S&S Quarterly, Inc. Guilford Press

S&S Quarterly, Inc.
Guilford Press
A Dangerous Liaison? Feminism and Corporate Globalization

Author(s): Hester Eisenstein
Source: Science & Society, Vol. 69, No. 3, The Deep Structure of the Present Moment (Jul., 2005),
pp. 487-518
Published by: Guilford Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40404269
Accessed: 07-01-2016 16:36 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
S&S Quarterly, Inc. and Guilford Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Science &
Society.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 165.190.89.176 on Thu, 07 Jan 2016 16:36:38 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Scienceäf Society,
Vol. 69, No. 3,July2005, 487-518
/'
V
A DangerousLiaison?
Feminismand CorporateGlobalization
HESTER EISENSTEIN*
ABSTRACT: In the1970sand early1980s,a heateddebatetook
place over the relationship betweenMarxism and feminism. In
thecurrent moment theperhapsmoredisturbing question arises:
has feminism enteredintoa dangerousliaisonwithcapitalism?
The profound"restructuring" of theU. S. and worldeconomy
sincethe1970sparallelstheriseofthewomen'smovement dur-
ing the same period, and revealssome and
ideological practical
usesofthismovement interests
forcapitalist athomeandabroad.
thedeclineofthefamily
In particular, wageand theabolitionof
welfare "asweknowit"intheUnitedStates, andtheuseofmicro-
creditand femalelaborin exportprocessing zonesin the"de-
veloping" world,bothcan drawuponfeminist ideas,as can the
U. S. government as itpursuesits"waron terrorism." Thereis a
kerneloftruthin U. S. propaganda:feminism actsas a cultural
solvent,as globalization erodesthetraditions ofpatriarchy. The
leftmusttakeon boardthecrucialcontribution offeminist ideas
and activism, as we contemplate a worldwherealternatives to
capitalism havebecomedevaluedand de-legitimized.
* Thisarticleis partofa largerwork-in-progress
on feminism and globalization.Myheart-
feltthanksto myhusband,MichaelTänzer,forassistance withstatisticaldataand edito-
rialcontent,andforhisunfailing supportforthisproject.Thanksalso toChillaBulbeck
andRonHaydukfortheirfeedback, andtoHosuKimforherresearch assistance. Gabriel
Kolkobrought byBarnett
thearticle andGaffneytomyattention. Thearticle wasenriched
bymyparticipation in theRockefellerFoundationHumanities Fellowship Program semi-
nar,"FacingGlobalCapital,FindingHumanSecurity: A GenderedCritique," 2002-2004,
at theGraduateCenteroftheCityUniversity ofNewYork,organized byPatricia Ticineto
Clough,DirectoroftheCenterfortheStudyofWomenand Societyand theWomen's
StudiesCertificate Program, The GraduateCenter,CUNY;LindaBasch,Director, The
NationalCouncilforResearchon Women;and KristenTimothy, ResearchScholarat
NCRW.Unlessotherwise stated, onemployment
figures arefrom theU. S. BureauofLabor
Statistics
and figures on GDP are fromtheBureauofEconomicAnalysis, U. S. Depart-
mentofCommerce.
487
488 SCIENCE àf SOCIETY
1. Fromthe"UnhappyMarriageofMarxismand Feminism"
toa Dangerous
Flirtation
ofFeminism
withCapitalism
THE 1970SANDEARLY1980S,a heateddebatetookplaceover

therelationship betweenMarxism and feminism. In thewakeof
the"secondwave"ofthewomen'smovement in thelate 1960s,
feminist intellectualsand activists withinthesocialisttradition chal-
lengedMarxism foritsinadequacies regarding the"woman question."
"the
Investigating unhappymarriage" ofMarxism and feminism, this
debatecalledon theleftto resolvethequestionsofhowwomenand
genderissuesrelatedto a Marxistanalysis, and howcapitalism was
linkedto patriarchy. Muchinkwasspilleddebatingwhether capital-
ismand patriarchy wereseparatesystems, "dualsystems," or some
otherconfiguration, andattempts weremadetorecover anddevelop
thethemeofattention towomen'sissuesand needswithin therevo-
lutionary Marxist tradition (see Z. Eisenstein,1979; Kuhn and Wolpe,
1978;Vogel,1983;Sargent,1981).
In thecurrent historical momentan essayon gendermight want
toaska related, butperhapsmoredisturbing question:hasfeminism
enteredintoa dangerousliaisonwithcapitalism? Morespecifically,
in whatwayshas thecontemporary women'smovement facilitated
thegrowth andspreadofcorporate This
globalization? questionmay
seemlikea provocation. Mostwriters assumethatthewomen'smove-
mentispartofthelargerfamily ofmovements thatseeksprogressive
change,broadly defined as the left. WhileI make thesameassump-
tion, I want to point in this essay to some ways whichcontempo-
in
raryfeminist ideas and actionshavebeen extremely usefulto the
powers thatbe. I do this in a of
spirit sisterly self-criticismand analy-
sis.I hope tocontribute toa revival ofthesocialist feminist tradition
thathas sucha majorroleto play,as progressive forcesencounter
thedangerousrealitiesof thecurrentworldsituation(see Holm-
strom, 2002b,arguingforthecontemporary relevanceofthesocial-
ist-feminist project).
To makethisargument, I beginwitha reviewoftheprofound
changesto theU. S. and worldeconomybroughtaboutbythe"re-
structuring" of the 1970s.I thendiscussthe riseof thewomen's
movement duringthesameperiod,and pointtotheideologicaland
practical ofthismovement
uses forcapitalistinterests at homeand
abroad. In particular, I focuson the declineof the family wage
FEMINISM AND CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION 489
and theabolitionofwelfare "asweknowit"in theUnitedStates,and

on theuseofmicrocredit andfemalelaborinexportprocessing zones
in the"developing" I of
world. pointto theincorporation feminist
ideasbytheU. S. government as it pursuesits"waron terrorism,"
and to thekerneloftruthin U. S. propaganda:feminism actsas a
cultural as
solvent, globalizationerodes the traditions
of patriarchy.
I concludewitha callto theleftto takeon boardthecrucialcontri-
butionoffeminist ideasandactivism,aswecontemplate a worldwhere
to capitalism
alternatives havebecomedevaluedand de-legitimized.
"
2. SettingtheScene: "Globalizationand Restoration
ofProfitability
"
AftertheEnd ofthe "Long Boom
Muchhasbeenwritten aboutthetransformation oftheinterna-

tionaleconomysincetheend ofthe"longboom"ofthepost-World
WarII period,wheneconomicgrowth begantoslowdownworldwide
fromthemid-1960s to theearly1970s.The U. S. economy,threat-
ened bytheeconomicrecovery ofEuropeandJapan,facedwitha
strengthened challengefromthird-world nationalism (symbolized by
theOPEC price"shocks"of 1973and 1979),and weakenedbythe
prolongedwarin Vietnam, waslosingitscompetitive advantage.In
response,U. S. corporations and the U. S. government adopteda
numberofstrategies to counterthisdecline(see Amott,1993,24-
48; Pollin,2003,17-18;Tabb,2001).
theU. S. economy
First, begana processofwhatBarry Bluestone
andothershavetermedde-industrialization, growth therust
orthe of
belt.Manufacturers replacedthedomesticstrategy of movingin-
dustry from the unionized North to the non-union South withan
international of
strategy moving some elements ofproduction over-
seas,takingadvantageofcheaperlabor, anti-union policies, the
and
establishment ofexportprocessing orfreetradezones(see Froebel,
etal, 1980;Mies,1998,112-120;Freeman,2000,24-30). Thisstrat-
egywasparticularly dramaticin thecase oftheelectronics and tex-
wherefemalelaborwaspreferred.
tilesindustries, Around theworld,
fromTaiwanandChinatoMalaysiaand IndonesiaandfromMexico
andtheCaribbeantoSouthAmerica, women's"nimble[andcheap]
fingers"made them the workforceof choice fortheselabor-intensive
industries,whichincreasedtheprofits ofthemultinational corpo-
rationsas it broughtin much-neededforeigncurrencyto local
490 SCIENCE à? SOCIETY
governments(Wichterich,2000, 1-33). Simultaneously, otherareas

of productionwereretainedwithinthe continentalUnited Statesby
reducingcoststhroughtheuse ofautomationand byusingimmigrant
labor,primarily female(Fernandez-Kelly, 1989). Atthiswriting,much
concernis being expressedovera second waveofjob transfers over-
seas in the white-collarservicesector (e.g.,Glater,2004). Here, too,
femalelabor is crucial,and companies go out of theirwayto make
the workattractiveto local women. (See Freeman,2000, on "pink
collar" data entryprocessingin Barbados,forexample.)
Second, therewas veryrapid growthin the servicesectorof the
economy,definedas transportation wholesaleand
and publicutilities;
retail trade; finance,insurance and real estate; government;and
businessand personalservices.From1970 to 2000,servicesectorjobs
more than doubled, from49 millionto 102 million,while employ-
mentin goods-producingindustriesincreasedbyonly15% (from26
millionto 30 million).
Withthe growthof the servicesectorcame a rapid increasein
women'semployment. From1970 to 2000,of the 53 millionnewjobs
created,60% wentto women.This shiftreflected"boththe increase
inwomen'slaborforceparticipation and thedisproportionate increase
in serviceindustriesand in occupationswheresignificant numbersof
women [were]employed"(Kuhn and Bluestone,1987,9).
The process of drawingwomen into the servicesectorwas an
interactiveone, as Heidi Hartmannnoted:
ofcheapfemalelaborpro-
The servicesectorgrowsbecausetheavailability
videsthesupplyand becausetheuse ofwomenin thelabormarket rather
thanat homealsoprovides thedemandforreplacement services
(fast-food
replacinghomecooking,forexample).. . . Andtheshifttowardthecom-
mercialization is requiredbywomen'sincreasedlabor
ofpersonalservices
forceparticipation.
(Hartmann, 1987,55.)
Particularly forthe growthof women's employment

significant
was a dramaticincrease in the financialcomponent of the service
sector.As KevinPhillipswrote:
In thelastfewdecades,theUnitedStateseconomyhas been transformed

through whatI callfinancialization.
The processesofmoneymanagement,
securities
management, ofassets,
securitization
corporatereorganization,
derivatives
trading and otherformsofsecurities
packaging are steadily
re-
ANDCORPORATE
FEMINISM GLOBALIZATION 491
placingtheactofmaking, and transporting

growing things.(Citedin Edi-
tors,2002,53.)
As a measure of the decisive shiftin investmentflowsfromgoods

