminist legal thought have provided thought provoking and powerful examinations of how women can be affected by law. Such diverse inquiries also investigate the consequences this has for female gender identity and socialized power relations. All theories are important as particular writers under each category discuss very real topical legal subjects which the reader can relate to.

Examples of legal topics discussed by feminist scholars

For example the legal subjects of rape, domestic violence, and harassment have been examined under English case law. R v. R (1991) has been a notable case for radical feminist attention in discussing the laws of rape, which attempt to protect women from sexual violence within and outside marriage. Feminists look at such emotive topics in order to place critical attention on women’s legal rights as citizens, examining the context of situations associated with the female experience. It can be suggested, a crucial aim of such discourse in not only theoretical, but represents genuine pragmatism to produce change which prevents rape head on,^[40] and alters traditional ingrained conceptions which permeate gender relations in society. For example, rape should not be conceptualized as a phenomenon female victims should ‘have to deal with trying to avoid’ but infact it should be reformulated as an act which men must prevent.^[41] It can be argued, it is imperative for feminist legal scholars to continue to question how we view issues of sexual violence and critically assess how laws might unintentionally reinforce negative male values against women. A second area of feminist legal analysis is concentrated on the notion of equality for the sexes. Laws regulating pension retirement ages and equally pay opportunities under labour laws have been an issue within liberal feminism. Aspects of inequality between the sexes have been discussed using the differences in pay opportunities between the genders, and the existence of the glass ceiling in economic corporate structures. Such examples showing the range of analysis feminist legal thought pursues, demonstrates how resourceful the discipline is. Further more feminist thinking can provide distinct and logical investigations of previously unexplored areas of law. Black letter law, statutory legislation and rules effecting social relations and power structures have been exposed by feminists questioning the nature of legal rules upon female social existence. In this respect, feminist aims of uncovering the patriarchal aspects of the legal system increase awareness and help to establish necessary debates challenging the current condition of legal structures. This essay will now discuss some of the theoretical contributions of liberal, radical, and cultural feminist thought to legal theory.

Feminist responses to Liberal theories

This essay believes analysis of equality and earlier liberal theories have provided a valuable contribution to legal analysis. The work of Cain^[42] and Lacey both examined models of equality in a legal environment. Liberals believe in the autonomous rational individual and minimal state involvement with private agents, which theoretically displaces gender differences. It suggests all humans are equal on the basis of possessing free will.

Liberal feminism is rooted in the belief that women as well as men are right bearing autonomous human beings. Rationality, individual choice, equal rights and equal opportunities are central concepts for liberal political theory. Liberal feminism building on these concepts argues that women are just as rational as men and those women should have equal opportunities with men to exercise their right to make rational self interested choices. ^[43]

Cain directly challenges established libertarian thought, arguing it is not the point ‘ to make women into men but expand the possibilities for female life experience by freeing women from the limitations of the male constructed category of “women” if she so chooses.’^[44] Nicola Lacey extends this line of argument by examining the institutional limitations which are placed on women. This is known as the public and private sphere which effects power relations between men and women. The private spheres of life, such as family domestic life are contrasted to male dominated areas of public life such as in employment. Freeman argues ‘family is seen as beyond the control of the state, as power is deemed to be in the public arena while power relations in the domestic sphere can be ignored.’^[45] Lacey raises an important theoretical point, questioning the extent to which the state should legitimately intervene into the private realm, especially in the context of domestic violence and sexual abuse within family relations. It is argued the state should favor a pro interventionist policy in such cases even if it goes against traditional liberal values infringing on individual civil liberties and private autonomy. Thus, Lacey argues the ‘ideology of the public and private allows the government to clean it’s hands of any responsibility for the state of the private world and depoliticizes the disadvantages which may spill over the divide, affecting the position of the privately disadvantaged.’^[46] Lacey argues the language of public and private spheres helps to support the status quo of pre existing power relations. For example, in the case of domestic violence the victims are ignored, resulting with ‘women being depoliticized and marginalized.’^[47] It is suggested by Freeman that women’s injuries are ‘often not recognized by public legal culture’^[48] such as in prosecutions which involve Battered Women’s Syndrome, and the application of provocation and self defense in criminal prosecutions. Olsen suggests the lack of state intervention is itself ‘a political act confirming the status quo and affirming the public private power relations.’^[49] Such powerful discussions of feminist thought applied to legal analysis shows how traditional theories can be persuasively challenged from the feminist perspective to encourage new degrees of awareness and dialogue.

