Ciere Welton on Sociocultural Consequences of Free Trade

In this article, Elvia Arriola speaks on the unjust policies and treatments of global employment. These unjust policies and treatments have led to murders and the "violence of poverty."

This article sheds light on some critical aspects of globalization. Arriola speaks on the crisis of femicide in Ciudad Juarez due to the upcoming of industrialization. Women are being targeted and murdered attributed to, from my knowledge, the lack of liability of these companies along the border. How can this iniquity proceed for so long with no forms of actions being set in place to avoid further femicide? Why don't these women who are driven to improve their everyday life and lives of their loved ones matter enough to the governments to have some policies for their protection or for better treatment in the work place?

If it is mainly women who take on the jobs, what will happen when the fear of being killed trumps the desire of working for these industries? I assume this will be a conflict with the production within these industries. Wouldn't you think someone would raise an eyebrow to this, and say "Ok, let's lay down some laws, let's protect these women, let's give these women better work environments." After all, they are the ones doing the heavy lifting for you! Instead, "we are not responsible" is the response given. I feel as if there were more liabilities set in place for the murders and unjust policies and treatments in the industries, we would see a decrease in the numbers of murders.

Though I agree indefinitely about industrialization being the main cause of the continued murders occurring in Ciudad Juarez, I must also agree that poverty is a factor as well. Receiving some income for production is more important than the lives of the women being killed. These women will literally die trying to make a living and make ends meet. Poverty plays roll in many other leading aspects around the globe. For example, so many young children being killed in Illinois over the past years just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, some of these kids also being swept in the wrong crowds outside of schools. If these same men who have such bad influences on young kids had an opportunity at a better education and career there would be, in my opinion, different dynamics. Instead of this man influencing young kids to join the wrong crowd and make the wrong decisions, it would be this man encouraging kids to stay in school, go after that job, which would reduce the murders of children.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjB0JvRs5zXAhUN0IMKHYu0D7cQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthirdmonk.net%2Fknowledge%2Fpoverty-structural-violence-peter-joseph.html&psig=AOvVaw0IB2TR_q6inaAegydFxWWl&ust=1509592272526810

What can we do to begin reconstructing governments to reduce poverty instead pf penalizing citizens, making them feel as if though their lives, education, sanity, overall humanity aren't valuable?

Maya Pietrzkiewicz on "Murder in Juarez"

In Jessica Livingston's "Murder in Juarez" she argues that many young women that work in maquiladoras are targeted to gendered sexual violence because the industry fosters inequality. The female workers of maquiladoras experience gender discriminations to justify women's cheap and disposable labor in Juarez, which leads to undermining violence of women.

The leaders in the maquiladoras factories use third world women as ideal workers because they are naturally good at non-skill worthy labor. This ideology that women are naturally well at specific skills is destructive for women because it justifies cheap labor. Therefore women in the workforce are left untrained in specific skills to keep wages low. This devalues women's work while increasing the factory's productivity. Female workers become differentiated in the work force between male workers are disposable, cheap, and unskilled.

Similarly, traditional roles of women, i.e motherhood, is used against women in the maquiladoras industry. Factories don't want their female employees to get pregnant since its counter productive and expensive for the company. However, they use the concept of motherhood as a way to avoid permanent worker status for women and to justify low wages. Therefore, factories regulate female workers sexual activities, menstrual cycles, and force birth control use. They also feminize and sexualize female workers to create a divide between female and male workers. These actions prevent women from gaining worth in a company and instead promotes consumerism. Factory leaders encourage female workers to dress up and buy items that express femininity to divide them from other workers. Feminizing and sexualizing the female work force also portrays these women as prostitutes thus, devaluing their presence as workers and justifies their deaths or violence as 'dirty girls.' The feminization and sexualization of female workers creates blame on the workers for the violence they experience.

In 2016, human rights activist in Toronto, Kathy Laird, criticized restaurants of sexualizing female workers by forcing women to apply a stereotypical feminine dress code. Laird specifically addressed Hooters restaurant for sexualizing the female workforce to bring in more clients. The dress codes that force women to wear short and revealing clothing to work emphasizes that these women's worth as employees is more important than the skills they bring into the workspace. These dress codes also play a factor in sexual harassment in the work place by co-workers or clients. As Laird states, "They may make employees more vulnerable to sexual harassment, contribute to discriminatory work environments and exclude people based on sex, gender identity ... or creed." The dress code can also be used against a female employee after being sexually harassed. Many excuses used for sexual harassment or violence blames the victim by using their appearance against them, as if they were asking to be abused. All aspects of feminization and sexualization of women in the work force is unacceptable and doesn't justify any sexual harassment or abuse an employee faces.

http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2016/03/08/workers-should-not-be-subjected-to-sexualized-dress-codes-ontario-agency-says.html

What can we do to stop sexualizing and feminizing female workers to provide a safe environment for them?

