Gender Division of Labor

Gendered Division of Labor as a Unified Systems Theory

Glenn’s race-gender analysis of labor provides a unique insight to social feminism. In Gender, Race, and the Organization of Reproductive Labor, she analyzes society’s form of social reproduction—this gendered division of labor. I believe that Glenn’s inquiry leans more towards Young’s approach of a unified systems theory as opposed to Hartmann’s dual systems theory. Dual systems theory highlights two distinct spheres: capitalism and patriarchy. This theory is a combination of Marist and radical feminism, which claims that both spheres reinforce and constantly interact with each other. A unified system theory, on the other hand, takes a more historical approach that evaluates the relations of power as a whole. This theory emphasizes the value of “invisible” work such as childcare, housework, and nursing (etc.). One of the key similarities between Glenn and Young, (I believe), is that they both argue against the assumption that women as a group are in the same situation and face the same conflicts. This is clearly not true. In Women and Revolution, Young states,
“Gender division of labor analysis allows us to do material analysis of the social relations of labor in gender specific terms without assuming that all women in general or all women in a particular society have a common and unified situation… Gender division of labor analysis, however, can avoid this false identification” (55).

Glenn continuously points out that women of different races, ethnicities, and classes face very different situations. While mostly all women are subordinated to men, they are so in different ways, and in many cases women of color are inferior to white women. “Black and Latina women were disproportionately employed as service workers in institutional settings to carry out lower level public reproductive labor, while cleaner white-collar supervisory, as well as lower professional positions, were filled by white women” (Glenn, 73). Through a unified systems theory approach, both writers take account for specific variations in different groups of women’s situations. One of the major differences between Hartmann’s dual systems theory approach and Glenn’s race-gender analysis is Hartmann’s more radical concept of patriarchy as a key factor in relation to the oppression of women in all societies. Hartmann believes that patriarchy has always existed in all societies and that it came before capitalist gender inequalities. Women’s oppression under patriarchy is fundamental for capitalism and human society. Hartmann pinpoints men as the enemy in many ways throughout her writing, and she agrees that men exploit women in both the public and private spheres of society:
“Men are dependent on one another to maintain their control over women. Men maintain this control by excluding women from access to some essential productive resources (in capitalist societies, for example, jobs that pay living wages) and by restricting women’s sexuality” (Hartmann, 322).
And:
“Instead of fighting for equal wages for men and women, male workers sought the family wage, wanting to retain their wives’ services at home” (Hartmann, 325).

Glenn, however, does not argue that women’s oppression is rooted in patriarchy, because this oppression is not a universal female experience applicable to all women. While Glenn notes women’s oppression on a global scale, her conclusion does not opt for a global or universal solution. Rather, she proposes a rethinking strategy of the different interests of various classes and races of women. Moreover, Glenn accepts the fact that the improvement of the oppression of minority women may in turn cause a loss of status for higher ranked white women. Similarly, Young recognizes the need for improvement of third world women saying, “…we know now more than ever that the reproductive rights of poor and Third World women are more seriously threatened than those of other women” (Young, 63). In the ways mentioned above, it is clear that both Young and Glenn have similar viewpoints of social feminism through a unified systems theory.