A Woman’s Work is Never Done

international | gender and sexuality | opinion/analysis

Thursday September 11, 2008 14:30

by Eve Campell - WSM

Capitalism and the Exploitation of Women

When the Irish constitution was unveiled in 1937 it set out a special place for women within the home. In Ireland as elsewhere ‘women’s life within the home’ has to a large extent been characterized by long hours of thankless drudgery. While the struggles of Irish women for greater liberties during the last century have improved our lives in many ways, the drudgery of housework remains thankless and the workplace has not brought the liberation that certain feminists promised. As anarchists see it, this is because as long as we live in a capitalist society women (or men) can never be meaningfully liberated.

For the vast bulk of people on the planet, capitalism means a life of exploitation with little or no say in how things are organised, while a small elite reap the profits and make the decisions. Those of us who create the wealth do not control it. The main tool of capitalist exploitation is the wage. Put simply, in your job you create a certain amount of wealth every day when you go to work be it in the office, the call centre or the building site. You are paid back a fraction of this wealth as a wage by your boss who keeps the rest as profit or surplus value.

So whether you work as a waiter in Cork or in a garment factory in the Philippines the wage relationship means that you are not paid for all the work you do; you are being exploited by your boss who amasses the surplus value you create. For working class women around the globe capitalist exploitation is twofold. Women are exploited as wage workers in paid jobs but also on the basis of the vast amount of unpaid domestic work, overwhelmingly done by women, that contributes directly to the bosses’ profits.

According to U.N. figures, women do two thirds of the world’s work for 5% of the world’s income. Most of this work is unpaid, unvalued, unrecognised work without guaranteed benefits, health and safety regulations or organised hours. It is the work of rearing children, breast feeding, caring for the elderly, cooking, cleaning and growing food: housework. The work that women do in the daily grind of housework is not only central to the existence of humanity; it is the work that underpins economics and the work upon which capital bases its profits. The work that women do in housework is the production of the human race and that means overwhelmingly the human workforce, the basic ingredient of all industry, all agriculture, all services, all profits and all wars. Women’s unpaid domestic work is the production of the commodity that is sold for wages, labour power.

It is in the production and reproduction of labour power that women as housewives are exploited in capitalism. By producing workers and caring for workers to enable them to face into the daily slog of wage work women directly contribute to the profits of capital. But while the wage worker gets a fraction of the wealth they create, the housewife gets none. Her work is done for free.

Women who solely work in the home having no wage of their own are faced with the choice of being economically dependent on a man or getting by on social welfare. For many women solely working within the home is not an option and increasing numbers of women also engage in waged work. For most women, work outside of the home does not bring the liberation promised by certain feminists. Millions of working class women can tell you that there is nothing particularly liberating about low paid menial work, especially when you have to make dinner and clean the house after you ‘come home from work.’ The double day of wage work and unpaid domestic work is done by millions of women. The lack of social and economic recognition for women’s domestic work devalues all the work women do, resulting in low wages for caring and domestic jobs (nursing or cleaning for example) and helping to keep women’s wages lower than men’s across the board.

As anarchists we aim to break apart the exploitative relationships that govern all the work we do and to replace them with relationships based on mutuality, solidarity and respect. This means the destruction of the wage relationship upon which capitalism is built and in which women’s unpaid caring labour plays a central part. We think that work should be governed by the needs of our communities not the need to maximize profits at our expense. For women this means an end to their double exploitation inside and outside the home. It means a fundamental shift in what gets prioritized, placing the caring work that is fundamental to the survival of the human race, our well being and our happiness at the centre where it belongs.

save preference

Comments (6 of 6)

you are right, now what?