Daisy Abrego on Global Woman: Nannies, Maids and Sex Workers in the New Economy

In the Introduction of Global Women by Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Hochschild, one of the points that the authors discuss is how women from less fortunate countries travel to wealthier countries in search of work. Even though there are benefits from searching employment in different countries, the families of these women are being left behind.

In the 1970s, due to the declining earning power of most men, many women had to "make up the difference" and support for their families. However, the roles of women in household began to go down. As a result, many women from poor countries are given the opportunity to find employment like "liberation" and have a chance to become breadwinners for their families and improving their children's lives. In exchange, these women have to leave their families and came to a "rich" country as a substitute for these upper class turned career-oriented women by doing their "womanly duties" of cleaning, cooking, taking care of children and even pleasuring men.

When these foreign women make the decision to leave their families to go work, it has a heavy impact them and their families over time. Josephine, a woman who migrated from Sri Lanka to work as a nanny in Athens, Greece, had to leave her three children behind so that she could take care of a stranger’s child. Although she leaves them behind so that she could provide for them, her absence had negative consequences for her children. The author mentions that her youngest does poorly at school and is withdrawn from the world, her middle child attempted suicide three times and her oldest had to get a job because what she made was still not enough. This made me realize how much foreign women sacrifice so much of their lives in order to put food on the table for her kids, but loses the chance of seeing their children grow up at the same time.

In today's society, I've seen many cases where female migrant workers have been affected by this. While female migrant workers have brought the best not only in their families but in their communities, it's still hard for them to not see their children. In an article called “The Sacrifices of an Immigrant Caregiver”, a filipina woman named Emma wanted to send her children to have a better future and go to college, so she came to New York and became a nanny. She talks about she hasn’t seen them in 16 years and how her children slowly feel disconnected with her. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/04/11/the-sacrifices-of-an-immigrant-caregiver

How can immigrant workers still have a strong relationship with their children despite not being there with them?

Soaiba Fatima on Ehrenreich & Hochschild's "Global Woman"

Ehrenreich and Hochschild start off the introduction to “Global Woman” by telling the narrative of a woman named Josephine, who migrated from Sri Lanka to work as a nanny in Athens, Greece. As they depict the life and struggles Josephine faces, the authors illustrate how she has to leave her children behind so she can take care of a strangers child in order to be able to provide for her family. Although she leaves her kids behind in order to provide for them, her “abandonment” has severely negative consequences for her kids.

In the writing, the authors describe how Josephine’s three children, ages 2, 9 and 13, struggle without their mother. The authors mention how Josephine’s middle child, Norma attempted suicide multiple times. This fact made me realize just how deeply wrong the situation of migrant workers really is. Until this reading, I had simply assumed that migrant workers didn’t have children, or if they did, leaving them behind wouldn’t be worse than how most parents leave their kids behind when they go to their 9-5 job. Now, however, I learned that when a woman migrates for work, her children are left behind long term with someone who can not give them the love or support of a mother.

Another fact this reading made me realize was that, although Josephine sends all the money she makes back home to her children, it is still not enough. To help make ends meet, Josephine’s son, Suresh must work as well, which is why he is a bus driver back in Sri Lanka. At first I didn’t understand that although she works in a foreign country, where currency has a greater value, she still doesn’t make enough to fully support her family. It shocked me to realize that even after working in Greece for 10 years, Josephine goes back again, in order to prevent her family from living in desperate poverty. I thought that migrant workers could work overseas for a few years and be able to come back and return to their lives with their families back home.

The story of Josephine reminded me of the movie The Help, which is about how African American women who served white women as nannies or maids. These African American women would leave their own children behind, like Josephine, to take care of other children. Despite resenting their wards, the women treated all the children with love, as shown in the picture below, and tried to instill good values in them. The difference, however, is that the African American women could go home to take care of their own kids every night, while migrant workers like Josephine only got to visit their children once a year, only if they saved up enough for the trip.

I’d like to discuss whether the liberation of African American women from being “The Help” has lead to the oppression of other groups of women, who must now be “The Help.”

