「経済的依存性」とジェンダー

概要

論文の詳細を見る
On the assumption that all forms of social interaction necessarily involve some kind of "exchange" and that all exchanges benefit both parties, "dependency" can be described as a particular type of exchange relationship, where, in contrast to 'normal' (non-dependent) exchanges, one party in the transaction is placed in a position of dependency (i.e. subordination) in relation to the other. Patricia Tulloch has taken up the concept of women's economic dependency in her paper on gender and dependency, something which few of us have dared to do in women's studies. She has examined the social meanings of the term and identified the various processes to which it refers. According to her viewpoint, dependent exchange relations are characterized by an "asymmetrical reliance" (A relies on B for X substantially more than B relies on A for Y). Since asymmetrical reliance implies asymmetrical relations, it can be argued that dependency involves an exchange based on the norm of 'beneficence' rather than 'reciprocity'. Thus four characteristics can be associated with dependency: relative powerlessness, unilateral reliance, obligation, and exploitability. In connection with another assumption, that women have limited access to the labour market because of their domestic and care-giving work, the term, economic dependency, is mainly used to describe the position of women outside the workforce who are dependent on their spouses or on the public welfare system. That is women who are at the risk of economic dependency on spouse or state, and placed in asymmetrical power relationships. However, women's continued presence in the home may be at least partly explained by their awareness that their "withdrawal" would hurt vulnerable others, particularly the old and young. The theses here, then, is that women are disadvantaged in the labour market because they give "higher priority" to care-giving than do men. This is an important dimension. It brings the collective personal into the structural. But the following major problem remains with this explanation; why is it women and not men who identify with the interests of the vulnerable and continue to supply care-giving work? If the identification with the vulnerable is based on socially structured childrearing, we still must explain why women do this fundamental caring work, that is, what political, economic and social processes screen out other alternatives and have women specialize in childcare. I would suggest that answers to these questions require the notion of 'gender as process', which incorporates the idea of both gender and sex as being socially produced and interdependent, and/or an analytic catergory of 'gender relations' as a dynamic component in continuing social relationships, in order to account for a changing set of historically variable social processes and to capture a complex set of social relations. Until very recently, the original equation of sex with biology has tended to remain unquestioned. Within such a conception, sex and biology as the physiological and genetic endowment of human beings are regarded as predetermined and static. However, they may be taken as 'row material', awaiting moulding by social and other forces at the same time. Sex or sex differences are not independently existing pre-social phenomena but are intimately connected to the cultural definitions and practices which constitute gender, and there is a need for a different mode of conceptualising the relationship between sex and gender other than as a simple dichotomy. The sex/gender distinction, and the other binary divisions associated with it, body/mind, emotion/reason, and nature/culture are all products of the predisposition for a dualistic mode of analysis that is characteristic of much Western thought. An "either/or" dichotomous division is accompanied by emphasis on difference and opposition rather than similarity and overlap, and a privileging of one of the alternatives in each binary pair. The major task in feminist theory might be to find new ways of conceptualising sexual difference, that would avoid repeating the logical and philosophical mistakes of previous modes of thought, specifically determinism and dualism.
1991-03-15

著者

有賀美和子
東京女子大学

「経済的依存性」とジェンダー

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク