Women, Mode of Production, And Social Formations

7/24/2019 Women, Mode of Production, And Social Formations

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/women-mode-of-production-and-social-formations 1/12

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Latin American Perspectives.

http://www.jstor.org

Women, Mode of Production, and Social FormationsAuthor(s): Heleieth I. B. Saffioti

Source: Latin American Perspectives, Vol. 4, No. 1/2, Women and Class Struggle (Winter -Spring, 1977), pp. 27-37Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2633160Accessed: 17-02-2016 18:59 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 [email protected].

This content downloaded from 143.106.1.138 on Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:59:23 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/

http://www.jstor.org/publisher/sage

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2633160

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp






http://www.jstor.org/stable/2633160

http://www.jstor.org/publisher/sage

http://www.jstor.org/



WOMEN,MODE

OF PRODUCTION,

ND

SOCIAL

FORMATIONS

by

Heleieth I. B.

Saffioti*

This

paper examines the specific problem

of

women within

social forma-

tionswhere the

capitalistmode of production s dominant.

The

difficultynherent

n the

analysis proposed

here arises from

he fact

that t deals withhuman aggregateswhich

are distinctas

regards both their

structural ormation

nd the scope

of their

political action. In

fact, a social

formation

ontains,

on the one

hand,

groupings

which derive from the rela-

tions

of production nd, on theother,

groupings

whose structure s

determined

byprinciplesother thanthoseofthe relations ofproduction.Thus . . . while

Marxism speaks of strata, fractions and

categories to designate particular

groupings, t is nonetheless true that these

strata,fractions nd

categories are

always pertinent o a class. The working-class

ristocracy

s a

specific stratum,

but

t s a stratum

f

the

bourgeois

class. 'Intellectuals' or the

bureaucracy'

are

particular

social

categories,

but

are

pertinent

to the

bourgeois

class.

...

Fractions, strata and

categories

are not outside or

alongside

classes, but an

integral art of them Poulantzas,

1972:37). Although

social

categories

have

a

heterogeneousclass

composition, they

should

be

distinguishedfrom

social

strata, class fractionsand, finally,

social

classes,

insofar as

their political

behavior may display relative autonomyin relation to the classes to which

theirmembers

belong.1

The

phenomenon

of

social classes

is,

therefore,

he

most

comprehensive,

and no

analysis

of

groupings

which

are

not

structurally

elimited

can

be

made

without

explicit

reference

to the

wider social

context which

necessarily

involves social classes;

while this

point

should

always

be

kept

in

mind, t is

nevertheless rue

that the

concept

of social

category may

retain

considerable

usefulness as an analytical category

for

examining

the

situation of women.

This does not mean that

the

sex

categories,

male

and

female, operate

inde-

*The

author is

a

professor

n

the Facultade

de

Filosofia, Ciencias y Letras, at Araraquara,

Sao

Paulo. She is well-knownforher many publications on women, and was invited to present this

paper at the Conference

on Women and

Development,Wellesley College, June

976.

'By

social

categories

we

may

understand

social

groupings

with

pertinent ffects' which, as

Lenin

showed, may

become social forces whose distinctive haracteristic

ies in their

specific

and

everdetermining

elation with

other tructures

han economic

ones: this

s above all the case

with

the

bureaucracy

in

its relations with

the

State,

and with

the intellectuals' n

theirrelations

with deology Poulantzas, 1968:88).

Latin

American erspectives:ssues 12 and

13,

Winter nd

Spring

1977,

Vol.

IV,

Nos.

I

and

2

27






28

LATIN

AMERICAN

PERSPECTIVES

pendently f their

ndividual members'

class affiliation. n the contrary, ince

the sex categories

do not even

possess

the autonomy necessary for their

own

biological reproduction,

heirmost pronounced

tendency s tooperateon social

class lines rather than as categories which are relatively autonomous of

classes. From thestructural oint of

view, then, sex

category s not compara-

ble

with a

social class. However,

if

the

political

instance is

considered,

a

sex

category may display agglutinative

behavior around

certain values which,

while they do not

transcend

the

antagonistic

relations between social

classes,

are nonetheless

viable within

the

very

limits

imposed by

the

competitive

society.

In other words,

a sex

category

does not possess the structural

conditions forfighting o achieve

solutions which surpass the limits of

the

system nd,

in this

sense,

is far from onstitutinghe social forcewith the

most

potential

for subversion of

the

existing

order.

However,

it

may display

unity

and cohesion

in the

struggle

or social and civil

rights

the

right

o vote,to

earn

an

equal

wage for equal work,

and so

on

-

which are

compatible

with

the capitalist ystem.

Hence sex categories

do not

have historicmissions which

can be compared

with those of social

classes.

The

limits

of their

social and

political

action are much

narrower, wing

to the

very

nature of sex

categories

in themselves.

Indeed,

whilst a social stratum

or a class fractionmay, in given political-

economic conjunctures,have specific

interests

which diverge from those of

other

trata

and

fractions,

n

the long

run

and in the last

instance, there s

still

a convergenceof interests t least insofar as the maintenance of the macro-

structural ype

of society

is

concerned.

In other

words,

these

groupings

are

internal o social classes,

which means that

their nterests, hough heymay be

momentarily

istinct or

even

opposed,

are in the last instance derived

from

one and the same structural

position

and

oriented,despite

the

differences, o

the

preservationof

the

status quo

in

terms of the

division of society

into

social classes and the domination

of one class by another. Sex categories,

however, s typicalgroupings,

re

not situated nside social

classes.

Given that

any social class is composed

of

men

and

women,

it

is

important

o

note the

intersection f

two contradictions:

the contradictionbetween

social

classes,

which is dominant in capitalist social formations,and the contradiction

between

sexes,

which is subordinate

n the same

type

of social

formation.To

say this does

not imply the

attribution f greateror

lesser

importance to

the

former r the latter

type

of

contradiction.

Rather, hey

are contradictions f a

different

evel and thus perform

distinct

historical

functions

n

social forma-

tions

based on private property,

whether

the dominant

mode of

production

n

them be the slave, feudal,

or

capitalist

mode.

The

relations between sexes

may

perhaps acquire greater

relevance

in the

domestic

mode of

production

(see

Meillassoux,

1975:19),

where controlof

the mechanisms

of biological reproduc-

tion, which guarantees

the supply of labor power,

is extremely mportant

insofar as, in the absence of private propertyor control of the means of

production, tconstitutes

source

of

power.

In

capitalistsocial formations,

owever,

where

the contradictionbetween

social classes is

fundamentalowing

to the

historical

scope of their political

action, the contradiction

between

sexes

is

subordinatedto it and in empirical

reality appears in intersection

and

combination

with it. The contradiction

between

social

classes

commands

the social

operation

of the

contradiction






SAFFIOTI:

MODE OF

PRODUCTION

29

between sexes, which assumes specific dimensions in each social formation.

This specificity s derived from characteristics which are peculiar both to

cultural radition nd to the mode of nsertion f the capitalist social formation

in the world's array of capitalist nations.

Careful note should

therefore

e

taken of

two basic

points concerning he

interrelation f the contradiction etween sexes and the contradiction etween

social classes in capitalist social formations. On the one hand, the sex

determinations manipulated by a society

which

is divided into social classes,

with

a resulting

istorical

configuration

n which

women's

situation s in large

measure a reflectionof the specificity of each social formation. This fact

justifies

he

necessity

for

empirical research,

whose

aim would be to show the

peculiarity

both of

the mode of women's insertion in

society

and of

the

discrimination f

which

they are the object through

he

effectsof legislation

and of social prejudice.The discrimination ufferedby women, then,takes on

a regional or national

character which makes

comparative research both

interesting nd useful. However,

the

comparison of distinct empirical situa-

tions

oses

part

of its

significance

f no identification s

made of the

common

coordinates which,

while

giving

rise

to

different

historical

configurations,

operate

n all

capitalist

social formations.

hus,

the second

fundamental

point

to

note concerns the

functioning

f the

capitalist

mode of

production,which is

dominant n those social formations nder examination here.

In

fact, given

the

basic

operating requirements

of the

capitalist

mode

of

production, ertainhuman contingents re necessarily relegatedto an inferior

condition

n

order

to

permit

more intense

exploitation. Despite

the

fact

that

discrimination

gainst

certain

human

contingents,

bove all

women,

is consid-

ered

to be the result of the persistence

of

certain features

of

juridico-ideologi-

cal superstructures istorically rior

o

capitalism,

he

truth s that

they

are

not

mere survivals but

characteristics

f the

superstructure

which are

supported

and nourished

by

the

economic

infrastructure

f

society. Thus,

at the level of

mode

of

production,

the situation of

women is

a constant:

relegation

to

an

inferior condition on the ideological plane

to

justify their fundamentally

economic

marginalization.

The

dominant

class,

whose

interest

s to

preserve

theclass structure fsociety,cultivatesa cultural tradition elatedhistorically

to

pre-capitalist

modes of

production

and

exploits

certain features of this

tradition

n a rational-functional

manner.The aim of this s

located on

another

plane; that is, the maintenance

of

great

masses of women at a

distance

from

the class

struggle or,

in other

words,

idle

or involved in

pre-capitalist

work

relations

in

order to be able

to

have

recourse

to

them

during

the

periods

of

capitalist

economic

expansion. Indeed,

in

order to

keep moving, capitalist

accumulation

needs to

be surrounded

by non-capitalist

ocial

formations,

ince

it

develops by

means of constant

exchanges

with

these

formations nd

cannot

survive

without

contact with

such

an environment

Luxemburg, 967:41).

Not

onlydoes theproperly apitalistsector of societyresort o pre-capitalist reas

in order

to

exchange

labor

power

and other

commodities,

hus

destroying

he

pre-capitalistorganization

of

production

in

certain

regions,

but

it

also

con-

stantly

recreates

pre-capitalist

ctivities.

From

its

interchange

with the

latter,

capitalism gains

an enormous

number of

advantages, amongst

which it is

worth

giving pecial

mention

o labor

rent

see Meillassoux, 1975:190).

A

social formation oes not

consist,

as

Poulantzas

would have

it,

in the

LatinAmerican

erspectives

ssues 12 and

13,

Winter nd

Spring1977, Vol. IV, Nos.

1

and 2






30

LATIN

AMERICAN

PERSPECTIVES

coexistence of various modes of production,within

which one

has

the

domi-

nant role (Poulantzas, 1968:73).

It

is evident that

historically

a mode of

production

s not realized in a

pure

formbut

mingled

with a

variety

of

work

relationswhich belong to other modes of production.Each mode of produc-

tion, however,

is

vertically

differentiated

o that it

necessarily

involves

the

economic infrastructurend the ideological superstructures r, as Poulantzas

puts it,

the

economic, uridico-political

nd

ideological

instances.The

concep-

tion

of a social formation s the coexistence of several modes

of

production,

one of which is

dominant, mplies

the

recognition

hat each

mode of

produc-

tion

preserves

ts

own

identity r,

in other

words, displays

a

relatively arge

margin

f

autonomy

s

regards

the

others. t thus becomes difficult o conceive

of

the

dominant

character

of a

mode of

production

f it is

thought

f in terms

of

its

coexistence with other modes

of

production

with

each one

maintaining

itsown peculiar infrastructurend superstructure.Would dominance, then,be

effected

n horizontal

terms,

n termsof the

greater

xtension of the

dominant

mode of

production?

Empirical

observation ndicates

the

need to think

thingsout

from

nother

angle.

A mode of

production s dominant nsofar as it interferes ertically n

the

other modes of

production, hus provokingthe latter's loss of autonomy

and

redefining

heir

specific

activities.

n

fact,

n

capitalist

social

formations,

bourgeois deology

tends to

penetrate

those

sectors of

activity

which

are most

impervious o capitalist organization, herebydestroyingn an accelerated and

irrevocablemannerthe ideological superstructurewhich involved these sec-

tors. Hence they are only able to survive thanks to a process of redefinition

governed by thecapitalistmode ofproduction.Once the uridico-political nd

ideological

instances of

the

pre-capitalist

modes of

production

have

been

destroyed,

these modes

no

longer

survive

as

such.

What remains are

pre-

capitalistwork relations,

which now

have new

connotations.

For the economic

dimension of these pre-capitalistmodes of production,which is all that has

survived of them, is now involved

in an

ideological superstructurewhich

attributes ew

meaning

to it. The redefined

pre-capitalistwork relations thus

become an

integralpart

of the

capitalist

social

formation

nd

thereby

furthers

the accumulation process. All the evidence seems to indicate thatthe magni-

tude

of the

exploitationrate depends directly

n

the relative

weight

of

the

pre-

capitalist pockets with which the capitalist mode of production carries on its

interchange.To avoid encroaching upon problems whose discussion would

require a great deal of space, it will suffice o consider the labor rent which is

extractedfrom he

manpower

formed

n the

pre-capitalistpockets

and used in

activities

which are

strictly peaking capitalist. Capitalism disposes

of

a labor

force

towards whose

formation

t

never made

any

investment.

Thus,

to the

surplus value generated by the worker, abor rent is added in this case. A

process

of

this kind takes place under ideological conditions which are

specificallycreated by capitalism in order to increase the rate of exploitation.

Without

he

penetration

f

bourgeois deology

n all

spheres

of human

activity,

such a

process

would

not be

viable,

since the extraction

f

abor rent

mobilizes

different ocial

institutions rom

those mobilized

in the

process

of

extracting

surplus

value: . . . the

extraction

f labor

rent

requires

the

exploitation

of

the

specific

and

complex

mechanism of

the

migrations

o and

fro,

he

settingup of

a

double labor market

and

the maintenance

of a suitable discriminatory






SAFFIOTI:

MODE OF

PRODUCTION

31

ideology Meillasoux, 1975:173).

If the social formation s examined

from vertical point of view, through

the dynamics of its substructures,

here s a certain sense in which thefamily

group forms a pre-capitalist pocket. The services which are carried out,

generallyby women in the family, re destined to the daily production

of the

worker's labor power, as well as the reproductionof this labor power.

Al-

though

this

labor

is

dedicated to

the production of a commodity abor power

-

which is indispensable to the functioning f the capitalist mode of

produc-

tion,organizationwithin the family

group does not assume a capitalist,

hat s

contractual, orm.On the contrary,

what dominates the family nstitution re

domestic relations of production,historicallyderived from he domestic

mode

of

production.The commodity abor

power, therefore,s produced in a frame-

work of personal relations,while

there s no contractto regulate the distribu-

tion of domestic duties, the workingtime devoted to each of them,or the

remuneration of these services.

Women's work, which is given over the

production of the worker, withouthaving a contractual organization

is not

remunerated n the form f wages

based on the time which is effectivelypent

on this production.Measured in termsof working ime,however, this

produc-

tion is no small achievement. n 1973, the average price, in France, of

female

labor power dedicated to the productionof workers was estimated

at 3,000

francs U.S. $667) per month Meillasoux, 1975:214).

Since

it s

not

a

capitalist

enterprise,

he

family

nvests n the

production

of

labor-power

a

commodity

on the labor market

without

any monetary

compensation. In other words, the family (above all its female members)

produces a commodity

which

it cannot commercialize.

Thus this is a case of

domestic

production

and not

simple commodityproduction.

The worker who

is

produced

in

this

way

will

only

benefit those

who, being

owners

of

a

capitalist enterprise,

re able to

offer

him a

job.

The

price

of

producing

and

reproducing

abor

power

does

not fall within

capitalist society's

accounting

system. t

constitutes

losing

nvestment.

In this

way,

the

permanentproduction

of the conditions

which

permit

he

reproduction

f

capital strictly

epends

on an

institution the

family

in

whichpersonalrelations and domesticproduction re predominant.Bymeans

of the

unpaid

mobilization of

labor, especially

of

female

labor,

this

nstitution

is more economical than any other

for the

purpose

of

supplying capitalism

with

the labor power it

needs.

There

is

yet

another

reason

why

the

family

institution

s so

profoundly dapted

to

the

functions attributed

o it

by

the

capitalist

mode

of

production:

this

resides in its

being

an

ideological

State

apparatus (Althusser,1970:12-16),

hus

carrying

ut

the

vital task

of transmit-

ting

the

ideology

of the

dominant

class

without

which there

would be no

possibility

of

daily creating

the

necessary

conditions for

the

reproduction

of

capital. The family, hen,performs

unctions

which are

basic

to the

continuity

and expansion ofthecapitalistmode ofproduction:

1.

production

of

a

product

which

only

becomes a

commodity

n the

labor

market,

hat

s,

in

the presence

of

owners of

means

of

production;

2.

dissemination, hrough

he

socialization

process

of the

young generation,

of the

ideology

which

ensures

disciplined

conduct on the

part

of the

worker

and

subjects

him to

the

rules

of

the

capitalist

economic

game.

This

analysis

calls fortwo comments.

First

of

all,

in

the

present

theoretical

Latin

American

erspectives:ssues 12 and 13, Winter nd Spring1977,

Vol. IV,

Nos.

1

and 2






32 LATIN AMERICAN

PERSPECTIVES

context, here s no

sense in the arguments f either Mariarosa

Dalla Costa2 or

Ira Gerstein,3 lthoughthey are radically

opposed to each other. Dalla Costa,

by defendingthe

productive nature of domestic work in the

Marxist sense,

shows a lack of mastery of the most fundamental category in historical

materialism:

hat of

surplus

value. The production of value, of

commodities,

may

take

place

without that of surplus value. Thus, the production

of labor-

power by

the

family

outside

the

framework

f

the

capitalist enterprise

does

not produce surplus

values and consequently cannot ever

be considered a

productive ctivity.Given Dalla Costa's

lack of mastery ver

Marxist concepts,

her work would not deserve any comments

at

all

were

it not for the wide-

spreaddissemination rom

which it

has

benefited

n the United States.

As

to

Ira

Gerstein,

the problematic

of domestic work

is

treated at

a

different, hough

still

unsatisfactory,

evel. She

rejects

the

hypothesis

of

definingdomestic work as productive,which is correct according to the

scheme of interpretation f the capitalist

mode of production laid out in

Capital. However, in using

a

partial

argumentation,

he fails to convince. In

fact,

her

analysis

assumes the

perspective

of the first

olume

of

Capital,

which

is

writtenfrom he pointof

view of the individual

capitalist

enterprise.Thus

Gersteindoes not even

pose

the

problem

n termsof the

capitalistsystem as

a

whole. Perhaps because

of this,

he ends up makingthe elementarymistake of

considering heproductionof

abor

power

by

the

family

o be

simple commod-

ityproduction.

This weakness

can

be

seen in the

following tatements.

There

is an enormous

difference between

the motives of the

simple commodity

producer

and those

of the

capitalist

.

.

. The

production

oflabor-powerfalls

into the

first

of

these

categories

it

is

simple commodityproduction ...

Labor power

is

the

single

and

unique

commodity

n

capitalist

society whose

general production

does

not

take

place

in a

capitalist

manner

(Gerstein,

1973:113-114).

Here, a

few

questions

need to

be

raised. It

is

clear that the

activities which result

in the

production

of

labor-power by

the

family,

and

particularly ywomen,

are not

organized

in a

capitalist

form.But

it s not true

to

say

that

only

one alternative

emains,

hat

of

simple commodityproduction.

The work relations in the family are

distinctly

domestic ones, historically

linked to the domesticmode of production. f simple commodityproduction

were in

fact

nvolved,

the

commodity

in this

case,

labor

power

-

would

be

marketable

by

its

producers, which,

however,

is

not

what

happens.

The

commodity abor

power produced by

the

family

becomes

autonomous

once

its

production

s

completed,

nd it

is

only

marketable

by

its own bearer when

the

latter is face to face with the owners

of means of production. In simple

commodity roduction, he producer s

free

to markethis products

because he

is

the

owner of

them.

n

domestic production

of

the

commodity abor-power,

the

producerdoes

not have theproperty

f

his

product.

Furthermore,

t is

important

o

draw attention

o

the

type

of articulation

that exists between the capitalistmode of productionand pre-capitalistwork

relations.

While

the industrial

reserve army

s

indispensable to the

survival of

capitalism

in

that

t

makes possible

a higher

rate of

exploitation

of the active

2 What we

meant

precisely is

that

housework is

productive

in

the

Marxian sense,

that is, is

producing

urplusvalue

(Dalla

Costa,

1972:52, ootnote

2).

.

.

. is

the

production

of

abor-power

capitalist

production,

nd

can

domesticwork

be said to be

productive abor? I

have

assumed,

throughout his

paper,

that the

answer to

these

questions is no

(Gerstein,

973:112-113).






SAFFIOTI: MODE OF PRODUCTION

33

army of

workers as well as

periodic

expansion

of

economic

activities, this

mode

of

production

feeds

to

a

great

extent

on

the

asymmetrical

relations

which it sets up with the

pre-capitalist

ectors

of

a

social

formation's

conomy.

In those social formationswhich are called underdevelopedthere s a manifest

difference

n

the behavior

of the

capitalist

mode of

production in

different

conjunctures.

When

the- conomic

conjuncture requires

the

expansion of the

internalmarket,

he

capitalist

mode of

production

ends to swallow

up

the

pre-

capitalist pockets by

monetarizing

he income

of

the

workers n these

sectors

and thus

enlarging

ts own field of

operations.

The labor force formed

by pre-

capitalist

ctivitiesbecomes a

part

of

the

wage-earning

masses

in the

capitalist

sectors

of the

economy.

When the

capitalist

model of

development

s based

on

highlyunequal

distribution

f the national income and

sophisticated produc-

tion of

industrialized

goods

for a reduced internal

market,

there is a

clear

tendencytowards the re-creationof pre-capitalist ctivities,above all in the

sector

which involves

services

performed

y

individuals: domestic

service,

car-

washing

and

car-watching,gardening,private

manicure,

etc.

Thus,

of

all

women

employees

in Rio

de

Janeiro,

3.8

percent

n

1950

and

48.7

percent

n

1960

were

working

n

the service

sector,

he

greatmajority

f

them as domestic

maids.

These

women,

the

greatmajority

of whom

(89.7

percent)

earned less

than three

fourths

f the minimum

wage

in

1960,

constituted

no

less

than

11.4

percent

of the

labor force in Rio.

Together

with

the

self-employed (12.1

percent), hey

constitutedGuanabara's

marginalized

masses which

then

repre-

sented

almost

one fourth of the active

population (Singer, 1973:83).

The

expansion of these activitiesfacilitates he realizationofsurplusvalue insofar

as it

represents

a certain redistribution f income. On the

boundary

line,

however,

hereremain

the mere subsistence activities

o

which the

contingents

marginalizedby

the

market

conomy

are forcedto

resort.

In

fact,

t

is

to the

capitalistmode of

production that the benefit

accrues

when

any

kind of

interchange

with the

pre-capitalist

pockets

is

established.

This

occurs at moments of

expansion

of

its

economic activities,through

he

mobilization

of

manpower

which it in no

way

contributed

o

create, or,

at

the

times

when the internal

market akes second

place, by

forcing

he

contingents

previously

mobilized as

wage-earners

in

capitalist relations of production

to

resort o subsistenceactivities.

The

articulation

of the

capitalist mode of

production with

pre-capitalist

work relations s

highly

relevant to the

situation ofwomen, given that

women

are above all

involved in

activities

which are

not

typically capitalist. This

phenomenonacquires

greater ntensity

n

underdeveloped

social formations,

where the

relative

weight

of

pre-capitalistwork

relations s much greater

han

in

highly

industrialized

social formations. mperialism

eliminates the need

permanently

o

recreate pre-capitalist

activities in developed nations:

these

nations can then

rely

on

the

advantages obtained in

their relations with

the

pre-capitalistareas located on the peripheryof the internationalcapitalist

system.