Noemi Barrera on Global Women: Ehrenreich and Hochschild

The author in this passage how the women's work has been globalized. She further explains globalization, but I would like to touch on the idea of how women are becoming the breadwinners of their homes.
In the article, the author shares the experience Josephine had as a migrant worker. She had to leave her children at such a young age with no father to take care of another woman's child. She left for about 10 years, and watching the film When mother comes home for Christmas I could see how much not seeing their mother affected them. This brought me to think how being a female migrant worker has affected the relationship a mother should have with their children. As a female migrant worker, Josephine wasn't able to be there for her children in those rough moments, instead, she was taking care of another person baby in order to keep her family back home stable.
This also brought to me to conclude that because in Josephine's situation the male which is defined as the breadwinner was not in the picture to help Josephine and her family. This correlates with women becoming the breadwinners, and the female doesn't necessarily need males to support the family but poverty, in general, has forced them to leave behind their lives to take care of others and make of living out of it to help their families back home. Female migrant workers have been targeted in this aspect and they have become oppressed by wealthy families because not only are they becoming nannies, housekeepers, but also some become sex workers. They lose their dignity, family, and role as a mother wealthier mothers are winning because of these migrant workers.
In today's society, I've seen many cases where female migrant workers have been affected by this. Many families have been broken apart due to the fact that their mother isn't there for them. In others, female migrant workers have brought the best not only in their families but in their communities and have helped rebuild their homes. In Bangladesh, Jahanara a female migrant worker herself made the decision to leave her village because at the time her large family wasn't living out of the money her husband brought back home. She made the decision to the Middle East to make enough money as well to help her family she absolutely left behind everything, but she was able to help her family and her village. Many females have sacrificed everything just to help their families and because of them, they've become the breadwinners of their families.
http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/07/03/female-migrant-workers-changed-face-village/

What kind of resources do female migrant workers deserve?

Brenda Barrientos on Ehrenreich and Hochschild's "Introduction"

The globalization of household labor is a familiar notion to many across the world: we think of household maids from the Philippines and nannies from Sri Lanka. Almost no one questions their presence in our homes, but rarely does anyone seriously consider the functions they serve in replacing what society now lacks: people to do emotional and physical tasks associated with “women’s work.” Ehrenreich and Hochschild’s “Introduction” brings up what they coin as the “care deficit” of wealthy countries, which they explain is what centrally pulled migrant women from their countries - away from family, homes, and children -  to wealthy countries to fill in for the roles commonly attributed to women: caretaker, spouse, and homebody.

The authors frame the care deficit as a three part problem: it’s not only the fact that more women in developed countries are taking on more hours to work outside the home, it’s also that men do not want to take over “women’s work,” and in doing so leave both parents outside the home and unable to care for home and family. It is the powerful societal traditions, Ehrenreich and Hochschild say, that discourage men from taking over responsibilities socially dictated for their wives. In doing so, the role of migrant workers is purposely shifted by society to “not enable affluent women to enter the workforce; it enables affluent men to continue avoiding the second shift” (9). By societal interference, there's little leeway in covering at-home care with family.

From what I gathered, the authors regard the care deficit as an issue created by a focally patriarchal government; so without anyone at home to watch over children or elderly relatives, the emotional and domestic work is pushed off onto someone else. It's mentioned elsewhere in the introduction how wealthy countries have found themselves lacking in emotional companionship with the increased focus on work. If I understand this correctly, this issue is mainly due to the increased importance of superiority in work ethic and for quick progress in a capitalist world, mainly ruled by patriarchal prejudices. The priority of work combined with a lack of concern with one's emotional well-being or home life has created a necessity out of these women; it's a destructive cycle forcing foreign women into devalued work while also preventing any at-home improvements in family work policies in the USA or other developed countries. If it's still "working," it isn't broken, so to speak.

Often our class has framed the globalization of foreign domestics as a oppressive evil; and indeed there’s truth in that, considering how it is shaped by patriarchal notions of what counts as “women’s work” and its following setbacks against women, among other factors. However, there have been efforts made by a notable organization to reshape how domestic workers are regarded in society. An article by Premilla Nadesen talks about the HTA efforts to gain protections and respect for domestic workers, relabeling themselves as professional "household technicians"...The HTA presents a new mindset for those fighting for the recognition and rights of migrant workers in domestics: Could it be possible to reshape how domestic work is considered in wealthy countries like the United States, thereby allowing more workers - men and women alike - to take up the work that is currently covered by migrants?

As we further explore feminized globalization and its impact on women, especially women from developing countries, it may be beneficial to discuss the mindset drilled into these women by their home countries: how does it affect how they view their work before and after they’re sent off, and what efforts are likely necessary to reverse this mindset within their home countries?

