16)The lack of recognition of women’s work in India is
responsible for their subordination. Explain this
system in light of visible and invisible work.
In India, the lack of recognition for women's work perpetuates a system of
subordination that restricts their freedoms and reinforces gender inequality.
Feminist scholars have shed light on this complex dynamic through the
frameworks of the sexual division of labor and the public/private dichotomy.
These concepts help us understand how work is categorized based on gender,
and how this categorization devalues the contributions women make in both
the visible and invisible spheres.
The Sexual Division of Labor: A Foundation of Inequality
A core concept in feminist analysis is the sexual division of labor.
Pioneering work by feminists highlighted how societies historically
categorized work based on sex. This categorization deemed activities
undertaken by men in the public sphere, often associated with
production and earning wages, as more valuable. Conversely, activities
undertaken by women, primarily in the private sphere of the household,
were seen as natural extensions of their biology and undervalued. This
devaluation of women's work, as Christine Delphy argues, forms the
bedrock of women's subordination.
Consider how Sylvia Walby differentiates between public and private
patriarchy. In private patriarchy, men exploit individual women within the
household. Public patriarchy, while removing formal barriers to women's
participation in paid work, still maintains patriarchal segregation and
subordination within the workforce. This translates to women being
concentrated in undervalued sectors and facing challenges like sexual
harassment.
Moreover Nature, by making women mothers, has decreed that outside
work is not for them, according to the myth propounded by the great poet
Rabindranath Thakur. Because women are obligated to stay at home to
care for their children, taking care of the household becomes second
nature to them. Nature, not men, has imposed this on them. The two
myths are stated quite clearly: the first is that women cannot do the
same things as men because they are physically weak and mentally
inferior. Rabindranath emphasises the lack of creativity in women. The
other is that they are unable to work outside the home due to their child-
bearing and child-rearing responsibilities, and because they stay at
home, they are the ones who do the housework. In other words, the
Gender Division of Labor is nothing more than a mutually beneficial
agreement between consenting adults - man as provider, woman as
nurturer. There is no use of force.
The Invisibility of Women's Labor
A significant aspect of women's disadvantage lies in the invisibility of their work.
Unpaid domestic labor, which includes cooking, cleaning, childcare, and eldercare,
forms a crucial pillar of society's functioning. Yet, as pointed out by feminists like
Patricia Hill Collins, this labor remains largely unrecognized and unaccounted for in
economic statistics. This invisibility has several consequences.
Firstly, it devalues the skills and effort required to perform these tasks effectively.
Secondly, it fails to acknowledge the economic contribution of women's labor to the
household and society as a whole. Amartya Sen's concept of "care work"
emphasizes the importance of these activities in enabling paid work and overall well-
being. Thirdly, the invisibility of housework reinforces the notion that it is women's
natural duty, discouraging men from sharing the burden. This unequal distribution of
labor within the household further restricts women's opportunities for education, paid
employment, and leisure.
feminist sociologists look at the case of housework, they notice that it has an
invisible dimension, which includes not only the fact that it goes unnoticed, but also
the fact that part of doing housework is the work of "keeping in mind" various aspects
of tasks that make up housework (De Vault, 1991). Housework entails both physical
and mental efforts, such as noticing and remembering chores, mentally organising
tasks, and keeping track of the work to be done. Because none of the mental work
can be measured or observed, it is difficult to share, despite the fact that it is an
important aspect of the job.
The Duality of Public and Private: A Realm of Power and Control
The public-private dichotomy, another key concept, is central to understanding
women's marginalization. This concept, as explained by Carole Pateman, has
historical roots in social contract theory. Here, the public sphere, associated with
politics and citizenship, was seen as a masculine domain. The private sphere,
encompassing the family and domesticity, was constructed as feminine. This
association of femininity with the private has several implications. It confines women
to the domestic realm, limiting their influence in public spheres of power.
Furthermore, it allows the state to legitimize its non-intervention in the private
sphere, where violence against women often occurs. Studies by researchers like
Diana Dobash and Rosalind Dobash illustrate how legal frameworks treating the
home as a private space can hinder efforts to address domestic violence.
Identity Politics and the Nuances of Oppression
The concept of identity politics adds another layer of complexity. The early feminist
vision of a unified "sisterhood" faced challenges as women from diverse
backgrounds realized their experiences of oppression differed. For instance, Black
women in the West, as bell hooks points out, faced racism alongside sexism.
Similarly, in India, Dalit women experience a specific set of social and economic
disadvantages distinct from upper-caste women. This recognition of difference led to
the emergence of identity politics, where various feminist groups advocated for the
specific needs of their constituencies.