productionto finance,insuranceand real estate (FIRE), we can ex-
amine the increase over timein investmentin privatefixed (non-
residential)assetsbyindustry sector.From the end ofWorldWar II
through the 1970s, goods production (mining,constructionand
manufacturing) accountedforabout 32% ofthetotalincreasein such
investment, whereasin the 1980sand 1990s the sharewas only18%.
In contrast,in the FIRE sector,the share of investmentflowswent
from16% in thefirstperiod to 30% in the second period. (The cru-
cial role thatFIRE playsin theoverallservicesectorcan be seen from
thefactthatnon-FIREservicesincreasedtheirshareonlymarginally,
from45% in the firstperiod to 50% in the second period.)
In the 1960s and 1970s,the shareof FIRE in GDP remainedvir-
tuallyconstant,at between13 and 14%. However,the percentageof
employeesin FIRE who werewomenincreasedsharply,from46% in
1960 to 58% in 1980. Then, in the 1980s and 1990s,while the per-
centageofemployeesin FIRE who werewomenleveledoff,the total
FIRE sectorgrewrapidly,reaching20% of GDP currently.
then,haveinvolved
forincreasingprofitability,
Capital'sstrategies
de-industrialization, expansion of the servicesector,and a relative
shiftof investmentfromgoods productionto finance.All of these
developmentshave involvedthe expanded use ofwomen'slabor.As
a result,thepercentageoftheU. S. adultfemalepopulationemployed
outsidethe home rose from34% in 1960 to over60% today.
Despite the attemptsafterWorld War II to returnwomen to
domesticity, marriedwomenincreasingly stayedin paid employment.
For employersthiswas crucial,since particularly withthe growthof
theservicesectormarriedwomenconstituted a majoruntappedpool
of labor. Thus, between1970 and 2001, when therewas an increase
of 27 millionwomen in the labor force,63% of these (16 million)
were marriedwomen.1As we will see, the powerfultaboo against
marriedwomenin theworkforce was overcomebya combinationof
theeconomicneed fora dual-worker household and the ideologyof
(78%) ofall adultwomenweremarried,

1 In 1970,almostfour-fifths and thelaborforce
rateofmarriedwomen(41%) wassignificantly
participation lowerthanthatofsingle
women(57%).
1970sfeminism. The patternofwhitewomen'semployment came

closertothatofBlackwomen, whohadtraditionally beenmorelikely
to workaftermarriage.
The structuralchangesproducedbythesearchforgreater profit-
were
ability accompaniedby a sea in
change political and economic
ideology,usuallycharacterized as a shiftfromKeynesianism to neo-
assaulton theliberalconsensus
an all-out
liberalism: symbolizedbythe
NewDeal. Botha philosophy oflimited government and a setofpre-
for
scriptions economic growth, neoliberalismwasborn in Chicago.
from
Starting a tiny
embryo ofChicago
attheUniversity withthephiloso-
pher-economistFriedrich
von HayekandfollowerslikeeconomistMilton
Friedmanatitsnucleus, andtheir
theneoliberals funders a
havecreated
huge network
international of research
institutes,
foundations, centers,
scholars,
publications, andpublicrelations
writers expertstodevelop,
pack-
and
age, push their
doctrine. 2002,4.)
(George,
As Paul Nasserpointedout,whatis conventionally termedneo-

liberalism is reallya returnto thepre-NewDeal consensusabout
allowingthebusinesscycleto proceeduntrammeled bygovernment
intervention. The ascendancy ofthissetofideasis linkedto there-
gimesofMargaret Thatcherin Englandand RonaldReaganin the
UnitedStates(and itis beinggivenrenewedvigorat thiswriting by
theadministration ofBushII). Itspoliticaleffectivenesscanbe dated
fromthesuccessful passageofProposition 13 in Californiain 1978,
setting of
limitson thegrowth property taxes, and thefiring ofthe
strikingProfessional AirTraffic Controllers (PATCO) byPresident
Reagan in 1981 (Nasser,2003; Amott, 1993, 34).
Theelements oftheneoliberal offensive,driven byan increasingly
effective of and
coalition rightwing right-leaning included
politicians,
attackson laborand therightto organize;de-legitimizing ofthewel-
farestateand theconceptofprogressive taxation; devaluing therole
ofgovernment in stimulating
economicgrowth andfullemployment;
a preference forprivatizingpublicfunctions andorganizations; andan
emphasis on deregulation, seekingtorollbacktheconstraints on cor-
porations imposed bygovernment in
policies such areasas environmen-
talregulation, affirmativeaction,banking, utilitiesand themedia.
Internationally, neoliberaldoctrine was firsttriedoutunderthe
dictatorship ofAugustoPinochetin Chile.It wassubsequently im-
posedbytheinternational financialinstitutions (IFIs), particularly

theBretton Woodsinstitutions (theInternational Monetary Fundand
theWorldBank),whichusedthedebtcrisisofthe1980sto restruc-
turetheeconomies ofthosecountries thathadcomeundertheirsway.
the
Through imposition of "conditionalities" undera programof
"structural adjustment policies"(SAPs), the IFIs virtuallyforcedin-
debtedgovernments to accedeto a radicalseriesofchanges.In the
nameofmacroeconomic stabilization andstructural reform, govern-
mentswereinducedto devaluetheircurrencies, cutthepublicsec-
tor,end foodand fuelsubsidiesto "realign" domesticpricesto the
worldmarket, liberalizetrade,privatize stateenterprises, and regu-
larizetitles
toland,oftenresulting intheforfeiture ofcustomary land
to
rights large landlords (Chossudovsky, 2003,35-64).
The fallof theSovietUnion and of itssatelliteEasternEuro-
pean regimesafter1989-1991gavethissetofpoliciesnewvigor,as
formerly state-runenterprises wereprivatized, and nationalecono-
mieswereforcedto abandonstate-led development. It is truethat
somecountries wereable to retaintheirstate-led development poli-
ciesand experiencedrapideconomicgrowth: theTigersofTaiwan,
Singapore,Hong Kongand SouthKorea,and theNewlyIndustri-
alizingCountriessuchas Malaysia,and Indonesia,notto mention
China.Butothersin SouthAsia,LatinAmerica,and sub-Saharan
Africa,undertheimpactof SAPsovertheperiodsincethe 1980s,
suffered lowgrowth and devastating increasesin poverty, malnour-
ishment, and disease.
Thewidespread criticism oftheimpactofSAPsduringthe1990s
led theWorldBankto modify itspolicies,acknowledging thebur-
denson "highly indebted"countries and placinga newemphasison
theneed for"poverty reduction"(see Petchesky, 2003, 142-151).
Whilethisshiftwasa responseto theintensified poverty produced
by SAPs, particularlyin Africa, governments were still
requiredto
followthebasicmacroeconomic policiesthat producedtheintensi-
fiedpoverty in thefirstplace.
Theprivatization
ofessential likewater
services, andelectricity,
andthedete-
rioration ofpublic
orprivatization suchashealth
services, andeducation,have
neverbeenintheinterests
ofthepoor.Forinstance,
theimpositionofuser
feeson health
careoreducationhasledtoa sharpdropinhospital atten-
danceandschoolenrolment from pooror low-income it
families;hasalso
494 SCIENCE&>SOCIETY
ofthose
increasedthegendergap,sincegirlsand womenare themainvictims
policies. (Dembele, 2003.)
In extreme cases SAPs helped to produce "failed states,"where the

fundamental elements of governance no longer function, and "eth-
nic" violence and civil war are the norm (Federici, 2000).
From the point of view of the U. S. elite, thisensemble of changes
has been necessary to maintain the dominance of the United States,
both as the premier economy in the world, and as its overwhelmingly
pre-eminentmilitarypower. Corporate globalization, then, has a mili-
taryas well as an economic component. In a revealingpolicydocument
produced by the Office of Force Transformation in the Pentagon,
Thomas Barnett and Henry Gaffney, Jr. describe the world as divided
into two parts: the globalizing countries and countries in the "gap":
As globalizationdeepens and spreads,twogroupsof statesare essentially

pittedagainstone another:countriesseekingto align themselvesinternally
to the emergingglobal rule {e.g.advancedWesterndemocracies,Vladimir
Putin'sRussia,Asia's emergingeconomies) and countriesthateitherrefuse
such internalrealignmentor cannot achieve it due to political/culturalri-
gidityor continuingabject poverty(mostof CentralAsia, the Middle East,
Africa,and CentralAmerica). We dub the formercountriesthe Function-
ing Core of globalizationand thelattercountriestheNon-Integrating Gap.
(Barnettand Gaffney, 2002, 1-2.)
In this analysis,the gap is where terrorismcomes from,and it is

the duty of the U. S. militaryto keep these new barbarians at bay.
The authors argue that the United States pays in kind for its enor-
mous balance of payments deficitby providing "security"to the rest
of the world. Thus the War on Terror fitsreadily into a strategyof
corporate globalization. At this writing, these policies have come
together in the occupation of Iraq and the proposed privatizationof
much of its economy (see Klein, 2004).
3. The SecondWave oftheWomen'sMovement:

A BourgeoisRevolution
for Women
The periodofradicaleconomicrestructuringsincethemid-1960s
also saw the remarkablegrowth of what is now an international
women'smovement.It is impossibleto understandtheresilienceand
reachofthismovement without relating itto theeconomicchanges

I havebeen describing, mostnotably, theexpansionoftheservice
sectorand theinfluxofwomen,especially married women,intothe
paid work force.I am pointing to a complex interaction betweena
setofcorporateand government strategies to maximize profitabil-
ity,and a social movementthatsoughtto maximizeoptionsfor
women,mostcentrally, theireconomicopportunities. As Lourdes
Beneríanoted,therewasa "supply" factor in thechangedconscious-
nessofwomen,and a "demand"factorin thepreference forfemale
in
labor many sectorsof theeconomy(see Beneria,2003,77; thisis
a globalphenomenon).
Asmostreadersknow,thewomen'smovement isone ofthemost
lastingand influentialof the "new social movements" arisingfrom
thestormy In
decade ofthe 1960s. theU. S. context, conventional
historiespresenttwo strands ofthe movement: the radicalwomen's
liberation whosawthemselves
activists as socialrevolutionaries; and
whomerely
theliberalactivists, a
sought piece ofthe pie forwomen.
Thesetwocategories werefirstidentified byJo Freeman(Freeman,
1975), andarestillusedbymosthistorians, althoughrecentresearch
has shownthatthe"liberal" wing of U. S. feminism had itsrootsin
tradeunionand Communist Party activism duringthe 1940sand
1950s(Weigand,2001;MacLean,2002a).
Whileotheractivist movements - againsttheVietnamWar,for
student andforBlacknationalism
rights suchas thePanthers - either
fadedorwerecrushedduring the late 1960s and early1970s,theU. S.
women'smovement continuedto growand to influence U. S. soci-
etyprofoundly. Recent historiescelebrate this widespread influence,
usingexpressions like"tidalwave"(Evans,2003), "theworldsplit
open" (Rosen,2000),and "no turning back"(Freedman,2002) to
indicatethebreadth, depthandpermanency ofthechangeswrought
by feministactivism over the more than three decadessince1970.
Although the women's movement raised manyissues- from
reproductive rightstobattering in marriage to childcare;fromfree-
domofsexualchoicetohealthissuestopornography - overwhelm-
inglytheenergy oftheorganizedmovement wasfocusedon women
in paid employment. As SaraEvansnoted,
Byfar,thesinglegreatest
impactofthewomen's
movement wasin the
Americanworkforce.
Beyond housing, issuesof
daycare,beyond
beyond
496 SCIENCEàf SOCIETY
houseworkbetweenhusbands and wives,it was issues of career and work