Giulia Oros on “Introduction” to Global Woman: Nannies, Maids and Sex Workers in the New Economy

Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Hochschild argue that migrant mothers who work abroad for their families sacrifice everything but are oppressed regardless. She describes the life of one migrant nanny and afterwards state that “nannies like Josephine bring the distant families that employ them real maternal affection, no doubt enhanced by the heartbreaking absence of their own children in the poor countries they leave behind.” This sentence tore my heart. In order to become the independent breadwinner, they abandon their children, aging parents, and homes. They either go into childcare, homemaking, or sex. They provide all the skills that would have otherwise been invested in their own families, but they are expected to not belong in the family but work separately.

Since wives of richer regions are taking on jobs outside the house, they, therefore, need a replacement woman in the house to carry out all the tasks that are associated with the wife’s role. The author states that this is a form of modern imperialism. She gives an example, saying that “an earlier phase of imperialism” when northern countries extracted raw materials and natural resources from the lands they conquered. I found this comparison rather interesting because it makes me understand that hiring a maid from another country is like extracting homemaking services from overseas. This just seems wrong, and I find her comparison somewhat disturbing because it makes me think of what else was extracted from conquered countries – slaves! However, migrant works are different because they are paid for the services they provide to the richer people. But the decision is sadly not an option for many, like Josephine, who could either live with her children in poverty or make money by living away from her family.

Prior to reading this article, I had never thought about what it meant to be a migrant caregiver, nanny, or maid. It is physical labor as well as emotional effort. There is a great deal they sacrifice in order to support their family financially and to improve the material side of their child’s life. The author makes me believe that working in a foreign country away from your family enslaves you to a family while being restricted from your own. The image below represents a migrant woman who works for the family but does not have the privilege of feeding her own children, but instead, she made food for the family and cleaned the house. While the mother of this household can feed her own children, this migrant woman cannot. The obstacles mentioned in her article stir in me sympathy for these mothers and also makes me feel grateful for my parents who did not have to leave the country for work.

In fact, my aunt came from Europe and was hired as a maid. She had to take care of a large American family but she had to leave behind her daughter and husband and now their family is divided. So, when the author states that the distance and separation of the working mother affect her family, it is true and I have witnessed it in my family. The author gave the example of a nanny’s children who were suicidal and poor in school. My cousin was never like that but her bond with her parents are shattered permanently, just like their bond with their daughter, and their bond with each other as the people who brought her into the world. In search for a hopeful answer, I’m wondering, is it possible for migrant nannies to have strong relationships with their children despite not physically being there for them?

Jennifer Gaytan on "Introduction" to Global Nannies, Maids, and Sex Workers in the New Economy

The argument that Ehrenreich and Hochschild is putting forward is that the government and the global economy are oppressing women. This is mainly going on in less developed countries. Women aren't able to better their qualities of life because of social constructions of women in their cultures.

I think this is a very interesting topic and it's something that happens in many countries without much light being shed onto it. Many of a country's social constructions on women place a burden on a woman's life to bring their families forward, even if it means migrating to another country. It is not right for a culture to believe a woman isn't capable of performing all kinds of jobs. Women mostly perform care-taking jobs to be able to financially support their families. Their jobs can include: cooking, cleaning, being nannies, and even being some form of sex worker. Performing this kind of job shifts attention away from the individual's families and onto another individual or family.

When a woman is working in this kind of job, sometimes it can be more oppressing than working in sweatshops or factories. This is because in factories there can be regulations and rules on how a worker should be treated, but when you're working privately, there can be no regulations at all. Of course, there being no regulations in a work space is always a problem. Women can be discriminated against or sometimes even be abused. It would be interesting to figure out what kind of steps are being taken to help people who work privately. They can set a minimum wage on this as well, like all other jobs. Maybe they can even limit the hours they can and should be working.

This issue reminds me of workers in Mexico back then. When my parents lived in Mexico, they were both working independently. Therefore, they were working long hours for very little money. My mother was a maid and nanny for upper class families' homes. They'd pay her whatever they wanted pay her, which usually wasn't enough. She would clean, cook, and take care of their children. Fortunately, at the time, my mother didn't have any children of her own yet, so she didn't have to shift her attention away from anyone specifically, besides her family.

I think this image does a nice job on representing the kind of oppression going on for women working in these kinds of jobs.

What are some other work spaces in which this can happen as well, aside for the ones mentioned? How can we prevent this kind of oppression from happening in these kinds of work spaces?

