After our intriguing class discussions the other week in
regards to the home and the ideology of separate spheres, I wanted to do more
research on the home as a source of women’s oppression, as well as the vital
role played by unpaid domestic labor (done primarily by women) in the
maintenance of the capitalist system.
While we discussed the home as a site for the production of
gender identity and gendered difference, we did not dive more deeply into the
origins of the feminization of the home, nor did we look into the origins of
women’s oppression and its relation to the home.
I would argue that both the gendered division of labor, made
apparent through the separation of public and private spheres, and women’s
oppression itself have concrete, material origins in the development of class
society.
Frederick Engels located the root of women’s oppression in
the formation of the nuclear family, which emerged for the sole purpose of
passing on private property from one generation to the next in class society.
Furthermore, Engels argues that women’s oppression is a
result of the dominance of production for exchange in combination with the
gendered division of labor. Basically, because women have the ability to bear
children, they were excluded from public production, which was left for men to
do, and which was also valued more in society. Engels remarks, “the modern
individual family is founded on the open or concealed domestic slavery of the
wife, and modern society is a mass composed of these individual families as its
molecules.”
The association of women with the “private sphere” (i.e. the
home) is not separate from the capitalist economic system, rather, it is a
direct development of its emergence and plays a crucial role in its maintenance.
Furthermore, even as women are increasingly entering the workforce (or the public sphere of production), they are still expected to take on the brunt of the domestic labor within the private sphere. Thus, the privatization of reproduction is intrinsic to the capitalist system. This remains true even as some working-class men begin to take on domestic labor. The end to the privatization of domestic labor, the perpetuation of the nuclear family, and, ultimately, women's oppression can only come about through a complete revitalization and transformation of the mode of production in society itself.
Thank you Tess for bringing up very good points about how home and the ideology of separate sphere keep women out of public sector. I’ve personally never questioned before about how home scale could be an indicator to perpetuate domestic works as women’s obligations. I have also never noticed before about how home being classified into different categories are parts of reflection to pressure women to take care of home and family instead of outside jobs that would gain more social value either. It does connect to Hayden’s concept of city becoming sexist and it is really true in reality, in fact. I came from a big family while my mom is a housewife and my dad is state officer. I’ve grown up seeing my mom performing all the housework and taken care of the family and learnt that it’s girl’s responsibility to become a good housewife. All of these divisions were just socially constructed and made up logically to provide us a convincing message. I’m also interested to the point you connect women’s unpaid labor is connected to capitalist’s profit of exploiting their labors. Overall, you did a great job to point out interesting points. I enjoyed reading your writing.
ReplyDelete