The third section of Global Women focused on the commodification of domestic labor and household rules and relations. The relationships that exist between household laborers and the woman whom employ them are often between women who are of different races, nationalities, and social classes. The employer’s use these racial differences to justify the kinds of work they demand. The laborer depends on the employer for more than just a paycheck, because they are often in the U.S illegally, and likewise the employer relies on the employee for more than her “elbow grease”. Women use these workers to show their comfort and leisure to the world. The number of women who do not work outside of their homes, but still employ domestic help, is rising. The book states that while working households may need to bring in help to care for children or the elderly, no one has to employ a household cleaner in the same way. However employing these workers shows a household’s status by displaying financial resources. The book goes on to discuss live-in help. The reason people often employ immigrant workers is because they are more likely to comply with living in the employer’s house. From an employee’s perspective this is because they do not have to worry about lodging; from the employer’s perspective this is because live-in help is generally less expensive, because their rooming and board can be set against their wages. Also it becomes easy for the employer’s to ask for “favors”. Being a live-in employee gives domestic workers a label of “family”. It is easier to ask a family member for a favor rather than an employee. These employees are therefore required to work long hours and have permanent availability. This often entails waking early in the morning with children, and staying up late into the evening for entertaining guests.
Domestic workers outline the differences between themselves and the family’s they work for, or at least the differences that the families quickly outline. Workers are usually told that they are “part of the family” but are treated as anything but that. The workers are required to wash their clothing separate from the family’s, eat out of separate bowls, using distinct utensils, use different bathrooms, and are outcast by children. The family’s also use this excuse that the workers are part of the family by telling them they should understand when they cannot afford to pay them more, or appreciate the financial situation. This idea coins labor as a social, not just an economic process. Family’s also use this idea of family to control their employees. The book looks at employed domestic laborers in Hong Kong. Often time these workers are required to comply with certain regulations that the employer sees fit. Examples of these include, cutting their hair into male hairstyles, refraining from wearing make-up, or finger nail polish, and access to limited showers. The employees are told by their employment agencies to suppress their own wants and desires and to always assume their employers are doing things to protect them. Some employers enforce strict curfews, or lock their employees in their home, from the outside. This is all seen to be a way of “protecting” their employees like they would their own daughters, but are more likely another form of control. One employee recounts that when she ate dinner with the family that employed her they all ate out of a large bowl set in the center of the table, while she was served her own individual bowl. At the time she thought this was because the family respected that in her culture this was not practiced and seen as uncleanly. Later reflecting though, she realized that this was actually because in their culture eating from the same pot symbolizes a shared identity of members of the same lineage. Providing their employee with her own bowl was really a form of exclusion.
This section of the book spoke a lot about culture. We have been speaking about culture and the different levels that make up culture, including artifacts, values, and beliefs. Global Women outlines the household labor that has become part of our culture. Americans use household laborers as a sort of artifact, to show status and to demonstrate to others comfort and leisure. Bringing in hired help also displays that the lady of the house, especially if she is not employed herself, has more important things to do with her time. The book continues to look at domestic workers in Hong Kong. An employer here says that the employees, whom come from the Philippines, need to be taught how to behave properly, due to cultural differences. The employer said that there is a difference between laziness and being slow. In the Philippines they are said to do things at a slower pace due to the hot weather, while in Hong Kong, where it is cold, people move fast and that is what they expect to see in other people. They believe the Philippians need to be taught how to budget their time to fit in with Hong Kong’s fast paced daily life. They also justify the long hours and hard work by believing that housework is not real work in their culture because they are expected to be hard workers; if employee’s budget their time wisely, they will find time to relax.
No comments:
Post a Comment