opportunitiesthat allowed women to remake the nation. Whetherthey
workedin factories,in offices,or as professionals,the politicsof workwas
an abiding concernforfeminists. . . . (Evans,2003, 81-2.)
Equal pay;sexualharassment; accessto training and promotion; ac-

cesstotraditionallymalejobs through affirmative action;comparable
worthcampaigns to alignthesalariesoffemaleworkers in tradition-
allywomen's jobs like nursing to those of men in traditionally male
jobs liketruck driving: women followed
activists the example theof
Blackcivilrightsmovement inseekinggovernment support forequity
in theworkplace.
Attheideologicallevel,theU. S. women'smovement setitssights
on the dismantling of the gender rulesthat had governed the1950s.
Bothradicaland liberalfeminists wereunitedin their vociferous
rebellionagainsttherigidsexrolesofthewhitesuburbs, withfather
as breadwinner and motheras housewife, whichundergirded the
of
expansion consumption for the home in the era.
postwar Betty
Friedan, whohadbeenan activist fortherights ofblue-collar women
workers in the1940s,aimedherfamouspolemicof1963at thewoes
ofthemiddle-class housewife, whosenamelessproblemwasboredom
withdomesticity (Friedan,1963;cf.Horowitz, 1998;Schrecker, 1998,
388-389,on Friedan'sconcealment ofherearlieractivism, probably
forfearofredbaiting) .
Theattack on sexroleswaslinkedtothedesireoffeminists toover-
comethetraditional notionthatmarried womenshouldnotbe in the
paidworkforce. Whilesucha stigmaneverprevented somemarried
women- especially and
working-class immigrant women - from
working, itdidradically themtojobs thatwereseenas suitable
restrict
forwomen.(Of course,African-American women,fromslavery on,
neverhadtheluxury ofsuchprotections, beingsubjected totheharsh-
estand mostpunitive laborconditions alongsidetheirmenfolk; see
Davis,1981.) Now women fought forand won the right to enter the
moststereotypicallymaleoccupations, from topolicing,
firefighting and
frommining andconstruction topiloting airplanes (MacLean,2002b).
The insistence on a changedlanguage- firefighter insteadof
fireman - reflected thispushtoeliminate thebarriers thathadkept
womenoutofthemosthighly paidjobs. Unionsthathad foughtin
the19thcentury forprotective legislationforwomennowshifted their
viewsunderpressurefromwomenactivists,andagreedthatlawsand
the
restricting
regulations amount ofweightwomen ortheir
couldlift,
accesstonightshifts, AliceKessler-Harris
werediscriminatory. noted
theswifterosionofprotective
legislation:
In fiveshortyears[1964-1969]thecapacityofthelawto treatwomenpri-
marily as family
members, valuablefortheirreproductiveroles,had been
transformed. atleast,womenofall raceshad becomeindividuals
Formally,
underemployment law.(Kessler-Harris,
2001,267.)
Whilethepushtoopenjobs towomenwasmostsuccessful intheareas

of professional worksuchas medicine,law,architecture, and the
most
academy, job categories were atleast to
opened women,
officially
although thestruggle tomaketheselegalopenings realinvolved
many
lawsuitsand muchemotionalstaying power(MacLean,2002b).
Thewomen'smovement wasequallysuccessful inestablishingthe
idea,ifnot the that
reality, women were full with
citizens, rights equal
tothoseoftheirmalecounterparts. Attheheightoffeminist influence
in the1970s,victories camerapidly, includingthelandmark Roe v.
Wadedecisionin 1973acknowledging women'srighttoreproductive
self-determination;therightto equal accessin education, including
TitleIX ofthe1972EducationActwhichsoughtto equalizefunding
forwomen'ssports; andtheright toequalcredit(Brenner, 2000,242).
Women'spoliticalparticipation increasedrapidly, creatingsuccessful
womencandidates forlocal,state,and federaloffice(ibid.,243).
Obviously manystruggles ofthewomen'smovement wereincom-
plete.The backlashagainstfeminism and Blackcivilrightsorches-
tratedbythenewlypowerful evangelical-cum-corporate rightwing
accelerated in the1980s(Faludi,1991). Butmostanalysts nonethe-
lessagreethatthewomen'smovement succeededin changingthe
attitudesofmostAmericans toward theroleofwomen.The (predomi-
nantlywhite)wivesandmothers ofpublicunderstanding inthe1950s
had becomeworkers, wivesand mothers in the1990s.
In short,thewomen'smovement createda successful"bourgeois
revolution"forwomenintheUnitedStates. WhiletheEnglish, French
and Americanrevolutions ofthe 17thand 18thcenturies replaced
feudalrelationswiththeruleofthewhitebourgeoisie, theserevo-
lutionsnotoriously did notextendto therightsofwomen,people
ofcolor,and thosewithoutproperty. Whilebourgeoismenfreed
themselves fromtheruleofkings,womenremainedsubjectto the

ruleof menwithinthefamily. It tookthe 19th-and 20th-century
women'smovements to claimtherightsofwomenas fullcitizens
(Pateman,1988;Brenner, 2000,222ff.).
Thisunfinished revolution nowseemedcomplete: women,espe-
ciallywomen in themiddle class, could escape from the category of
"only" the
wifeand motherintotheworldof competitive, individual-
isticmarket. WhiletheU. S. women'smovement producedmyriad
strandsofthoughtand activism, including strongtradition
a ofso-
cialistfeminism andmanyvarieties ofthird-world andwomen-of-color
feminisms (see Mohanty, etal, 1991;Holmstrom, 2002a),thedomi-
nant,mainstream versionemphasized womenas self-sufficient indi-
viduals.Thisfeminism came to be identified withliberationfrom
patriarchal constraints.The rightto earna livingso as nottobe de-
pendentfinancially on a husband;therightto developone's skills
and abilities tothefullest; therighttocontrolfertility so as nottobe
shackledbyendlessyearsofchildbearing: in short,feminism U. S.
stylecame to mean individualism and theright participate the
to in
marketeconomyas a workeror entrepreneur in one's ownname,
separatedfromone's roleas a wifeand/or mother.
Corporations adjustedtheirmarketing toaddressthewomenwho
embracedthissetofideas, from Nike's imagesofthepowerful woman
engagedin athleticcompetition to Business Week'spresentation ofa
correct corporate wardrobe for women. The changed social expecta-
tionsmadetraditional homemakers intoa dwindling classofwomen
whoapologetically introduced themselves as "onlya housewife." (Mar-
riedwomenwithchildrenunder6, whowerenotworking forwages
outsidethehome,droppedfrom12% ofall adultwomenin 1970to
4% in 2000.)Froma powerful tabooon havingmarried womeninthe
workforce, theideathatwomen,married single,or would spendmost
oftheirlifetime working outsidethehomehad becomenormative.
In a tellingillustrationofthechange,RuthMilkmancompared
thereactions towomenworking intheGreatDepression ofthe1930s
withthe reactionsto the recessionof the 1980sunderPresident
Reagan.DuringtheDepression, although womenandmenwerenot
interchangeable workers,itwas common practiceto blameworking
for
women high ratesof unemployment. ButwhenReagantriedto
scapegoatwomenin the1980s,thisidea didnotfly, and he wasactu-
ally rebuked publiclyby the AFL-CIO. "The ideologicalassaulton
femaleemployment [lacked]thepopularlegitimacy
itenjoyedinthe
earlierperiod"(Milkman, 1987,112).
4. UsefultoCapitalismiTheDeclineoftheFamilyWage
and theDismantling oftheFederalWelfare
Entitlement
As we haveseen,thewidespreaduse ofwomen'slaborwasac-
companiedbya majorrestructuring inwhichtheproportion oftradi-
tional"smokestack" jobs formen was reduced. The oldersmokestack
industries (auto,steel,tires,householdappliances,petrochemicals)
werecharacterized from1930to 1980bya smallhigh-wage segment
atone end,a smalllow-wage segment at theother,anda large"semi-
skilledand skilledblue-collar and white-collar 'middle'"(Kuhnand
Bluestone,1987,11). Butthenewlyexpandingindustries - high-
tech,businessand personalservices, and retail- havea "dual"mar-
ketstructure, witha well-paid bureaucracy atthetopanda largepool
ofpoorlypaidworkers at thebottom.Thusthereis no equivalent to
theold "middle-wage" blue-collarjobs.
Dramatic evidenceofthischangecomesfromthetransformation
ofthedepartment storeindustry.
Traditional department storesbene-
fittedfroma consumerboom,peakingin the1960sand 1970s,but
discount storesbegantoundersell themwithreducedlevelsofservice
and automated checkoutcounters. The discountstoresdoubledthe
sizeoftheir(mainly male)managerial hierarchy, butalsomultiplied
thenumberof"low-wage, highturnover, part-timejobs"- goingpri-
marily towomen(Kuhnand Bluestone, 1987,17).
Thisanalysis in 1987presagedtheriseofWal-Mart, nowthelarg-
in
estU. S. company terms of revenue and employment, withannual
salesin 2002of$244billionand 1.4millionemployees, 72% ofthem
women.Wal-Mart is nowthetarget ofthelargesteverclassactionsex
discrimination lawsuit("Wal-Mart's Waron Women,"2004). The
"Wal-Martization ofAmerica"is illustrated in a BusinessWeekarticle
on thedeclineofsocialmobility in theUnitedStates:
Foryears, the1990sboom,muchofCorporate
evenduring Americahad
embraced
already Wal-Mart-like to
stratagemscontrollabor such
costs, as
hiring and
temps part-timers, unions,
fighting dismantlinginternal
career
andoutsourcing
ladders, tolower-paying
contractors
athomeandabroad.
Whilethesetactics
havetheadmirable
outcomeofholdingdownconsumer
500 SCIENCEôfSOCIETY
prices,they're
costlyin otherways.Morethana quarterofthelaborforce,
about34 millionworkers, is trappedin low-wage,oftendead-endjobs. . . .
Many middle-income and high-skilled face
employees fewer opportunities,
too,as companiesshiftwork tosubcontractorsandtempagenciesandmove
white-collar
jobs to China and India. 2003,54.)
(Bernstein,
In an illustrationof the lack of generationalmobility, the articlecites