by lonely welfare woman

Thu Sep 11, 2008 16:15

I am living on my own and depend on social welfare.
I cannot afford a drink when I go out and cannot buy a guy a drink either.
Men expect you to pay for them. This has to change. Irish men should buy the girls a drink and not expect any return other than the dance they get (or the smiles and conversation). We (girls) put hours in that just to get to know you. Nailing a guy is a job on its own.
Recently I got onto this dating service and they claimed they had too many men and needed women to place a free add. I did but to be able to reply to all the winks of the men you have to pay by credit card. I got loads of winks and being a social welfare chick I have no credit let alone a c-card. The men all paid so the dating site owners raked in lots of euro's. They do not seem to realize that us women pay through the roof just to look good on a date so we can nail us a guy.
The government does not hand out towards clothing, make up, hair,shoes, jewelry and buying a working/high earning man a drink.
I hope that not just women read this article.

progress?

by lulu

Thu Sep 11, 2008 19:46

One major problem is that there's no respect for 'menial work'; too many people swallow the line that those who do 'unskilled work' are lazy & undeserving. This is just rubbish & lets qualified workers pat themselves on the back while perpetuating class/income divisions. Not everyone is able to clean properly, & it's mighty important that it's done well. To just be a stay at home mother, you need to be cook, cleaner, 1st aider, teacher, & home manager, or 'just a housewife'!
Unfortunately, most women can't stay at home if they want to now, & are obliged to leave their children with low-paid workers.

So what are you suggesting ?

by Mike - Judean Popular Peoples Front

Thu Sep 11, 2008 20:18

Are you suggesting that Women who work in the home (instead of/as well as) engaging in a paid job outside should recieve money for the work they do at home. ?

If so:
Where should this money come from ? Their partners ? Their children (in the form of some kind of long term loan ?) The state ? (and if so what taxes should be increased to pay for it ?)
What about men who do their fair share. (or even MORE than their fair share) ? Surely they should get some of this money as well ? How should the ratio of work done (and theirfore money owed) be determined ?
How would it work with Single people ? Gay or Lesbian partnerships ? Widowed people ? Single parent households ? Or situations where grandparents or other relatives lend a hand ?

Is it not inconcievable that some of those overburdened with domestic work are in some cases themselves to blame for letting their partners/other families away with it ? Granted it may not be much of an option for women in third world countries or abusive relationships but if the rest of them were to adopt some of the tactics of the workplace and simply withdraw their labour and let the washing pile up until more equitable arrangments were put in place...........

Rights and wrongs of Art 41.2

by Husband and Father

Thu Sep 11, 2008 22:45

Women who solely work in the home having no wage of their own are faced with the choice of being economically dependent on a man or getting by on social welfare.

Well, the thing is that if we had a decent living wage, and weren't getting ripped off in this country, it would be feasible for only one parent to work and the other, (either the mother or father) could be minding the kids, growing the veg and having some time for themselves as well ( IF that's what they wanted to do).

Needless to say, it's a bad arrangement in this day and age that there are still a few couples around where the man works, and doesn't lift a finger at home, and is very controlling of the money.
Thankfully that's a lot rarer these days. and most men share the finances as well as the housework (to varying degrees of effort and quality, but compared to the previous generation, a big improvement over a short space of time)

I have to say, that in one way I applauded the bit in the constitution that says that the state shall "endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties at home."

Yes, it is outdated language, and the word 'duties' can be taken different ways, both parents have a duty to a child, and this text omits the duties of a father, suggesting that child raising was the sole duty of the mother, but at the time it was written, the man was the breadwinner, and it was written in opposition to having both parents away from the kids rather than just one.
We all know some of the thinking on "duties" went so far as that a wife shouldn't work (whether she's got kids or not) and plenty of women had to give up the job when they got married. Thankfully that's changed.

When our own kids were very young, we couldn't afford for my wife to give up work altogether, but she went part time, and I took flexible hours, so there were times when my wife was at work and I was minding the kids, and vice versa, and times when we were both at work, and her parents were minding the kids.
Luckily things changed, and later on we could get by on just my wages, and my wife was a lot happier not having to shuffle paper 9-5 and spend time on our children as well as her own interests. Now that they're hitting secondary school, she's thinking of going back to work part time (self employed).
Ireland has come a long way from the wife being stuck at home, and only making a bit of pin money from cottage industries. Now, it's mainly economic factors that determine whether a mother has free choice to work outside rather than inside the home.