However, as Linda Nicholson argues, an overemphasis on identity politics can also
lead to fragmentation within the feminist movement. Groups with differing priorities
may struggle to find common ground, hindering the development of a unified agenda
for change.
There are 2 kinds of segregation.
1. In horizontal segregation men and women have different jobs in different work
places some jobs are seen as men's work and some are seen as women's work like
coal mining and school dinner lady. The jobs often women do are the expansion of
unpaid caring work they do job at here.
2.Vertical segregation refers to the distribution of men and women in the same
accusation but one sex is likely to be at a higher grade on level - for e.q. men are
more likely to be senior managers and women as junior manager.
Vertical segregation is comprised of a determinant of male female pay differentials,
as well as deskilling the reduction of the amount of skill required to perform a specific
task. Women are more likely to complain about the glass ceiling, which prevents
them from progressing beyond a certain level and into higher positions.
Because mobility between male and female occupations is restricted, occupational
segregation by sex causes labour market inflexibility. For example, if a company
requires a large number of new workers in a clearly male or female-dominated
industry, it may be unable to find a sufficient number of qualified candidates for the
positions. Female -male pay differentials and occupational segregation by sex
Throughout the world, women's earnings are lower than men's. Whether non-
agricultural workers as a whole or only manufacturing workers are being compared.
Based on a monthly reference period, the average female-male pay ratio in the world
is 60-70 percent; 70-75 percent based on an hourly reference period.
Gunderson (1994) identifies five sources of pay disparity between men and women: I
disparities in human capital assets like education and experience (caused mainly by
non-labour market factors), (ii) differences in pay within the same occupation (due to
direct discrimination and dual labour markets); (iii) differences in pay for "equal
value" work (due to the relationship between pay level in an occupation and its
degree of feminization); (iv) differences in jobs desired; and (v) differences in jobs
available.
The comparative worth exercise shows how wage rates in female" occupations are
lower than in "male" occupations. Jobs are objectively evaluated and point scores
are established for factors such as responsibility and skill education in these
exercises. Physical exertion, as well as working conditions. When compared to
female-dominated occupations, male- dominated occupations pay significantly more.
According to a review of studies conducted in the United States, occupational
segregation by sex accounts for roughly one-third of the female-male disparity. The
percentage of the female- male earnings gap explained by occupational segregation
by sex increased from about 10% when 12 occupations were used to at least 30%
when 479 occupations were used, according to a study from the United States.
The research literature on wage differentials provides a useful context for
understanding sex-based occupational segregation because it shows that pay
disparities between men and women are caused by a variety of factors other than
occupational segregation and differences in men and women's human capital. Anker
(forthcoming) finds, for example, that occupational segregation by gender is lower in
Asia than in Europe, and is highest in Scandinavia. In comparison to Asian countries,
European countries have higher female-male pay ratios. Scandinavia has the
highest female-to-male pay ratios among European countries.
These unusual values could be explained in a number of ways. First, the general
level of pay differentials in a country is a major determinant of female-male pay
differences across countries (Blau and Khan, 1992; Gunderson, 1989). Second, the
fact that female-male pay differentials are lower in countries with centralised wage
set factors undoubtedly contributes to Scandinavia's relatively high female-male pay
ratios.
Reconceptualizing Work and Moving Forward
The path towards gender equality necessitates a fundamental change in
how we perceive and value work. Feminist scholars like Heidi Hartmann
propose a reconceptualization that acknowledges the social importance
of both paid and unpaid labor. This would involve measures like
economic policies that recognize and support unpaid care work.
Additionally, challenging the gendered division of labor within
households through encouraging men to share domestic responsibilities
is crucial.
Furthermore, dismantling the public-private dichotomy is essential.
Feminist writers like Carol Lister argue for a more nuanced
understanding, acknowledging the interconnections between the public
and private spheres. Policies that address issues like domestic violence
need to acknowledge the private sphere as a potential site of
oppression, requiring intervention from the public sphere.
Finally, the concept of identity politics, while highlighting the diversity of
women's experiences, needs to be navigated thoughtfully. Building
solidarity while acknowledging differences is key to a more inclusive and
effective feminist movement. Judith Butler suggests that focusing on
creating possibilities for new, unforeseen identities can be more
empowering than fixating.
Recognizing the full spectrum of women's work in India is crucial for achieving
gender equality. This includes not only paid employment but also the vast
amount of unpaid care work, such as managing family farms or small
businesses, that often goes unseen and undervalued.