the case of MichaelA. McLimans,who worksas a deliverydriverfor
Domino's and PizzaHut. His wifeis a hotelreceptionist. Togetherthey
down about a
$40,000 year - farfrom the $60,000 Michael's
"pull
father, David I. McLimans, earns as a veteransteelworker" (ibid.,58).
Comparing1973 to 1998, Sam Gindinand Leo Panitchargued
thatworkingfamiliesresponded to the changed structureof the
workforce byincorporatingtheworkof"morefamilymembers"(dis-
creetlyungenderedin theiraccount). "In additionto theincreasein
debt . . . working-classfamilieshave restructuredtheirown livesto
maintain and increase their consumptionby having more family
memberswork (spouses, students) and by increasingthe average
hoursworkedper person" (Gindinand Panitch,2002, 38). In other
words,thestagnationofwageswascompensatedforbythegrowthof
dual-income-earnerfamilies.
There is no doubt thaton one level the legitimizationof paid
workforwomen representeda major advance. Heidi Hartmannar-
gued thatthe rise of the serviceeconomywas a boon forwomen,
despite the factthatit was accompanied by an influxof low-paying
jobs. She cited the risingdivorcerate and the rise of singleparent-
hood as evidencethatwomenwerevotingwiththeirfeetforeconomic
independence (Hartmann,1987). Thiswasparticularly trueforBlack
women,forwhomthechangesofthe 1970smeantan end to theneo-
enslavementof domesticservice.
Immediately WorldWarII,blackwomen's
after earningswereabouthalfthose
ofwhitewomen.By1981,blackwomen'swageshad risen of
to92-95percent
due to thefactthatblack
thoseofwhitewomen. . . largely women workers
aretodayno longerconfined todomestic
chiefly jobs,buthavemoved
service
intoa widerrangeofoccupations (Kuhn& Bluestone, 1987,23.)2
2 Since that time,the inequalitybetween Black and whitewomen's wages has increased
again, withthe ratio decliningto 85% in 1998. (For Hispanic women in 1998 the ratio
was only 72% of whitewomen's earnings.)
Despitetheseundeniablegains,theinclusionofmarriedwomenin
theworkforce, including themothers ofyoungchildren, wasofassis-
tanceto capitalin keepingwagesstagnant, and in abandoningthe
ofa
concept wage that would cover the expensesofwifeandchildren,
a goal thatwasstruggled forduringthe19thcentury bypatriarchal
unions.Feminists in the1970swerevociferous in theirdemandfor
women'seconomicindependence, and indeedmanyfeminist schol-
arsandactivists attacked thefamily wage of the 19th century a trap
as
forwomen.ButJohannaBrennerarguedthatthiswasa misreading
ofthehistorical evidence.The family wage,forthoseworkers who
achievedit,represented a victory fortheworking class(Brenner, 2000,
11-58).
WhileI certainly am notarguingfora returntodependenceon
menandmarriage as theonlyoptionsforwomen,itseemsnecessary
to acknowledge thattheindependence wonin the1970sand 1980s
came at a highprice:theabolitionof thefamily wage,and an ex-
tendedperiodofwagestagnation forallworkers. (On thispoint,see
MacLean,2002a,whoarguesthattheabolitionofthefamily wage,
ratherthantheriseoffeminism, shouldbe thecentralframework
forthewomen'shistory ofthepost-World WarII era.)
the
Meanwhile, widespread acceptance wagedworkforwomen
of
didnotgo unnoticed bypolicy-makers. The idea thatwomenshould
be in thepaid laborforcewasso hegemonicin the 1990sthatthe
welfare "reform" legislation of1996,thePersonalResponsibility and
WorkOpportunity Act, made thisits centerpiece. out
Carrying key a
elementin theneoliberalagendaofundoingthesocialpoliciesof
theNewDeal, welfarereform devolvedresponsibility to thestates;
removedtheidea ofwelfareas an entitlement to anypoor single
mother needingassistance withtaking careofherchildren; andmost
importantly, instituted workfare as a requirement. No longerwould
singlemothers have the safety net of a government subsidy, no mat-
terhowinadequate,forraisingtheirchildren.
In theperiodwhenAidtoFamilieswithDependentChildren(as
welfare wasfirsttermed)wasintroduced, as partoftheSocialSecurity
legislationof 1935, itwas unthinkable
still to expectsinglemothers
toentertheworkforce whilealsocaringfortheirchildren(Gordon,
1994).Butafterthemajorexpansionofthewelfarerollsfollowing
theactivism ofthewelfare rights movement inthe1970s,welfare had
becomeidentified primarily with Black women, and was a majortarget
502 SCIENCE& SOCIETY
of rightwingideological critique. The issue of welfarewas seen as an

entering wedge in the ideological de-legitimization of government
interventionin the market.
While some feministsfought the welfare "reform"signed offon
by President Bill Clinton to steal an issue fromthe Republicans, many
women activistsregarded thisas an unwinnable fight(Eleanor Smeal,
informalcomments, appearance at Queens College, 1996) . When the
welfare legislation of 1996 was being voted on,
one hundred fifty-nine House Democratsvoted forthisbalefulassaulton

of
the rights poor mothers includingDemocratswho call themselvesfemi-
nists:the Democratic co-chairof the CongressionalWomen's Caucus (Nita
Lowey,D-NewYork), the former Democraticco-chairoftheCaucus (Patricia
D-
Schroeder, Colorado) , theonlywomanin theDemocraticleadership(Bar-
baraKennelly, , twenty-three
D-Connecticut) otherDemocratic
oftwenty-eight
women,and twopastpresidents of the liberal for
Americans DemocraticAc-
tion (BarneyFrank,D-Massachusetts, JohnLewis,D-Georgia). As one
and
congressionalfeministadmittedofher colleagues,whenitcomes to welfare
"nobodycares about women." (Mink,1998, 3.)
More broadly, it is arguable that the idea that women should be

workingmade workfareacceptable to the broad American public. As
Gwendolyn Mink noted,
If racismhas permittedpolicymakers to negate poor singlemothersas citi-

zens and mothers,whitemiddle-classfeminismhas providedthose policy-
makerswithan excuse. Whitemiddle-classfeminists' emphasison women's
right to work outside the home - accompaniedby women's increasedpres-
ence in the labor force- gave coverto conservatives to
eager requirewage
workofsinglemothersevenas theychampionedthetraditional (Mink,
family.
1998, 23-34; cf. the followingpages forfurtherelaborationof thispoint.)
The abandonment of the New Deal entitlement to a safetynet

for poor women, and the devolution of welfare - now renamed
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - to the states, where a
five-yearlimit was applied, was also a boon to employers. Women
forced offwelfarewere pitted against illegal immigrants,whose claims
to better working conditions were silenced by their uncertain status
as non-citizens. This ensured greater competition, and therefore
lower wages, for these jobs (Chang, 2000).
5. ExportProductionand Microcredit:
IntegratingThirdWorld
WomenintotheMarketEconomy
I have been arguingthatthe centralidea of U. S. feminism, that

paid work representsliberationfor women, was deeplyusefulto capi-
tal.We have seen twoexamplesof thiswithinthe UnitedStates,with
theeliminationofthefamily wageand theguttingofthewelfaresafety
net. But women'sworkhas been crucial,too, to capitalinternation-
ally.In theirreviewof the effectsof globalizationon women,Jean I.
Pyleand KathrynB. Ward identify fourareas wherewomen are the
majorityof workers:
Overthepastthreedecades,increasingnumbers ofwomenhavebecomesex
workers,maids,workersinexportproduction, ormicrofinancerecipientsto
earnincomes intherestructured
globaleconomy. Many mustmigrate domes-
orinternationally
tically nowspan
toobtainthiswork.. . . These"industries"
theglobe,occurringinmostareasofthedeveloping worldaswellas through-
countries.
outindustrialized (PyleandWard,2003,470.)
Here I wantto focuson twooftheseareas:womenin exportproduc-

tion,and the use of microcredit.
The use of cheap female labor was pioneered by South Korea
duringits economic miracle,as women were drawnfromfarmto
factorywork,allowingSouth Korea to industrializewith"unlimited
labor reserves."Indeed, Alice Amsdenargues thatthe male-female
genderwage gap was one of the keysto the successof South Korea's
industrialization:
Korea'soutstanding realwageincreasesandunrivaled genderwagedispari-

tiesare relatedto one anotherinsofaras an unlimited supplyofwomen
workers hasallowedKorea'sbifurcatedwagestructure toachievedualends.
One end is themaintenance ofinternationalcompetitivenessin labor-in-
tensive whichemployprimarily
industries, females.The otheris theentry
intomoreskill-intensive on thebasisofa relatively
pursuits highly
well-paid,
motivated,malelaboraristocracy. (Amsden,1989,204.)
UnderpressurefromIFIs to abandon state-leddevelopment,and

to reorienttheireconomies towardexports,indebted third-world
countrieswelcomed multinationalcorporations(MNCs) into "free
tradezones,"wheretariffs
and taxeswerereducedor eliminated,and
504 SCIENCE àf SOCIETY
wherelegislation and government practices combineto prevent the

formation of tradeunions.In the electronicsindustry, thistactic
beganin the1960s:shortly aftertheinvention ofthesiliconchipin
1958-59,Fairchildopenedthefirstoff-shore semi-conductor plant
in Hong Kong,movingintoSouthKoreain 1966.GeneralInstru-
mentsmoveditsmicroelectronics production to Taiwanin 1964.In
1965 manyhigh-tech firmsmoved their productionto theU. S.-
Mexicoborder,openingthefirstmaquiladoras. In thenextdecade,
Singapore, Malaysia and thePhilippines followed suit,andinthelate
1970stheywerejoined bycountriesin the Caribbeanand South
America(Fernandez-Kelly, 1989).Multinationals shifted production
in a widerangeofgoods,fromshoesand garments to toys,luredby
government advertisements forthe"nimblefingers" oftheirwomen
workers, although in at least one case - Ireland - a patriarchal
government initiallyresisted a
thistrendwith policypromoting only
maleworkers (Froebel,etal, 1980,322ff.; Pyle,1990).
As information abouttheinhumaneconditions experienced by
womenin thesefactories becamewidely known, therewaswidespread
publicity aboutthereturn ofsweatshop conditions aroundtheworld.
IndeedNaomiKleinarguedthattheglobaljusticemovement owedits
in to
origins part indignation over the conditions imposedbywell-
knownbrandnamemultinational corporations as Nikeon their
such
workers(Klein,1999,326ff;Pollin,2003,153-163).Some feminist
scholars condemned theexploitation offemale workers inmaquiladoras
and otherexportproduction sites.Butothersexhibited ambivalence
towardthisphenomenon. Thusin herworkonJapaneseelectronic
companiesin 1970sMalaysia, AihwaOng pointedoutthatthevillage
girlsthey hired be
might exploited workers, firedas soonas theirkeen
youngeyesight to
began require the use ofeyeglasses. Buttheywere
also beingmodernized, abandoning peasantsarongsoftheirvil-
the
lagesforbluejeans,and winning therightto choosetheirownhus-
bands(Ong,1987;Beneria,2003,77-8).
In a dialogonwomenandglobalization, Patricia Fernandez-Kelly
and Diane Wolfexploredthisambivalence. AsWolfnoted,
isa double-edged
Globalization asfaraswomen
process On
areconcerned.
theonehand,employment from
derived
opportunities in
transformations
theglobaleconomy producenewkinds controls
andcapitalist
ofpatriarchal
overwomen.
FEMINISMAND CORPORATEGLOBALIZATION 505
Low-wagejobs, "often below subsistence standards," nonetheless
gave women tools withwhichtheyresistedpatriarchy. . . . Women I inter-

