LIVING IN MANY WORLDS: WOMEN IN A POOR COMMUNITY IN RIO DE JANEIRO Jeni Vaitsman * Poverty, modernization and modernity This articles explores in greater depth certain ideas about changes in gender practices and values that I raised in a previous article (Vaitsman, 1997) on the basis of research data gathered among women from a low-income community in Rio de Janeiro. In that study, I endeavored to establish links between, on the one hand, changes in attitudes to contraception and, on the other, gender practices and values. 1 One of the conclusions I reached was that fixed, comprehensive, dichotomous categories – such as “traditional” and “modern” – are of limited use in interpreting the practical and symbolic worlds these women live in, as they are unable to take in the plurality that exists within popular segments of the population, nor the fragmentation within subjects. This, among other things, because they were categories produced in a historical and theoretical context where they stood in opposition as parts of mutually exclusive realities; that is, in the sense that “modern” would mean the opposite and overcoming of things “traditional”. The processes of modernization - entailing industrialization and urbanization - and more recently those of post-industrialization have caused new practical and symbolic contexts to emerge, thus constituting a world shot through with diverse orders of practices, values, ideas and images. Cultural changes form part of socio-economic, political and institutional processes that have differential impact on different social segments. * Researcher, National School of Public Health (ENSP), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Brazil. 1 This study was carried out in two consecutive stages by way of the following projects: Contracepção - o que querem as mulheres (Contraception – what women want) and Atitudes Contraceptivas- uma análise de mudança de valores entre mulheres de baixa renda no Rio de Janeiro”(Attitudes to contraception – an analysis of value changes among women from low-income communities in Rio de Janeiro). The National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) supported the two projects and the Rio de Janeiro State Research Support Fund (FAPERJ) supported the second. The interviews were carried out by Ana Carla Souza e Silva, Marly Marques da Cruz and Maria Ximena Simpson Severo. The data in my 1997 article were obtained from the former project and those in this article, from the latter.
22
Embed
Poverty, modernization and modernitylasa.international.pitt.edu/LASA98/Vaitsman.pdf · Poverty, modernization and modernity ... criticism made by Derrida ... been a powerful tool
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
LIVING IN MANY WORLDS: WOMEN IN A POOR COMMUNITY IN RIO DE JANEIRO
Jeni Vaitsman∗
Poverty, modernization and modernity
This articles explores in greater depth certain ideas about changes in gender
practices and values that I raised in a previous article (Vaitsman, 1997) on the basis of
research data gathered among women from a low-income community in Rio de Janeiro.
In that study, I endeavored to establish links between, on the one hand, changes in
attitudes to contraception and, on the other, gender practices and values.1 One of the
conclusions I reached was that fixed, comprehensive, dichotomous categories – such
as “traditional” and “modern” – are of limited use in interpreting the practical and
symbolic worlds these women live in, as they are unable to take in the plurality that
exists within popular segments of the population, nor the fragmentation within subjects.
This, among other things, because they were categories produced in a historical and
theoretical context where they stood in opposition as parts of mutually exclusive
realities; that is, in the sense that “modern” would mean the opposite and overcoming
of things “traditional”.
The processes of modernization - entailing industrialization and urbanization - and
more recently those of post-industrialization have caused new practical and symbolic
contexts to emerge, thus constituting a world shot through with diverse orders of practices,
values, ideas and images. Cultural changes form part of socio-economic, political and
institutional processes that have differential impact on different social segments.
∗ Researcher, National School of Public Health (ENSP), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (FIOCRUZ), Brazil.1 This study was carried out in two consecutive stages by way of the following projects: Contracepção - oque querem as mulheres (Contraception – what women want) and Atitudes Contraceptivas- uma análisede mudança de valores entre mulheres de baixa renda no Rio de Janeiro” (Attitudes to contraception –an analysis of value changes among women from low-income communities in Rio de Janeiro). TheNational Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) supported the two projects andthe Rio de Janeiro State Research Support Fund (FAPERJ) supported the second. The interviews werecarried out by Ana Carla Souza e Silva, Marly Marques da Cruz and Maria Ximena Simpson Severo. Thedata in my 1997 article were obtained from the former project and those in this article, from the latter.
2
Nonetheless, while one aspect of the globalized world made virtually instantaneous by the
power of information has been the emergence of difference and plurality, another aspect
is precisely the opposite: the homogenization of certain consumption styles and habits.
In addition to differentiating, change can produce similarities - albeit tangential ones -
to the extent that it produce new, common universes. From the perspective of subjects,
participating in different discursive contexts and interplays entails simultaneously producing
similarity and difference, since they interact in new, common universes from which, at the
same time, they differ. In the urban context especially, they experience simultaneously
different worlds which nonetheless interpenetrate.
Particularly in Latin America, as shown by Lechner (1990), today popular strata
of the population are marginal not because of their values and aspirations, but in
relation to the processes of modernization, which have not managed to incorporate
them owing to structural unemployment. It is no longer a question of the former duality
of traditional and modern, where the traditional sector lived a life apart from the modern
sector, but of a situation where the excluded sectors share in the “modern” way of life.
Part of the values and relations that characterize a tradition always continue
alive and reproduce as part of the culture. However, in the social order that some call
post-modern (Lyotard, 1978; Harvey, 1989) and others reflexive or post-traditional
(Beck, 1995; Giddens, 1995), we are confronted by a world marked by openness and
contingency where now traditions, in addition to being justified by discourse, enter into
dialogue with other traditions and other ways of doing things. This process entails two
situations which, although simultaneous from the subject’s point of view, may be
thought of as different by theoretical discourse. The former situation would be that
involving some kind of reproduction of values and behavior grounded in a given
tradition. The latter would be a situation leading to the production of new values and
behavior; that is, to a break with tradition.