Thus,

the

human

contingents

nvolved in

pre-capitalist ctivities

are

the

object

of

exploitation

by

national and

international

apitalism.

Here it

is

necessary

to

make

explicit the

differentiation etween female

roles

in the

hegemonic

countries nd those in the nations

which are

peripheral

to

international

capitalism. In the former, given the

very economic and

political

hegemony xercisedby these

regions,women have far greater

oppor-

Latin

American erspectives:ssues 12 and

13, Winter nd Spring1977, Vol. IV,Nos.

1

and 2






34

LATIN

AMERICAN

PERSPECTIVES

tunities to performeconomic activities

organized

within

capitalist

norms.

Evolution of theWorld's Economically

Active Population

Over 15 Years Old From 1950to1980,BySex

Percentage nthe

respectiveperiods

Population

1950

1960

1970 1980

Men 87.3 85.9 83.8

82.4

Women 46.4 46.0 44.8

43.7

Totals

66.5 65.6

64.0

62.9

Source: LO, 1970:10

Although

in the

West

women

rarely

make careers

and

generally occupy

subordinate and

badly-paid posts,

the rate

of

female

activity

has shown

appreciable

increases

in the

most

industrialized

nations. Whilst

this rate is

24

percent

for

Spain,

25

percent

for

Portugal,

nd 29

percent

for

taly, t

reaches

49

percent

for the Federal

Republic

of

Germany,

58

percent

for

Denmark, 59

percentforSweden, and 63

percent

forFinland.

Even ifonly the

Scandinavian

countries re

taken,

t can

be seen

that

the West

is

far

behind

Eastern

Europe

as

far as the rate of female

activity

s

concerned.

ndeed,

this

rate

s

significant-

ly higher

for the

socialist

countriesof Eastern

Europe:

73

percent for

Hungary

and

Rumania,

74

percent

for

Bulgaria,

80

percent

for

the

German

Democratic

Republic, and 82 percent for the Soviet

Union.

This

high rate

of female

participation n the labor forceof the socialist nations is responsible for the

improvement,

s time

goes on,

in

women's

position

relative to

men's,

on

a

world

scale.

If the

twenty years

between

1950 and 1970 are

taken,

it is seen

that,

whereas the

rate of male

participation

fell

3.5

points,

the female rate

fell

only

2.5

points.

However,

the

significance

of these 2.5

points

is

greater

than

it

appears

to

be, given

the

smaller

relative

weight

of female

participation

n

the

labor force.

Clearly,

the

improvement

n

women's

position

on a world scale

is

to a

great

extentthe

result

of

the

behavior

of the

rate

of female

activity

n

the

socialist

countries, ince,

with

the

exception

of

the

imperialist

nations

where

women'sparticipation n theeconomicallyactivepopulationhas shown appre-

ciable

increases,

the

expulsion

of women

from he abor market n

competitive

Economically

Active

Female

Population

in

Industrialized

and

Non-Industrialized

Regions:

1950

to

1980

Age

1950 1960

1970 1980

REGIONS

I. Non-I. I.

Non-I.

I.

Non-I.

I.

Non-I.

0-14

1.7 4.7

1.2 4.0

0.9 3.2 0.5 2.4

15-19

54.7 48.7 48.9 46.3

45.1 43.4 40.8 40.0

20-24

59.0 53.0

62.6 50.8

59.8 50.2 59.6 49.1

25-44

44.1 53.1

50.0 50.3 51.2 49.8

41.6 49.4

45-54

41.4 51.3

49.0 49.8

49.3 48.6

50.4 47.3

55-64

32.5

42.6 25.5 39.7

36.3 38.0

36.7 36.3

55+65

13.6 21.9

13.0 22.0

12.4 19.8 11.7 17.7

Totals*

41.8 49.5

44.4 47.0

43.4 45.6

42.8 44.2

Source:

LO, 1970:11-12

*

The

totals

were

calculated

excluding theage bracketbetween 0

and 14 years old.