viewed [in Java,Indonesia] preferredworkin "global sweatshops"to the
villagerice fields.(Fernandez-Kelly
and Wolf,2001, 1246.)
Perhaps the extreme end on this spectrum of opinion was the

view of Shelley Feldman, who studied export-processingfactories in
Bangladesh, and criticized other scholars for failing to acknowledge
the power of women to make their own choices. Some analysts ex-
plained women leaving their homes for factories as caused by wide-
spread rural povertyand the establishmentby government of export
processing enclaves. But thiswas simple-minded"economic determin-
ism." The women were influenced, not by external factors such as
structuraladjustment programs, privatization,and the liberalization
of the economy, but by their own choices, as "constituted through,
and enabled by,the complex and contradictoryhistoriesof women's
lives . . ." (Feldman, 2001, 1122).
Looking through the lens of a 21st-centuryfeminism that sees
work as the path to liberation, international feminist scholars per-
haps equated the newlyproletarianized women workers of the third
world with the "Lowell girls" of 19th-centuryMassachusetts, drawn
fromtheirfarmsinto the firstAmerican textilefactories.Under fairly
mild working conditions (compared to their counterparts in Man-
chester, England) theydeveloped both a worker and a feministcon-
sciousness from their work experience. But as Ellen Rosen pointed
out, the 19th-centuryAmerican pattern of industrialization was not
being followed in the countries subject to structural adjustment.
Women received a "women's wage," while men did not receive a
"man's wage":
Today's export-processingeconomydoes not . . . transplantolder formsof

to the developingworld.. . . Unlike in Westernnations,
industrialization
where capital-intensivemanufacturewas centralto economic growth,in
manydeveloping countriestheselow-wageindustrieshave become central
to the economic growththatis expected to occur.And unlikein theWest,
wherethe higher-paidmen's industrialjobs were centralto the economic
welfareof families,in export-processingeconomies the low-paidwomen
workersmakeup about 80 percent- thevastmajority - of theworkforce.
(Rosen, 2002, 245.)
506 SCIENCE & SOCIETY
Ifwomenhavebeen crucialin exportindustries, theyare also

for
targeted microcredit, widelypromotedby internationaldonor
agenciesas a wayout of poverty for rural women. Proponentsof
microcreditwaxeloquentaboutthepossibility ofdrawing womeninto
themainstream economybylending them small amounts, bundling
thewomenintosmallgroupswhowatchovereachother,and charg-
ingthem3% monthly Thisfollows
interest. microcredit's "cardinal
rule"thatwhileborrowers maynothavecollateral, theynonetheless
shouldbe consideredas seriousbusinesspeople, "notcharitable
cases."
"Sixtydollarsmaynotsoundlikemuchtous,butin a placelike
thePhilippines itcanbe enoughtogeta family going,allowing them
to buya cowor goodsto sellin themarketplace," saidNancyBarry,
presidentofWomen'sWorldBanking,a NewYork-basednetwork
and resourcecenterformicrofinancing organizations aroundthe
world."Thehopeovertimeisthatthe$60becomes$100,then$500,
and beforeyouknowit,theseclientsare integrated intothemain-
streameconomy"(Martinez, 2003) .
The originsofthisidea lie,in part,withpoliciesestablished in
Washington. Asearlyas 1973,USAIDrespondedtocritiques byfemi-
nistactivists
whosawdevelopment policies as directed onlyto men
and notto women,byintroducing an OfficeofWomenand Devel-
opment, andbyamendingtheForeignAssistance Act"toincludethe
incorporation ofwomenintonationaleconomiesas partofthefor-
eign policy"(Posterand Salirne,
aid 2002,184). Beforelong,micro-
a
creditlendingbecame majorstrategy ofUSAID,andwomenwere
targeted
specifically forthisformofcredit.
Overseastheideaofmicrocredit iswidely attributed toan experi-
mentin thevillageofGrameenin Bangladesh, in 1977,byGrameen
BankfounderMohammed Yunus,an economist.(The following ac-
countdrawsheavily 2002.)After
fromIsserles, watching theprocess
ofhowwomenvillagers borrowed frommiddlemen tomakebamboo
stoolsand mats,sellingtheproductsbackto themiddlemen at the
of
end each day,he initially distributed micro loans to 42 peoplein
one village,borrowing theinitialsumof$300 froma Bangladeshi
bank.Fromthishe developedtheGrameenmodel,inwhichgroups
ofsixnon-related people,fromsimilar socioeconomic backgrounds,
are grantedindividual loans,and expectedto producegoodperfor-
mance,definedas attending weeklymeetingsand makingweekly
payments on time.Ifattheendoftheloancycleeveryone hasrepaid

theirloansconsistently, thegroupcan thenseeka largeramountof
money.The GrameenBankhe foundedin 1983becamethelargest
micro-lending institution inBangladesh, lendingprimarily towomen.
By 1999 Grameen had 1,000 ruralbranches, covering 45,000 villages,
andwaslendingmorethan$1 billiontomorethantwomillionmem-
bers,94% ofthemwomen(Isserles,2002,210).
By1997,thefirst international Microcredit Summit washeldin
NewYorkCity,setting a goal ofreaching100millionoftheworld's
poorestfamiliesby2005.As of 2002,morethan2,500institutions
offeringmicrocredit havereached42.6millionpoorfamilies world-
wide.The Microcredit SummitCampaign,the network emerging
fromthe1997summit, involves"donoragencies,banks,nongovern-
mentalorganizations and educationalinstitutions," and focuseson
"empowering women. . ." (Semple,2003).
The background tothisdevelopment istherapidgrowth ofwhat
economists termtheinformal sector.Contrary to thepredictions of
mosteconomists in the1970s,theinformal sector- whichwasex-
pectedto shrinkinternationally as economiesgrew- has instead
been growing steadily(Beneria,2003,109-110).In countries trans-
formedbySAPs,theharshpoliciesdictatedbytheIFIs placedpar-
ticularburdenson women'sshoulders. As thepublicsectorshrank,
manyhundreds ofthousands ofpublicservants losttheirjobs. Charg-
ing feesfor health care and foreducation, and endingfoodsubsi-
dies,forced families to rely on their own resources. It wasassumed
thatwomenwouldpickup theslack(Tickner, 1999,54). In addition,
thederegulation oflandacquisition forcedmanypeasantfamilies off
theirland,so thattheywereno longerself-sufficient (Chang, 2000,
127).
Strategies adoptedbywomenincludedfinding workin thein-
formal sector:sellinghandicrafts inlocalmarkets or,moredrastically,
sellingthemselves and/or theirchildren into prostitution, or emi-
grating to the richer countries to sell their labor. Highly educated
womenfoundjobs as nurses, ortookcareofotherpeople'schildren,
whileleavingtheirownto growup withrelatives. (On thistradeoff
ofthird-world women'scaringskillsforfirst-world women'scareer
paths,see Ehrenreich and Hochschild, 2002.)
According toJuliaElyachar, themicrocredit schemesunderthe
sponsorship of the World Bank began when SAPS failedtoyieldthe
508 SCIENCE äf SOCIETY
resultsclaimedforthembyneoliberaltheorists.Reformerswithinthe
WorldBank,encouragedbythe appointmentofJamesWolfensohn
about theoverallimpact
as Presidentin 1995,expressedreservations
of neoliberalpolicies.
unemployment
Large-scale amongpublicsectorworkers and stateemploy-
ees- as wellas increasing
levelsofpovertyamongthepoordue totheend
ofstatesubsidies- weresupposedto havebeen a matterof"temporary
untiltheprivate
suffering" sectorkickedin to takeup theslack.Butwhen
thetemporary sufferingstartedtolookpermanent, newdevelopment pro-
gramsweredevisedtorelievethesuffering ofgroupsnegatively affected
by
structural
adjustment. In a numberofcountries whereSAPSwerebeing
enforced,theWorldBankestablished net"
SocialFundsas the"socialsafety
ofchoice.(Elyachar,2002,501.)
Located in the Caribbean,LatinAmericaand Africa,the Social

Funds contributeto microenterprise, grantingfundsto individual
microenterpreneurs through local non-government organizations
(NGOs), who distributemicroloansfarmedout byinternationalor-
ganizationsand developmentagencieswhileadditionallysupervising
the collectionof interestpaymentsforbanks (Elyachar,2002, 498).
Elyacharargued,the adoptionofmicrocreditsignalsan ac-
In effect,
ceptanceofthepermanencyoftheinformalsectorand theabandon-
mentof anynotion of genuine economic development.
Meanwhile,thewomendrivenout oftheirhome economieswere
a major source of remittancesto theirfamiliesback home. In the
Philippines,remittances(fromboth men and women) amount to
about $7 billion annuallyand are the "largestsource of foreignex-
change- surpassingincomefromeithersugaror minerals"(Chang,
2002, 130). Worldwide,thisflowofremittances is "fastbecomingthe
cherished 'El Dorado' formicrofinancing promoters. . ."; theamount
senthome in 2002 amountedto $80 billion,exceeding"forthe first
time the amount of total aid and credit (both privateand public)
extended to poor countries"(Martinez,2003).
Women,forcedout of theircountryby the absence ofwell-pay-
ingjobs, workinglong yearsawayfromtheirchildrenand husbands,
send home moneyto make up fortheirabsence. The influxoffunds
fromtheseremittances intothelocal bankingsystem allowsthemicro-
creditorsto drawpoor local village women into entrepreneurship,
overseeingtheirtransformation intomicroentrepreneurs and respon-
borrowers.
sible,interest-paying Thiscircuit
ofcapitalassiststhegov-
ernment and theelitein continuingthepoliciesthathavecreated
thepoverty place.Andthecostsarebornealmostentirely
in thefirst
bywomen.
6. UnitedStatesChampionsFeminismas Part ofNeo-Imperialism
Evenmoresinister istheemployment offeministideologyin the

