Patriarchal structures in marriage, household labor, and informal economies

Women and Patriarchy

Across the world, the secondary position of women in society remains a virtual constant. This preferential treatment for men is embedded in social and political structures in various countries and societies.

This paper examines how patriarchal structures remain in three important social structures - marriage, household and family life, and in the economy.

The first part of the paper compares the marriage practices among the Yanomamo Indians in northern Brazil, the Sherpa people of the Himalayas and the!Kung Sen people of the Kalahari desert. These ethnographic examples were selected because of their geographic and racial diversity.

The second part of the paper examines the gender relations and division of labor within the household, and how such traditional gender structures in the home are being affected by the growing number of women who work outside the home, both by choice and by economic need.

The last part of the paper examines women's participation in the economic sphere outside the home. Since traditional economic measures generally ignore women's work in the "informal" economy, this section gives special focus on women whose economic participation is often overlooked, such as the maquiladoras of Mexico and the small vendors and business owners in Jamaica. Precisely because their work is not counted in the formal economy, economic planners rarely take their needs into account when making decisions about policies such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund's structural adjustment programs.

In the conclusion, the paper teases out how -- despite outward changes such as suffrage and growing educational opportunities for women -- patriarchal norms remain deeply embedded in the social and economic structures all over the world.

Marriage Practices

In the United States, most women are free to pick their choice of mates and to enter into marriage agreements. The prevailing view in many developed and Westernized country is to see marriage as a partnership.

In many societies around the world, however, marriage is more than a union of two people. Most women do not have a choice regarding their mates.

For example, the Yanomamo Indians of northern Brazil use marriage arrangements to forge alliances and to maintain peace within the villages. Most women are expected to marry at a young age, via previous arrangements. Among the Yanomami, only men are allowed to have more than one spouse. A man who successfully obtains several wives ensures that his grandsons will have a wide pool of cross-cousins from which to find a wife (Chagnon, 1997).

Like the Yanomamos, the Sherpas of Nepal have exogamic restrictions governing marriage. Traditional marriages arranged by parents are still the norm. The consent of marriage partners became more important and there are also increasing instances of Sherpas marrying Nepalis from outside the Sherpa community.

Weddings are considered community events, times of elaborate celebration and feasting that last up to three days. Some Sherpa men may have more than one wife, although polygamy is no longer the norm. Like the Yanomamo, Sherpa women in rural villages marry young, often before they turn 18. Upon marriage, a wife becomes a member of her husband's extended family and is expected to care for his elderly parents (Ortner 2001).

The!Kung San are a nomadic tribe which subsist through hunting and gathering in the Kalahari Desert. Like the Yanomamo and the Sherpas, parents often arrange their teenage daughter's marriages, usually to adult men.!Kung men also have the option of a polygamous marriage, particularly if they have proven themselves as good hunters and providers. Shostak also observes that although many polygamous marriages last, these are often plagued by bitter fights (Shostak 2000).

Despite their geographic and cultural differences, the rules governing marriage among the Yanomamo, the Sherpa, and the!Kung San reveal an underlying preferential treatment for men. This is clear in the way the Sherpa and the Yanomamo women do not have any choice in the institution of marriage. Despite the higher position accorded to!Kung women, they are still in a more subservient position compared to the!Kung males.

Structural adjustment programs and women

Structural adjustment programs are economic measures geared towards reorienting a failing economy, particularly in developing countries. They are usually administered under the auspices of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Structural adjustment programs are usually systemic steps towards an efficient reallocation of resources geared towards boosting export and increasing employment. Opening the economy to international trade would supposedly result in more income, triggering a trickle-down effect that would benefit everyone in the long run (Alarcon-Gonzales and McKinley, 1999).

The costs of structural adjustment programs to human development, however, are not readily apparent. These programs were intended to improve a country's economy and perhaps result in better jobs. However, these programs can also often affect less-competitive sectors of the economy adversely, particularly the informal sector where women are most active.

In a study of structural adjustment policies in Jamaica, Faye Harrison studies how the "new conquistadors" of the IMF, the World Bank, and the Reagan and Bush administrations created strategies for an export-based Jamaican economy. However, she notes that their quest for development, these policies have sacrificed "basic needs in health care, housing, education, social services and employment for those of free enterprise and free trade" (Harrison 1997: 451).