Beck (1995) uses the image of the babushka – the Russian doll that contains a
series of similar, ever smaller dolls within itself – to describe classic industrial society,
3
where collective ways of life fit with one another: class presupposes the nuclear family,
which presupposes sexual roles, which presuppose the sexual division of labor in
marriage. In contemporary society, things no longer fit together so well. New types of
day-to-day arrangements, both in labor relations and in personal lives, are replacing
the typical model of industrial society, where social classes were a kind of sum of
numerous nuclear families built on the sexual division of labor and living similar
situations. New arrangements developed, no longer grounded in traditional models,
entailing greater individualization and the disintegration of the certainties of industrial
society (Beck, 1995). Life situations no longer interrelate necessarily on the traditional
model, but produce new arrangements. For example, the new sexual division of labor
entails taking male and female income separately, producing a fragmentation that
reorders the social structure, which can no longer be represented according to the
same model of complementarity predominant in industrial society (Beck, 1995).
This process, which entails social and personal fragmentation and further
individualization, had far-reaching consequences on gender relations in various parts
of the world. In Brazil, particularly among the urban middle classes, the redefinition of
the sexual division of labor and growing individualization meant that women came to
embark on careers, earn their own money and gain autonomy. What then occurs, in
terms of individualization and reflexivity, with women from poorer social strata who live
in the same historical circumstances, but under other conditions? This is one of the
issues raised by this article. The aim is to understand, in what way individuals from
popular segments are being incorporated, in specific contexts, into the processes of
modernization and are – or are not – gaining access to the institutional spheres that
guarantee universal rights, and how are they reconstructing values and behaviors
within the overall framework that typifies the idea of a reflexive modernity.
Another issue is the theoretical and conceptual implications attendant on this
situation, given that the categories usually employed to contemplate the symbolic
universe of the middle strata as modern and individualist and that of the popular strata
as traditional and hierarchical are unable to grasp this situation which presupposes
4
social and individual fragmentation and, at the same time, interpenetrating worlds.
It is appropriate here to refer to post-structuralism one of whose sources is the
criticism made by Derrida (1973) of the philosophical tradition of Western thinking, built
on binary oppositions whose first terms acquire primacy over and subjugate their
second terms. Derrida showed that the meaning of words or texts is not intrinsic or
fixed, but rather derives from some implicit or explicit contrast, and that oppositions are
not natural, but rather constructed for specific ends in given contexts. This criticism has
been a powerful tool used by feminist theory to contextualize meanings and
deconstruct representations that naturalize the gender hierarchies of modern society,
such as those that associate, on the one hand, universality and equality with maleness
and, on the other, particularity and difference with femaleness2.
Criticism of fixed, dichotomous categories in analyzing the social and symbolic
phenomena of contemporary societies points up one of the impasses facing the classic,
“realist” conception of science according to which clarity and distinctness of ideas are
elements that ensure truth expressed in concepts that “represent” an objective reality.
These impasses, at the same time, are leading to a search for new ways of thinking
about phenomena and of pursuing scientific endeavors. One approach that sees
phenomena – both natural and social – as complexes represents an effort to overcome
dichotomous thinking and to seek to understand the paradoxes and the several logics
in operation in producing a single phenomenon. As Morin (1996) showed, it is a
question of moving on to an approach that is no longer dialectic, but dialogic, where
unity between two principles does not cause duality to disappear, so that, on the
“complexity paradigm”, “the truths appear amid ambiguities and an apparent confusion”
(p.183).
Ambiguity and ambivalence are certainly constituents of the condition of women
who live under the historical circumstances that produced globalization, reflexivity and
individualization; that is, in a world interpenetrated by modern, egalitarian institutions,
2 In this regard, see the discussion by Scott, Joan. “Deconstructing Equality-versus-Difference: or,
5
aspirations, values and conduct. At the same time, their daily lives are marked by
poverty, exclusion, loss of rights and hierarchies of various orders.
In another article (Vaitsman, 1977), I discussed how the coexistence of a
plurality of worlds in Brazilian society is a phenomenon amply recognized by Brazilian
social thinking. Oppositions like traditional/modern, rural/urban, home/street,
individualism/hierarchy, and so on, have been used as theoretical and conceptual
instruments for thinking about and interpreting Brazilian social relations and
institutions, even though their “hybrid” (Freyre, 1992) and “relational” (Da Matta, 1979,
1990) nature – that is, the capacity to mix elements from different practical and
symbolic worlds – is considered a trait typical to the social and cultural formation of
Brazil and the Brazilian way of acting in everyday life.
Prompted by the classic work of Dumont (1966; 1977) on egalitarian and
hierarchical values as the defining elements of modern and non-modern societies,
there developed, particularly in Rio de Janeiro, a whole interdisciplinary tradition of
studies on the symbolic universe of urban population segments, involving
Anthropology, Sociology and Psychology, and going on to a kind of class division, a
socio-cultural stratification. On the one hand, were studies targeting modern,
egalitarian segments of the urban, middle strata; among these – although the
hierarchies did not disappear – what predominated were aspirations, identities and life
projects defined within an individualist symbolic frame of reference (Velho, 1986;
Figueira, 1981, 1987). On the other hand, were those who highlighted the traditional
and hierarchical aspects of the world view of popular population strata and “suburban”