serviceoftheU. S. imperialproject.Verymuchas thesuccessofthe
U. S. civilrightsmovement in theCold Warperiodwastrumpeted
bytheU. S. government in thestruggle forinfluencein thethird
world,so too thesuccessoftheU. S. women'srights movement has
becomecentralin thesellingofcapitalism to thethirdworld.
Whatcouldbe moreconvenient toward
thanthehostility women's
rights ofextremeIslamicist tendencies,suchas theversionofIslam
cultivated by the Saudi regime? Never mind thatthemoderninter-
nationalmovement ofpoliticalIslamis largelytheproductofWest-
ern funding and encouragement, intended as a weapon against
secularand leftnationalist regimesand movements. (On thispoint,
seeAmin,2001.)NowthatMuslimextremism hasbecometheinter-
nationalstrawmanforthewaron terrorism, therightsofwomen,
linkedinextricably to modernindustrial capitalism,are a made-to-
orderpartofthepropagandamachineoftheBushadministration.
The liberation ofwomenis self-evidently partoftheprojectof
modernization and democratization, thegoalsclaimedbytheBush
administration as itbrutally reshapesthelandscapeofAfghanistan
andIraq.The conventional wisdomlinksdemocracy, thefreemarket,
and theemancipation ofwomen.Indeed,theequationis that"mod-
ern"equalswomen'srights, theJudeo-Christian heritage,anddemoc-
racy,while"traditional" equalspatriarchal suppression women's
of
rights,theIslamicheritage, and terrorism.The rights ofwomen,for
are
example, beinggiven centerstageinthe Bush administration'swar
on terrorism. The warinAfghanistan in partas an effort
wasjustified
to saveAfghani womenfromtheTaliban.The samedirection is evi-
dentin theattempt to reconstructtheMiddleEastbytheneocon-
servativecabalaroundPresident Bush,startingwiththeinvasionand
of in
occupation Iraq 2002.Indeed,Cheney'sdaughter Lizwastasked
in theStateDepartment witha projectcalledtheMiddleEastPart-
nership Initiative,with a briefto "modernize" theMiddleEastby,
5 10 SCIENCE àf SOCIETY
amongotherthings, encouraging
' thefullparticipation ofwomenin
life
public (Bumiller, 2003).
Similarly, inAfghanistan, in December2003,a disputeoverthe
representation ofwomenin theleadership oftheconstitutional con-
ventionwasinterpreted as a struggle betweentheancientand the
modern.Accordingto thisaccount,the chairman,Sebaghatullah
Mojadeddi,toldthewomennottoputthemselves on a levelwithmen.
"EvenGod has notgivenyouequal rights . . . becauseunderhisde-
cisiontwowomenare countedas equal to one man."In sayingthis,
thereporter commented, thechairman "managedtoexposetheten-
sionsthatunderlaynotjust thisassembly butalso thisnation,over
theroleofwomenand theroleofIslam,thefealty to traditionand
thepushformodernity" (Waldman, 2003).
It is easytodismissthefeminist sentiments oftheBushadminis-
tration as a cynicalexercise.Butthereisan important kerneloftruth
in thispropaganda.Ifa centralgoalofglobalization is todissolvethe
bondsthathold a traditional societytogether, then feministideas
constitute a powerful solvent. One could,perhaps,makean analogy
to thefunctions ofChristianity in thecenturies ofEuropeanexplo-
ration.Christian missionaries accompanied Western traders,andtheir
evangelism helped to transform the traditional cultures theyencoun-
tered, whether in Africa, Asia, or theAmericas. Consciously or un-
consciously, theeffect ofmissionary preaching wastoweakenand to
de-legitimize theassumptions underlyingtheancientwaysofdoing
and beingthathad heldthesecultures together (Wolf,1997,145ff).
In thelate20thandearly21stcenturies, forbetterorworse, femi-
nismfunctions in a similar way.As MarthaGiménezhas noted,
The riseoftheabstract thebearerofeconomic,political,

individual, civil
andhumanrights, forthedevelopment
isbotha precondition ofcapitalism,
and a continuing structural
capitalist effect to itsongoing
thatcontributes
reproduction.Feminismis one of theimportant expressionsofWestern
individualism.
(Giménez,2004.)
feminism
Ideologically, encourages rather
womento be individuals,
thanmembersof familiesor communities. At thesame time,the
ofpeasantwomenmodernizes
proletarianization theirconsciousness
and theirsenseofidentity.
AsWilliamGreiderobserved,themanag-
ersforMotorolain Kuala-Lumpur haveto "changetheculture"of
the Islamicwomenit hiresto makesiliconchips.The company
FEMINISM AND CORPORATE GLOBALIZATION 51 1
teachesthemto speakup forthemselves, and to use ATMs,instead

ofhandingtheirwagesovertotheirfamilies (Greider,1997,82-84).
Thattheincorporation ofwomenintothemarket economyis a
requirement foreffectiveeconomic development has now becomepart
oftheconventional wisdomofglobalization. it
Ironicallywasthecon-
certedeffortsoffeminist economists sincethe1970s,starting withthe
workofEsterBoserup,thatinformed theworldofthecrucialsignifi-
canceofwomen'slabortoeconomicdevelopment (see Beneria,2003,
47-48). But now that gender is on theirscreen, oftheWorld
officials
Bank and other IFIsinsiston the educationand the labor market work
ofwomenas a necessary partofeconomicdevelopment. A WorldBank
notedthat"women
official remaina 'huge,untapped'resource in the
MiddleEastandNorthAfrica, wheremorewomenworkers areneeded
totransform economies thatmustdependincreasingly onprivate-sector
to
exports compete worldwide."3 This,however, goesin tandemwith
theotherorthodoxies ofneoliberalism, whichrequirethestatetowith-
drawfundsand institutional support fromtheservices mostrequired
bywomen.
The workings ofinternational capital,then,systematically dis-
mantlethestructures, however that
inadequate, protect women and
theirchildren- rangingfromhealthcare,education,housing,to
affordable foodandfuel- thuscreating intensified poverty, disease,
and unprecedented levelsofwealthpolarization. Buttheysimulta-
neouslyinvitewomenintothemarketeconomy, arguingthatthisis
thepathto liberation and equality(Chossudovsky, 2003,67-8). The
of
legitimization feminism masks theradicalrestructuring oftheworld
economy, and the of
glitter economic liberationdisguises theintensi-
ficationofpoverty forthevastmajority ofwomen.
Conclusion
I havebeenarguing that,inits21st-century feminism

incarnation,
hasbeen a usefulhandmaidenofcapitalism. In sayingthis,I am of
courseleavingoutofthepicture themanyaspectsoffeminist organiz-
ingthatrepresenta potential
challenge toglobalization,
andthemany
3 Womenmakeup halfofthe325millionpeopleintheregionandup to63% ofuniversity
in somecountries,
students butonly32% ofthelaborforce."'No country can raisethe
standardoflivingand improvethewell-being of itspeople,'said Christiaan
Portman,
WorldBankvicepresident fortheMiddleEastand NorthAmerica, 'without
thepartici-
pationofhalfofitspopulation.Experience in othercountries hasshownoverand over
againthatwomenare important actorsin development'"(Olson,2002).
5 12 SCIENCE & SOCIETY
organizationsaroundtheworldthatare engagedinjustthisactivity.
(For an excellentdiscussion oftherangeoffeminist organizing inthe
globalcontext, see Barton,2004.)My focus herehas been on the as-
pectsoffeminism thathavebeen co-optedintotheenterprise ofex-
the
panding global reach of corporate capitalism,ratherthan on those
thatpointto an alternative visionofeconomicsand politics. Butitis
justsuchan alternative visionthatis nowdesperately needed.
In thecurrent theleftin theUnitedStatesandaroundthe
crisis,
worldisdividedas tostrategy andgoals,anduncertain abouta pathto
thefuture.Whileacknowledging thebraveachievements oftheCuban
revolution,mostleftwriters seetheblueprint ofSoviet-model economic
development as discredited, and arguethattheonlypossiblesocial-
ismforthefuture is one thatis deeplydemocratic in character.
But howto buildthisnewsocialism? James Petras and Henry
Weltmeyer makea case fora returnto state-led development, with
nationsredirecting resourcestowardfoodsufficiency and a vibrant
localeconomy(PetrasandWeltmeyer, 2001). ButRosalindPetchesky
placesherfaithina newinternational civilsociety,
mediating between
nation-statesandinternational institutions(Petchesky,2003). Arturo
Escobarseesthepossibility ofcreating somekindofa hybrid culture
and economythatwouldrestoretheautonomy and healthofindig-
enouspeoples(Escobar,1995).MariaMiesgoesfurther, callingfor
a rollbackofindustrialization and a return toa subsistence economy
(Bennholdt-Thomsen and Mies,1999).ButDoug Henwoodis scath-
ingaboutcallsfora returnto a presumedprecapitalist GoldenAge,
the
whichdisregard complexity ofmodern production distribu-
and
tion,and overlooktheachievements ofindustrialization:
oflives,
thelengthening thereduction andmaternal
ininfant the
mortality,
liberation
far-from-complete inpartbytheavail-
ofwomen(accomplished
jobs,which
offactory
ability offer the
thema wayoutofruralpatriarchy),
- intheFirst
spreadofliteracy andThirdWorldsoverthelongsweepof
things.(Henwood,2003,165-66.)
Thusthereis no consensuseitheras to meansor endsamongthose

whoare seekingan alternativeto thecurrentsystem.
The taskfortheleftis todevelopradicalnewideasandmethods
forthecreationofa socialand economicalternative.In thiswork,
job thaninthepastoftaking
theleftmustdo a better women'sissues
seriously.CitingMargaretRandall,JohnForan notes that"the rela-

tionshipof Marxismto feminism,and of class struggleto women's
movements,has been a particularly vexed arena of contentionand
frustrationon all sides" (Foran, 2003, 1; Randall, 1993).
Even among revolutionaries who explicitlytakewomen's issues
into account,the recordis spotty:
MarisaBelausteguigoitiafindsthatevenamongtheZapatistas, women's"is-
sues"tendtocomebehindnationalissues,and demandsforgreater equal-
ityin thecommunity behinddemandsplacedon thestate;patriarchy, in
otherwords, willonceagainbe dealtwithonlyaftercapitalism and racism.
And the"solutions" thereforedo notgo farenough:childcare centers,
to
facilities
hospitals, make food - all essential
demands- do notadd up
towhatindigenous womenhaveeloquently called"therightto rest,"and
beyondthat,tothinkand todo,tofeeland tolove.(Foran,2003,5; on this
pointsee also Disney,2004.)
Foran's injunctionto the leftis to take the ideas and the critiqueby
feministactivistson board.
Thefeministrevolution,alongwiththeanti-racist maythuswell
revolution,
buta newMarxism
provetobe thelongestrevolutions, attunedtofeminism
andanti-racism withwomen'sandothermovements
atitscore,linking with
globalandclassedge,mayhelpusgetthereintheend.(ibid.)
an irreducible
Up tonow,theenergies,thebrilliance,and thehardpoliticalwork
of manydedicatedfeminists have been steadilyco-optedand cleverly
used to strengthen and to legitimizetheexpansionof corporatecapi-
talism.It is timefortheleftto acknowledgeand enlisttheinsightsand
the loyaltiesof women,withoutwhichno seriousalternativeto the
presentworldsystem can everbe successfully
constructed.I close,then,
witha challengeto the male left:read feminist work;absorbthe idea
that"womenhold up halfthesky";and above all,understandthatany
attempted socialtransformationthatdoes nottakeaccountofwomen's
needs,experience,and wisdomwillbe doomed to failure.
Ph.D. Programin Sociology
TheGraduateSchool
ofNewYork
CityUniversity
365 FifthAvenue
NewYork,NY 10016
hesterl net
@prodigy.
5 14 SCIENCE äf SOCIETY
REFERENCES
Abu-Lughod,Lila, ed. 1998. Remaking Women: Feminism and Modernity in theMiddle