Since nearly 50 percents of all Jamaican households have a female head, many women face tremendous pressure to make ends meet. Many women thus augment their income through informal sector work. Harrison studied the case of Mrs. Beulah Brown, one such "informal sector worker," in detail.

Mrs. Brown supplemented her income as an aide at the community health center by making dresses. She also sold meat patties, traded cheese and sold ice made in a deep freezer. However, the structural adjustment programs imposed by the World Bank and IMF diverted funds away from health programs. The Community Health Aide Program was shut down.

With the devaluation of the Jamaican dollar and the suspension of food subsidies, the cost of living rose dramatically. Mrs. Brown's friends and neighbors were driven to drug trafficking to make ends meet. In this new, export-driven economy, Mrs. Brown could barely afford food, much less the materials for her businesses. Eventually, the health care worker and proud business owner had to emigrate and work as a nanny, a profession many Jamaican women are forced into (Harrison 1997).

Similar structural adjustments have had detrimental effects on women in Mexico. Here, the new policies may have increased export and generated profit for the professional and more educated and skilled employees.

However, these programs involved wage repression, a lack of new jobs in manufacturing and a curtailment in agricultural production, jobs generally staffed by poor, unskilled women. These factors all contribute towards a loss of income sources among the poorer segments of the population (Alarcon-Gonzales and McKinley, 1999).

As in Jamaica, the effects of structural adjustment extend beyond the economic sphere. Cuts in public services, such as health, education and nutrition, tend to have a larger effect on women who are charged with the dual tasks of family earner and caregiver at home. As caretakers, women are expected to care for the sick and elderly family members. Women are also tasked with stretching a tight budget, a task that entails more time towards hunting for bargains and preparing food.

Layoffs and cuts in real wages often result in longer hours for women in household activities or informal activities to compensate for the loss of family income. In effect, these women are acting as economic "shock absorbers." They put in more hours in unpaid or low-paid activities that standard economic accounting does not recognize (Alarcon-Gonzales and McKinley, 1999).

In the Mexican case, structural adjustments have resulted in an unequal pattern of development. A small minority of educated, high-skilled workers may have profited at the expense of the poor, unskilled ones. Since many poor women make up the latter category, and because of the increased workload both inside and outside the home, structural adjustments thus take a heavy toll on the lives of women in the name of economic development.

The fight against structural adjustment programs in 36 countries Africa further illustrates the effects on structural adjustments on the lives of women. These effects include slashed wages, retrenchment, cuts in health care programs and declining resources allocated to education. In addition, because of stress over uncertain finances, many women report an increase in spousal abuse from frustrated husbands. Other women are forced to work as prostitutes, which leaves them vulnerable to violent or sexual assaults (African Women's Network, 1996).

In response, the African Women's Economic Policy Network (AWEPON) was formed in 1994. Their programs include teaching women "economic literacy" by building on their knowledge of household economics. These education programs seek to empower women by showing them their integral place in the larger economy. AWEPON is also trying to lobby the United Nations and other international organizations to address the human development discrepancies brought about by these structural adjustment programs.

In summary, while gender inequality in Jamaica, Mexico and Africa predates structural adjustment programs, the effects of these programs sharpen the gender divide.

They divert funding away from programs like low-cost healthcare and education programs for girls. Furthermore, the shift in dependency patters at home has contributed to violence against women. Though supposedly geared towards higher wages and higher standards of living, the ill effects of structural adjustments have disproportionately affected women.

Conclusion

In an era of gender equality, it is easy to overlook how structures of patriarchy continue to dominate the lives of women, both here in the United States and around the world.

In the disparate cultures of the Yanomamo, the Sherpa and the!Kung Sen, marriage relations are still seen as a way to united families or groups. In some societies, women continue to be betrothed as young girls, and do not have any voice in their choice of mates. Often, men are allowed more than one wife, but women are not allowed the same option.

After marriage, traditional domestic structures still continue to apply. Women are still expected to take care of household chores and caretaking responsibilities, even when they work outside the home. Finally, most women's participation in the economic sector remains invisible, because women like Beulah Brown are part of the informal sector. As such, their needs are often ignored by planners, and they are often adversely-affected by IMF and World Bank policies.

Though far from comprehensive, this survey of economic and social practices in various countries shows that even across disparate social, economic and racial groupings, women around the world struggle are burdened with unfair patriarchal norms and traditions. In the advent of the age of globalization, few concepts remain as truly global as patriarchy.