I feel sorry for folks these days with inflation, poor pay and grim jobs prospects , in one case I know of both parents are working, and the grandmother has to work as well, so they actually hire someone to mind the kids 2 days a week.

Wages for Housework and the Global Women's Strike

by Eve C

Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:02

The idea that housework is value producing, forming the other hidden half of capitalist exploitation was first articulated by Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James in their ground breaking text The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community published in 1972. Selma James went on found the Wages for Housework Campaign with the demand that women’s work in the home be rewarded with wages. In 1999 the Global Women’s Strike was founded calling for the recognition and payment for all caring work, and the return of military spending to the community starting with women the main carers. Grassroots women from over sixty countries participate in the Strike winning substantial gains along the way from the abolition of cost sharing in hospitals in Uganda to Venezuela’s article 88 entitling housewives to social security benefits.

What the Global Women Strike Say...

Why are women striking?
To demand a total change of priorities. $800bn a year is spent on military budgets worldwide, less than $20 billion is spent on all the essentials of life – accessible clean water, health, sanitation, basic education. Women make the world go round, and raise and look after its entire population; but at least two-thirds of the work we do is unwaged and unvalued – even though it’s worth at least $11trillion a year. Because of racism, Black and immigrant women work even harder, and in countries with the least resources the burden of women’s and girls’ work is most crushing. This basic sexist injustice, devalues women and everything women do. It keeps our wages 25%-50% below men's. In fact, though a few women are now highly paid, the gap between women's and men's wages is growing.

What do women want?
• Abolition of "Third World debt". Women in the South are owed billions for centuries of work.
• Accessible clean drinking water and ecologically sound appropriate technology for every household.
• Affordable, and accessible, housing and transport.
• Protection against violence – at home, in factory or office, on the farm, on the street.
• Pay equity for all – equal pay for work of equal value – internationally.
• Decent wages for caring work, whether in the family or outside.
• Paid maternity leave and breastfeeding breaks at paid employment.
• Increased pensions, child benefit and other benefits paid to mothers and other carers.
• Implementation of the UN decision (Beijing 1995) to measure and value the unwaged work done by women and men in national economic statistics.

Links

+ The Global Women’s Strike
http://www.globalwomenstrike.net/

+ The Strike in Ireland
http://www.globalwomenstrike.net/Irelandindex.htm

+ The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community by Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James
http://libcom.org/library/power-women-subversion-commun...james

+ Home truths for feminists. An exchange between Selma James and Melissa Benn
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/feb/21/gender.comment

The Global Women's Strike Banner

Not just low income women

by shoegirl

Wed Oct 01, 2008 13:20

shoegirl at shoegirl dot org

lonely welfare woman - I found your post interesting, because it reflected what a high earning older woman friend of mine finds on internet websites. While I do not agree that men should automatically buy a woman a drink (my personal feeling is that if somebody is considerably better off than the person they are dating well yes, it is reasonable to expect them to maybe give a little more than the less well off partner, but that doesn't mean should just fork out for ALL women), my friend does find it particularly hard to meet decent guys through websites. She doesn't agree, but to be honest, most of them she has introduced me to claimed to be "separated" but still living with the wife, which to me suggested they were married guys looking for a bit on the side.

Now in all honesty, I see a similar problem with a lot of straight guys my age, but nobody ever suggests that THEY should change. Oh my God but he has a God-given entitlement to stink the place out and drink like a fish. Yet women are expected to come beautifully groomed!

Ok you are probably at a disadvantage, but I would suggest you dump the dating sites - they are very superficial and full of cheaters. I'd suggest popping along to your nearest VEC and going to an evening class or maybe going along to political events such as those posted here. There you might meet somebody with both a brain AND a conscience who might have a little self-awareness and insight into himself.

PS I'm a single woman, but gay, and I find it just as difficult to meet somebody even though I am a high earner. So earnings are not much to do with it.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Lockdown Skeptics

A Woman’s Work is Never Done

Comments (6 of 6)