East. Princeton,NewJersey:PrincetonUniversity Press.
Agnew,Jean-Christophe, and RoyRosensweig,eds. 2002. A Companion toPost-1945
America.Maiden, Massachusetts:Blackwell.
Amin,Samir. 2001. "PoliticalIslam." CovertAction Quarterly (Winter),3-6.
Amott, Teresa. 1993. Caught in theCrisis: Women and the U. S. Economy Today.New
York:MonthlyReviewPress.
Amsden,Alice H. 1989. Asia'sNextGiant:SouthKoreaand LateIndustrialization. New
York/Oxford,England: OxfordUniversity Press.
Barnett,Thomas P. M., and HenryH. Gaffney, Jr.2002. "The Global Transaction
Strategy."Transformation Trends,U. S. Departmentof Defense,Officeof Force
Transformation,December 16. www.cdi.orff/mrp/ transformation-trends,
cfm.
Barton,Carol. 2004. "Global Women's Movementsat a Crossroads:SeekingDefini-
tion,New Alliances,and GreaterImpact."Socialismand Democracy, 18:1,No. 35
(January-June) .
Benería, Lourdes. 2003. Gender, Development, and Globalization:Economicsas ifAll
PeopleMattered. New York and London: Routledge.
Benería, Lourdes, and CatharineR. Stimpson,eds. 1987. Women, Households, and
theEconomy. New Brunswick,NewJersey/London:RutgersUniversity Press.
Bennholdt-Thomsen,Veronika,and Maria Mies. 1999 (1997). TheSubsistence Per-
spective:BeyondtheGlobalised Economy. London: Zed Books/NorthMelbourne,
Australia:SpinifexPress.
Bernstein,Aaron. 2003. "WakingUp fromthe AmericanDream: Dead-End Jobs
and theHigh CostofCollege Could be ChokingOffUpwardMobility." Business-
week,December 1, 54-58.
Bluestone,Barry,and BennettHarrison.1982. TheDeindustrialization ofAmerica:Plant
Closings,Community Abandonment, and theDismantling ofBasic New
Industry. York:
Basic Books.
Brenner,Johanna. 2000. Women and thePoliticsofClass.NewYork:MonthlyReview
Press.
Bumiller,Elisabeth.2003. "WhiteHouse Letter:A DiplomaticSuccess,and Cheney's
Daughter."New YorkTimes, June 16.
Chang, Grace. 2000. DisposableDomestics:Immigrant WomenWorkers in theGlobal
Economy. Cambridge,Massachusetts:South End Press.
Chossudovsky, Michel. 2003. TheGlobalisation ofPovertyand theNewWorldOrder.2nd
ed. ShantyBay,Ontario,Canada: Global Outlook.
Chow,EstherNgan-Ling,ed. 2001. Transforming GenderandDevelopment inEastAsia.
New York: Routledge.
. 2003. "Gender,Globalizationand Social Change in the 21stCentury."Inter-
nationalSociology, special issue, 18:3 (September).
Davis,Angela Y. 1981. Women, Race and Class.New York:Random House.
Dembele, Demba Moussa. 2003. "PRSPs: PovertyReductionor PovertyReinforce-
ment?"PambazukaNews:An Information Service
forSocialJusticeinAfrica.Decem-
ber 11. http://www.pamazuka.org.
Disney,Jennifer.2004. "Incomplete Revolutions:Gendered Participationin Pro-

ductiveand ReproductiveLabor in Mozambique and Nicaragua."Socialismand
Democracy, 18:1, No. 35 (January-June).
Editors.2002. "Crises:One AfterAnotherforthe Life of the System."Monthly Re-
view,54:6 (November),47-59.
Ehrenreich,Barbara,and ArlieRussellHochschild,eds. 2002. GlobalWoman:Nan-
nies,Maids,and Sex Workers in theNewEconomy. NewYork:MetropolitanBooks.
Eisenstein,Hester. 1983. Contemporary FeministThought.Boston, Massachusetts:
G. K. Hall.
. 1991. GenderShock:Practicing Feminism On Two Continents. Boston, Massa-
chusetts:Beacon Press.
Australian
. 1996. InsideAgitators: Femocrats and theState.Philadelphia,Penn-
sylvania:Temple University Press.
, ed. 2004. "Genderand Globalization:Marxist-Feminist Perspectives."Spe-
cial section,Socialismand Democracy, 18:1, No. 35 (January-June).
Eisenstein,Zillah R., ed. 1979. Capitalist
Patriarchy and theCaseforSocialistFeminism.
New York:MonthlyReviewPress.
Elyachar,Julia. 2002. "EmpowermentMoney:The World Bank, Non-Governmen-
tal Organizations,and theValue ofCulturein Egypt."PublicCulture, 14:3,493-
513.
Escobar,Arturo.1995.Encountering Development: TheMakingand Unmaking oftheThird
World.Princeton,NewJersey:PrincetonUniversity Press.
Evans,Sara M. 2003. Tidal Wave:How Women ChangedAmericaat Century's End. New
York/London: The Free Press.
Faludi,Susan. 1991. Backlash:TheUndeclared WarAgainstAmerican Women. NewYork:
CrownPublishers.
Federici,Sylvia.2000. "War,Globalization,and Reproduction."Peaceand Change,
25:2 (April), 153-161.
Feldman, Shelley. 2001. "ExploringTheories of Patriarchy:A Perspectivefrom
ContemporaryBangladesh."Signs:JournalofWomen in Cultureand Society,
26:4
(Summer), 1097-1127.
Fernandez-Kelly,M. Patricia. 1989. "InternationalDevelopment and Industrial
Restructuring: The Case of Garmentand ElectronicsIndustriesin Southern
California."Pp. 147-165 in MacEwan and Tabb, eds.
Fernandez-Kelly, M. Patricia,and Diane Wolf.2001. "A Dialogue on Globalization."
Signs:JournalofWomenin Cultureand Society, 26:4 (Summer), 1244-1249.
Foran,John. 2003. "Feminism and Global Marxism: Makinga Commitment."From
oftheSectionon Marxist SociologyoftheAmericanSociological
theLeft:The Newsletter
24:2 (Spring/Summer), 3-4.
Association,
Freeman,Carla. 2000. High Techand HighHeelsin theGlobalEconomy: Women, Work,
Identities
and Pink-Collar in theCaribbean.Durham, North Carolina/London:
Duke UniversityPress.
Freeman,Jo. 1975. ThePoliticsofWomen's A Case Studyofan Emerging
Liberation: So-
cial Movementand Its RelationtothePolicyProcess.New York:David McKay.
Freedman,EstelleB. 2002. No TurningBack: TheHistory ofFeminism
and theFutureof
Women. New York: BallantineBooks.
516 SCIENCEàf SOCIETY
Friedan,Betty.1963.TheFeminine NewYork:Dell.
Mystique.
Froebel,Folker, and OttoKreye.1980 (1977). TheNewInterna-
JürgenHeinrichs,
tionalDivisionofLabour:Structural
Unemployment in Industrialised and
Countries
Transí. Pete Burgess.London: Cam-
in DevelopingCountries.
Industrialisation
bridgeUniversityPress.
George,Susan.2002."AShortHistory
ofNeoliberalism." Glo-
Pp. 1-6 in RealWorld
A ReaderinEconomics
balization: fromDollarsand Sense,eds. Alejandro
and Politics
Reuss,etal. 7thed. Cambridge,Massachusetts:Dollarsand SenseEconomic
Affairs
Bureau.
Giménez,MarthaE. 2004."Connecting Marxand Feminism in theEra ofGlobal-
ization:A Preliminary Socialism
Investigation." andDemocracy, 18:1,No. 35
(January-June).
Gindin,Sam,and Leo Panitch.2002. "Exchange:1. Rethinking Crisis."Monthly
54:6 (November),
Review, 34-45.
Glater,
Jonathan D. 2004."Offshore GrowinLeanTimes:Consultants
Services Help
Companies ShiftTheirOperations." York
New Times,
January 3, C4.
and theHistory
Gordon, Linda. 1994. PitiedbutNotEntitled:SingleMothers ofWelfare,
1890-1935.NewYork:The FreePress.
Greider,William. 1997. One World,ReadyorNot: TheManic LogicofGlobalCapital-
ism.NewYork:Simonand Schuster.
Heidi1.1987."Changes
Hartmann, inWomen'sEconomicandFamily RolesinPost-
eds.
WorldWarII UnitedStates."Pp. 33-64in Beneriaand Stimpson,
Henwood,Doug. 2003. the
After New Economy.New York: The NewPress.
Holmstrom,Nancy,ed. 2002a. TheSocialistFeminist
Project: Readerin
A Contemporary
NewYork:Monthly
andPolitics.
Theory ReviewPress.
Pp. 1-12 in Holmstrom,
. 2002b."Introduction." 2002a.
Friedan.
Horowitz,Daniel. 1998. Betty Mystique: The
and theMakingofthe"Feminine
American Left,theColdWar, and ModernFeminism.
Amherst, Uni-
Massachusetts:
versityofMassachusettsPress.
Isserles,RobinG. 2000."Self-Reliance
and Empowerment? ExploringtheRheto-
ricofMicrocredit."Paperpresented to theAnnual ConferenceoftheAmeri-
can SociologicalAssociation,
Chicago,Illinois.
. 2002."Ideology,
Rhetoric,andthePoliticsofBureaucracy: Women
Exploring
and Development." Dissertation, The Graduate
Ph.D. Programin Sociology,
School,The CityUniversityofNewYork.
Men,and theQuestforEco-
Alice. 2001. In PursuitofEquality:Women,
Kessler-Harris,
nomicCitizenshipin 20thCenturyAmerica. New York:OxfordUniversityPress.
Klein,Naomi. 1999. No Logo: TakingAimat theBrandBullies.New York:Picador.
. 2004."Risky HangingwithHalliburton
Business: Iraq2." The
atRebuilding
Nation,278:1 5),
(January 11-16.
Kuhn,Annette,andAnnMarieWolpe,eds. 1978.Feminism Women
andMaterialism:
andModesofProduction.London:Routledgeand KeganPaul.
Kuhn,Sarah,andBarry and theFemale
Bluestone.1987."EconomicRestructuring
Labor Market:The Impactof IndustrialChangeon Women."Pp. 3-32 in
Beneriaand Stimpson, eds.
FEMINISMAND CORPORATEGLOBALIZATION 517
MacEwan,Arthur,andWilliamK.Tabb,eds.1989.Instability
andChangeintheWorld
NewYork:Monthly
Economy. ReviewPress.
MacLean,Nancy.2002a."PostwarWomen'sHistory: The 'SecondWave'ortheEnd
oftheFamily Wage?"Pp. 235-259 in and
Agnew Rosensweig, eds.
MacLean,Nancy.2002b."The Hidden Historyof Affirmative Action:Working
Women'sStruggles in the 1970sand theGenderof Class."Pp. 180-196in
Holmstrom,ed.
Andres.2003."Howa Seed-Money
Martinez, Loanof$60TurnedMelaniePicointo
NewYorkTimes,
an Entrepreneur." July8, A22.
Mies,Maria. 1998 (1986). Patriarchy on a WorldScale:Women
and Accumulation in the
DivisionofLabour.London: Zed Books.
International
Milkman,Ruth.1987."WomenWorkers and theLaborMovement in HardTimes:
Comparing the1930swiththe1980s."Pp. 111-131inBeneríaandStimpson,eds.
Mink,Gwendolyn. End.Ithaca,NewYork/
1998.Welfare's London:CornellUniver-
sityPress.
Mohanty,ChandraTalpade,AnnRusso,andLourdesTorres,eds.1991.Third World
Women ofFeminism.
and thePolitics Bloomington/Indianapolis,Indiana:Indi-
ana UniversityPress.
Naples,NancyA., and ManishaDesai,eds. 2002. Women's Activismand Globaliza-
Politics.New York and London:
and Transnational
tion:LinkingLocal Struggles
Routledge.
Nasser,AlanG. 2003."TheTendencytoPrivatize." 54:10(March),
Review,
Monthly
23-37.
Olson,Elizabeth.2003."WomenCalledMideast'sUntappedResource."NewYork
Times,September17.
Ong, Aihwa. 1987. SpiritsofResistanceand CapitalistDiscipline:FactoryWomenin
Malaysia.Albany,New York: SUNY Press.
Palast,Greg. 2002. TheBestDemocracyMoneyCan Buy:An Investigative Ex-
Reporter
posesthe TruthAboutGlobalization,
CorporateCons and High Finance Fraudsters.
PlutoPress.
Virginia:
London/Sterling,
Pateman,Carole.1988.TheSexualContract. Stanford
California:
Stanford, Univer-
Press.
sity
Petchesky,Rosalind Pollack. 2003. GlobalPrescriptions: Human Rights.
Gendering
London/New withtheUnitedNationsResearch
York:ZedBooks,inassociation
InstituteforSocialDevelopment.
James,and HenryWeltmeyer.
Petras, 2001. Globalization
Unmasked: in
Imperialism
Halifax,NovaScotia,Canada:Fernwood;
the21stCentury. London:Zed Books.
Fractures
ofDescent:U.S. Economic
Pollin,Robert.2003. Contours and theLandscapeof
Global London/New
Austerity. York:Verso.
Winifred,
Poster, 2002."TheLimits
andZakiaSalirne. ofMicrocredit:
Transnational
Feminism and USAIDActivitiesin theUnitedStatesand Morocco."Pp. 189-
219 in Naplesand Desai,eds.
Pyle,JeanL., and KathrynB. Ward.2003."RecastingOur Understanding ofGen-
derandWorkDuringGlobalRestructuring." International 18:3 (Sep-
Sociology,
tember),461-489.
5 18 SCIENCE àf SOCIETY
Pyle,JeanL. 1990."Export-LedDevelopmentand theUnderemployment ofWomen:

The ImpactofDiscriminatory DevelopmentPolicyin theRepublicof Ireland."
Pp. 85-112 in Ward,ed.
Randall, Margaret.1993. Gathering Rage: TheFailureofTwentieth CenturyRevolutions
toDevelopa Feminist Agenda.New York:MonthlyReviewPress.
Reskin,Barbara,and PatriciaA. Roos. 1990.JobQueues,GenderQueues:Explaining
Women 's Inroads intoMale Occupations.Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:Temple
UniversityPress.
Rosen, Ellen Israel. 2002. MakingSweatshops: The GlobalizationoftheU S. Apparel
Industry. Berkeley,California:University of CaliforniaPress.
Rosen, Ruth.2000. TheWorldSplitOpen:How theModernWomen's Movement Changed
America. New York:Viking.
Roy,Arundhati.2003. "Come September."Presentationat The RiversideChurch,
New York City.
Sargent,Lydia,ed. 1981. Women A DiscussionoftheUnhappy
and Revolution: Marriage
ofMarxism and Feminism. Boston, Massachusetts:South End Press.
Schrecker,Ellen. 1998. ManyAretheCrimes: McCarthyism in America.Boston,Massa-
chusetts/NewYork: LittleBrownand Company.
Semple, Kirk.2003. "Tiniestof Loans BringBig Payoff, Aid Group Says."NewYork
Times,November3.
Tabb, WilliamK. 2001. TheAmoralElephant:Globalization forSocial
and theStruggle
in theTwenty-First
Justice New York:MonthlyReviewPress.
Century.
Thomas, Caroline, and PeterWilkin,eds. 1999. Globalization, Human Security,and
theAfrican Experience. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Tickner,J. Ann. 1999. "FeministPerspectiveson Securityin a Global Economy."
Pp. 41-58 in Thomas and Wilkin,eds.
Vogel, Lise. 1983. Marxismand theOppression ofWomen: Towarda Unitary New
Theory.
Brunswick, New Jersey:RutgersUniversity Press.
Waldman,Amy.2003. "Meetingon New Constitution,AfghanWomen Find Old
Attitudes."New YorkTimes,December 16.
"Wal-Mart'sWar on Women." 2004. United Food and CommercialWorkers,AFL-
CIO. www.ufcw.org/issues-and-actions/Walmart-workers-campaign-info/
walmartandwomen/cfm
Ward,Kathryn B., ed. 1990. Women Workers Ithaca,NewYork:
and GlobalRestructuring.
Cornell University Press.
Weigand,Kate. 2001. RedFeminism: American Communism and theMakingofWomen's
Liberation. Baltimore,Maryland/London:The JohnsHopkins University Press.
Wichterich,Christa.2000. The GlobalizedWoman:Reports froma FutureofInequality.
London/New York: Zed Books.
Wolf,Eric R. 1997 (1982). Europeand thePeopleWithout Berkeley,Califor-
History.
nia: University of CaliforniaPress.

S&S Quarterly, Inc. Guilford Press

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S&S Quarterly, Inc. Guilford Press

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S&S Quarterly, Inc.

A Dangerous Liaison? Feminism and Corporate Globalization

THE 1970SANDEARLY1980S,a heateddebatetookplaceover

and theabolitionofwelfare "asweknowit"in theUnitedStates,and

Muchhasbeenwritten aboutthetransformation oftheinterna-

governments(Wichterich,2000, 1-33). Simultaneously, otherareas

Particularly forthe growthof women's employment

In thelastfewdecades,theUnitedStateseconomyhas been transformed

placingtheactofmaking, and transporting

As a measure of the decisive shiftin investmentflowsfromgoods

(78%) ofall adultwomenweremarried,

1970sfeminism. The patternofwhitewomen'semployment came

As Paul Nasserpointedout,whatis conventionally termedneo-

posedbytheinternational financialinstitutions (IFIs), particularly

In extreme cases SAPs helped to produce "failed states,"where the

As globalizationdeepens and spreads,twogroupsof statesare essentially

In this analysis,the gap is where terrorismcomes from,and it is

3. The SecondWave oftheWomen'sMovement:

reachofthismovement without relating itto theeconomicchanges

houseworkbetweenhusbands and wives,it was issues of career and work

Equal pay;sexualharassment; accessto training and promotion; ac-

Whilethepushtoopenjobs towomenwasmostsuccessful intheareas

themselves fromtheruleofkings,womenremainedsubjectto the

In an illustrationof the lack of generationalmobility, the articlecites

of rightwingideological critique. The issue of welfarewas seen as an

one hundred fifty-nine House Democratsvoted forthisbalefulassaulton

More broadly, it is arguable that the idea that women should be

If racismhas permittedpolicymakers to negate poor singlemothersas citi-

The abandonment of the New Deal entitlement to a safetynet

I have been arguingthatthe centralidea of U. S. feminism, that

Here I wantto focuson twooftheseareas:womenin exportproduc-

Korea'soutstanding realwageincreasesandunrivaled genderwagedispari-

UnderpressurefromIFIs to abandon state-leddevelopment,and

wherelegislation and government practices combineto prevent the

Low-wagejobs, "often below subsistence standards," nonetheless

gave women tools withwhichtheyresistedpatriarchy. . . . Women I inter-

Perhaps the extreme end on this spectrum of opinion was the

Today's export-processingeconomydoes not . . . transplantolder formsof

Ifwomenhavebeen crucialin exportindustries, theyare also

payments on time.Ifattheendoftheloancycleeveryone hasrepaid

Located in the Caribbean,LatinAmericaand Africa,the Social

Evenmoresinister istheemployment offeministideologyin the

The riseoftheabstract thebearerofeconomic,political,

teachesthemto speakup forthemselves, and to use ATMs,instead

I havebeenarguing that,inits21st-century feminism

Thusthereis no consensuseitheras to meansor endsamongthose

seriously.CitingMargaretRandall,JohnForan notes that"the rela-

Abu-Lughod,Lila, ed. 1998. Remaking Women: Feminism and Modernity in theMiddle

Disney,Jennifer.2004. "Incomplete Revolutions:Gendered Participationin Pro-

Pyle,JeanL. 1990."Export-LedDevelopmentand theUnderemployment ofWomen:

You might also like