Radical ‘identity’ theories

Radical feminist thought is voiced by Mackinnon^[50], claiming the dominant official voice is that of the male. It is suggested that the only significant distinction between the sexes is inequality. It is a patriarchal society where socio – legal structures facilitate the entire oppression and exploitation of women by men. Law is viewed to perpetuate the imbalance of power representing ‘a particularly potent source and badge of legitimacy’ which is systematically geared to enable male domination. Radical theories are controversial as they argue that dominance within power relations is central to accurately voicing the ‘authentic feminist approach.’^[51] Such theories can be criticized for being defeatist as it implies that ‘inherent masculinity of the law can not be changed by increasing women’s entry into the structures of the legal system or by incorporating female values into its rules and processes.’^[52] Therefore, laws aimed at abolishing discrimination and establishing equality in the workplace is deemed ‘futile’ in attempting to realistically alter the status of women. Logically the theory follows, if the law is fundamentally male orientated then its apparent objectivity and ‘equality for all persons’ is a cruel myth promoting a ‘false consciousness’ among women who believe they are regarded equally under law. Harris suggests that radical feminist legal theory believes only in the validity of exposing the ‘systematic stereotyping and denigration of women’^[53]. Only through the broad methods of conscious raising will true social freedom grow, overcoming patriarchal structures as female self awareness of their own oppression is enhanced.

Criticism of radical theories

It is important to note such radical feminist legal theories have been ferociously criticized by those of difference and equivalence feminism. For example academics such as Cornell^[54] specifically attack Mackinnon for conceptualizing female experience as a form of sexually passive victimhood. Secondly, Harris^[55] criticizes radical feminist thought for over generalizing the suggestion that female dominance is the only universal experience encountered by women. Furthermore, is it incorrect to characterize the law as male, since discrimination is not limited to gender. It can apply to race which can affect both men and women. Cornell attacks Mackinnon’s conclusion that the distinctive female values are simply a social construct formulated within the confines of the male dominated system. Therefore they are not truly feminine values per se. Cornell strongly criticizes Mackinnon’s reclamation of tough language to argue the point that women are degraded for example, in pornography as ‘passive receptacles’ in intercourse. ^[56] Cornell believes such ‘militant anti utopianism, is the inevitable expression or her argument that there is only one self-enclosed, self-perpetuating reality for women’^[57] that of male domination. Cornell contends that the sexes are different, and this must be recognized to encourage positive conceptions of sexual difference. She argues it is possible to maintain equality but also remain different and embrace the existence of womanhood which is rejected by the radical theorists. Such internal factionalism within the movement of legal feminist thought, it can be suggested reflects negatively on the discipline in terms of promoting a coherent and distinctive approach to the legal field. But such disagreements are ultimately reflective of the extensive nature of feminist thought in tackling the legal field.

Cultural feminist theory

It can be suggested cultural feminist theory, especially exhibited in the work of Gilligan^[58] has provided a distinctive but divisive legal analysis of law. In Gilligan’s difference feminism, the writer argues constructs of morality are formed at an early age and are crucially gender orientated, thus specific to males and females in different ways. Difference feminism has created an alternative paradigm assessing male and female social structures. Gilligan suggests women focus on an ‘ethics of care’ instead of the male ‘ethics of justice’. An ethics of care is argued to stress the values of