Zuzu Ramirez on “Introduction” to Global Woman: Nannies, Maids and Sex Workers in the New Economy

        One of the author’s points is that “the lifestyles of the First World are made possible by a global transfer of the services associated with a wife’s traditional role...from poor countries to rich ones.” This means that women in poor countries are who make it possible for women in rich countries to live their lives.
        I thought her main point was interesting because it was something I never took into consideration. I always knew immigrant women are typically those who fill domestic working role but I didn’t realize it’s what makes it possible for wealthier women to have the lives they do. This is because it’s often never portrayed that way in the media. In every show or movie I have seen with a maid or live in nanny, the family treats them like family and the woman often plays a major role in the family’s well being. While it used to be expected to have a POC actor portraying the maid/nanny/gardener/etc, the person is now often portrayed as white. This is because the media works to dismiss the idea that this kind of work is a race issue. Now, portraying ‘the help’ as an immigrant is seen as an offensive stereotype, yet people don’t realize it’s a reality for many people.
        Another major thing that came to mind in regards to this argument is the idea that the feminist advancement of one group of women leads to the oppression of another group. This is very evident here because of the blatant statement that the poor women’s work is what betters the rich women’s lives. The rich women feel empowered and free by the capability to live their lives without being forced into the societally expected role of housewife, yet they then employ another woman who needs the income into that exact role they abandoned. While these women probably did not intend to oppress another group through their liberation, it happened, and shows that feminism for a designated group actually does not help progress all women.
        Going back to the media, I immediately thought of how maids in television shows are typically hispanic/latinx. Coincidentally with the new season out, I’ve been rewatching Will&Grace (1998) and the way immigrant help is portrayed makes me cringe. Deportation is a punchline, culture is a thing to be mocked, verbal abuse towards them is seen as a joke, and they’re essentially slaves to the rich. The main maid, Rosario, is the only parental role in the lives of the children she cares for and manages the house, while her employer who constantly verbally abuses her is out partying and shopping. But, because her employer calls her family and a close friend, it’s dismissed because she’s apparently providing Rosario with a better life than she would have in her home country.

        A question I have is whether there is a proven effect on a child’s development if a maid/nanny raised them in place of their mother?

Elizabeth Castro on Barbara Ehrenreich and Arlie Hochschild’s Article

The authors talk about the increasing migration of women from poor countries to a more developed industrial country to be nannies, maids or sex workers.   The author uses the word “globalization” to describe a worldwide gender revolution. These women migrate to do the “women’s work” of the north.

According to the author, the earning power of most men has declined since 1970 in the United States.  Therefore, many women have joined the workforce to “make the difference” to sustain their family. The roles have changed where you would expect the women to stay home and wait for her husband to come from a long day of work. Since the women from wealthy countries are now working, they no longer have time to clean the house, cook or take care of the children thus hiring a maid/nanny is the solution to such problems. The person who is bound to take the household tasks will likely be a woman who comes from an impoverished country, such as the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and India. I agree with the authors view. This is all too common where my parents are from. My mother grew up in a very poor region in Mexico. In order for her family to make a living and survive, a few of my mother’s sisters had to go to the capital to find jobs as maids. Once they acquired those jobs, their duty was to send their earnings to the family. My mother herself was a maid at the age of 15.

Many of these women who leave their families to work as maids only do it to better their children’s lives. The irony I find is that these women leave their family to take care of another. The author points out the story of Josephina. In order to take care of her children financially she has to go to Greece. Her three children are emotionally unstable yet the family Josephina works for has one child who is getting the attention of both parents plus Josephina. Another irony I find is the use of the word “liberation” used by the author to describe the women who are leaving their home to work. How are these women considered liberated if they are doing “women’s work”? They are trapped in the same cycle. It is the cycle of cleaning, cooking and babysitting. It could also mean that they feel liberated because they are going to work therefore feel satisfaction for being the breadwinner of the family.

This picture depicts a maid who is being stepped on. This can have many meanings, but the most important one is the abuse a maid can experience. This picture is taken for a website that protects the abuse of migrant women. The group is called Migrant Care. They aim to track down potential victims of human trafficking. The article by Barbara and Arlie mention about the little media attention they give to migrant workers.  Some women experience abuse but are unable to seek help because everything is kept “behind doors.” The online article discusses some stories where maids are mistreated. For example, in Hong Kong, a woman ‘employer’ was convicted of beating her Indonesian maid, denying her food and confiscating her passport. Foreign workers take a huge risk in order to provide for their families back home.

http://www.anzrath.com/news-blog/indonesian-maid-detectives-are-on-a-mission-to-save-women-from-trafficking

 

 Will this pattern persist in 100 years from now? There needs to be stricter laws to protect our  foreign workers.