Gender Studies

Materialist Approaches: Reaction Paper 3: Since the Industrial Revolution brought about the rise of Capitalism, society has seen the rise of a working class community. Where Chancer and Watkins outline Marxist interpretations of the Capitalist system and the commoditisation of labour in 'Class Matters', Sylvia Walby explores the role the State plays in maintaining patriarchal relations in 'Towards a Theory of Patriarchy'. Conversely, Rachel Kurian puts these ideas into context explaining the sexual division of labour in 'Women's work, Male Domination and Controls over Income among Plantation Workers in Sri Lanka'. In examining these texts it becomes possible to understand the links between capitalism and patriarchy and whether they aim for gender inequalities or whether it is an inevitable end product of this system. As Chancer and Watkins point out Marx believed class was a 'key distinction' between 'parties who possess the means of production that bring wealth in a given society and those who possess little or nothing' (Chancer & Watkins 2006: 81). This evidently divides society where the distribution of wealth and class relationships are dependent on wages and profit, where the bourgeoisie live off profit and the proletariat become a commodity as they sell their services for a wage. Clearly then exchange relationships which tend to be rather 'exploitative' form the foundations of capitalist ideology which dominate society (Chancer & Watkins 2006: 84). This leads to rather problematic questions as the self becomes a commodity, to whom an exchange value can be attributed. As Kurian and Walby point out majority of the labour of women was controlled and regulated by their husbands, including their wages and in this way they are able to create power structures that accord women and her labour with a lower value and status than men. In doing so patriarchy is able to control not only the means of production but is also able to reproduce these subordinating gender relations. These power relations are then repeatedly reproduced through the institutions the base (class divisions) influences, which according to Marx are categorised as part of a 'superstructure' (Chancer & Watkins 2006: 87). This superstructure includes institutions such as family, education, politics and religion and in this way the pre existing class/gender relations are reproduced. Thus 'patriarchal relations within waged work' becomes a way of controlling women's access to paid work which is 'reinforced by patriarchal state policies' through the base and superstructure (Walby 1994: 22). Kurian clearly highlights this as being the case in her case study of women workers at tea plantations, where the domination of husbands and fathers in the 'domestic and economic sphere' was affirmed by family values in the household permitting a 'sexual division' of paid and unpaid labour (Kurian 1989: 182). This division began in the household where men went out to do the shopping whereas women stayed at home (within the boundary of the estate) and completed the chores. The fact that the girls were taught from early childhood to help the mother as it was her 'duty' and 'natural to women' confirms the cyclical subordination of women through socially/culturally constructed ways of living (Kurian 1989: 1832). This division continued into the economic sphere as the husband and father always collected the salary for the wife or daughter. This not only established 'male dominance in the economic sphere' it also meant women were reliant on men for their own income and needs and so were less likely to rebel or defy the man of the house (Kurian 1989: 189). However as reported by Kurian there were many exceptions to these norms for example if the woman had no male relatives or if she was from a lower caste she was not bound by the same norms as the other women and exerted a 'greater influence on expenditure' (Kurian 1989: 191). This brings race into the equation of patriarchy and gender; the lower down the race hierarchy you are, you seem almost exempt from the patriarchal structure that controls the rest of the women. This implies that patriarchal relations are merely reproduced through capitalism, but are not a product of capitalism per say; patriarchy uses the model of base/superstructure to reinforce this ideology of male superiority hence the state becomes 'a site of patriarchal relations' (Walby 1994: 24). Therefore, as McIntosh indicates the state, indirectly maintains the oppression of women through the maintenance of the family form, leading to the 'detriment of women' (Walby 1994: 25). Bourdieu highlights these relation as 'learned dispositions', implying that these inequalities are imbedded within the lessons we learn from the social conditions around us (Chancer & Watkins 2006: 100). The family unit then can be interpreted as something that is sustained for the benefit of capitalism as it means that women carry out unpaid domestic labour in the name of duty and nature. This also insinuates that women will have no access to the political sphere and it is this lack of power within the political realm which prohibits women from being able to alter the forms that suppress the interest of women. In denying women a political platform on which to fight for their rights the state upholds patriarchal relations that lead to gender inequalities, at times using the laws to regulate not only heterogeneous/homogenous relationships but also women's relationships with the world around her; 'Dilution Acts [.] the criminalization of forms of fertility control', 'regulation of marriage and divorce' and 'criminalizing of homosexual relations' (Walby 1994: 26). Consequently the dominators (men) of society allow class/gender inequalities to continue and so, by default, one becomes the privileged and one neglected. In conclusion then it becomes evident that although Capitalism did not produce patriarchy it does use its relations to gain profit. Capitalism functions through work relations; this in turn produces gendered/minority workers depending on the type of labour, and so inequalities in gender/race/class become an inevitable product of this system. This not only confirms patriarchal power but also allows the reproduction of this power and gives extended opportunities for its exertion over women, as seen in the case of the plantation workers were the men were responsible for collecting the women's salaries and thus spent it as they saw fit, leaving the women economically paralysed. Thus under male dictation the private and public spheres seem to merge together; inequality and discrimination acting as an adhesive. Bibliography Chancer, Lynn S., and Beverly X. Watkins. "Class Matters." Gender, Race and Class. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006. 77-155. Kurian, Rachel. "Women`s Work, Male Domination and Controls over Income among Plantation Workers in Sri Lanka." Women, Poverty and Ideology in Asia. Ed. Halah Afshar and Bina Agarwal. London: Macmillan, 1989. 178-95. Walby, Sylvia. "Towards a Theory of Patriarchy." The Polity Reader in Gender Studies. Cambridge: Polity, 1994. 22-28.