Women and Development (WAD)
Marxist historians, beginning with Frederick Engle's (1942), assert that the
Agricultural Revolution, through the establishment of stationary communities for
growing crops and domesticating animals, led to hierarchical structures in
societies presumed to have been previously classless.
Engels argued that the
institution of private property and consequent exaltation of monogamy
contributed to the decline of women's status Marxist feminists hypothesize that
the desire to retain privately held property within blood-lines (a need that did not
arise in the period of communal ownership) as well as to control children' s labor
made men attempt to control their wives sexuality through monogamous
marriage. This gender hierarchy was intensified with the spread of capitalism.
Production for direct use, which was a hallmark of more communal societies, was
replaced by production for exchange, which was taken over by men and came to
be viewed as a 'public function.
associated with the 'private domain were assigned to women. The
significance of this public-private cleavage is apparent in the importance
by feminists of all persuasions to women's paid employment as a source
and autonomy.
tance attachea
urce Gt status
Jaquette (1982) notes that Marxist and liberal feminists share the
structures of production detern ine women's inferior status; liberal anal
technological change as the causal mechanism, however, without consido
view tha
analysis cite
impact on class differentiation as do Marxists. Jaquette, stresses the impori
ork and
fits hingeon
the recognition within Marxist theory that women's unpaid domestic
reproductive services are critical for capitalist employers, Whose profits hi
paying workers less than the true value of their labour.
Based on her research review, Bandarage (1984) argues that liberal fer
using a WID framework tend to focus' narrowly on sexual inequality and
the structural and socio-economic factors within which gender inequalit:e
embedded. By contrast
feminis
arc
[Marxist feminists'] studies show that the changing roles of WOmen
historical factors: the sexual division of labour in reproduction, local
structure, the articulation of specific regions and sectors of production within
national economies and the international economy. The result is a Orei
economic production are determined by the confluence of a.
diversity and complexity in the integration of women into the.processes n
capitalist development (Bandarage, 1984; 502).
The theoretical steno of the Marxist and the dependency theorists is
exemplified in their focus on the exploitation of women by multinationals. Poor,
young non-white women are sought out for their purported pliancy and are paid
low wages to staff the factory complexes that amass, proits for foreign
companies. As they have multiplied around the world, these export-processing
zones have provided a microcosm of transnational exploitation of women that has
become a laboratory site for innumerable studies by feminists and scholars
representing diverse disciplines and ideologies.(See Part 2, Chapter 12, Part ,
Chapters 17-19; and Part 5, chapter 34.)
the dependency theorists is
Examing structuralıst perspectives on women and development,
(1994) finds, like earlier critics, that the Marxists have given scant attune
men.
sphere of reproduction and household-level relations between men and women
She notes that their preoccupation with the structures of production for exc wark
has downplayed men's role in the oppression of women. Kabeer reviewo