SAFFIOTI:

MODE

OF PRODUCTION

35

societies

accompanies

the

development

of capitalism.

The

data below

show

how

the

gains

in

female

participation

were much

smaller

in the

industrialized

countries,

even

though

these

include

the socialist

countries,

than

were

the

losses innon-industrialized egions.

The

less industrialized

areas,

that is,

those

in

which

the

development

of

capitalism

is less intense,

happen

to

be

located

on

the

periphery

of

the

international

apitalist

system.

They

are

thus

the

object

of

exploitation

on

the

part

of

the

imperialist

countries.

As

the

process

of

expansion

of

capitalist

activities

progresses,

bove

all

through

he

multinational

orporations,

o

the

marginalization

of

women

in

relation

to

economic

activities

is

accentuated.

Thus,

despite

the fact

that

the above

data

also

include

the socialist

countries,

whereas

in

the

industrialized

regions

female

participation

n the

economically

active

population

will gain

one

point

in

1980

in

relation

to

1950,

in

the

non-

industrialized egions twill lose morethanfivepointsduring hesame period.

This

is due,

fundamentally,

o

the

penetration

f

capitalism

on

the

basis

of

the

use

of

highly

abor-saving

echnology.

n

Brazil,

to take

merely

he

period

from

1940

to

1970,

there

is

a

distinct

reduction

in

female

participation

in

the

economically

active

population.

The following

able

shows

this

reduction.

Brazil's

Economically

ActivePopulation

Over

Different

eriods

bySector

of

Economic Activity:

n

Percentages

1950

1950

1960

1970

Sector Men Women Men Women Men Women Men Women

Primary

87 13

93

07

90

10

91

09

Secondary

80

20

83

17

83

17

88

12

Tertiary

66

34

70

30

70

30

62

38

Source:

BGE,

1970:xxx

In terms

of women's

participation

n

the

strictly

apitalist

sector

of

the

Brazilian

economy,

the reduction

must

have

been

much

greater

than

the

statistics

show.

In

fact,

although

there

are no precise

data

available,

it

is

estimatedthat,given the highconcentration

f income,

the

number

of

wage-

earning

women

involved

in domestic

work

has

proportionally

ncreased.

For

Latin

America

as

a

whole,

40

percent

of the women

engaged

in

the

tertiary

sector

of the

economy

are

made up

of

domestic

maids.

Chaney

and

Schmink

1975:25-26)

demonstrate

how

women

lose

status

and

are

economically

marginalized

in the

so-called

Third

World

countries

as

modernization

progresses.

Unfortunately,

nstead

of

working

with

the

heuris-

tic

category

f

development

of

the

capitalist

mode

of

production,

heyprefer

o

use

the notion

of

modernization,

which

is

identified

with

the

concept

of

development.

Modernization

constitutes

a

historically

subordinate,

general

category, ince itmay, and does in fact,occur both in the capitalistmode of

production

nd in

socialism.

Since

there

s

as

yetno

evidence

that

moderniza-

tion

n

the socialist

societies

has

deleterious

consequences

for

women,

there

s

no way

to blame

it,

either

in

the abstract

or in

relation

to capitalist

social

formations,

or

women's

loss

in status

and the

reduction

in

their

economic

participation.

he

consequences

of

the

massive

introduction

f

technology

nto

the

economyvary

depending

on its

social

utilization.

Therefore,

he

mode

of

Latin

American

erspectives:

ssues

12 and

13, Winter

nd Spring

1977,

Vol. IV,

Nos.

1

and 2






36

LATIN AMERICAN

PERSPECTIVES

production s of the greatest mportance

n

appraising

the effects f

technologi-

cal advance on women's social roles. The progress made by the socialist and

capitalist countries s an indication that technologyonly has negative conse-

quences for women's social position when utilized in the capitalist mode of

production. But this idea is not a

new one (see Saffioti,1969). Even though

Boserup's approach (1971) does not

make rigoroususe of concepts ike mode of

production,

t s

undeniably

richer

han those which are

oriented

by the

notion

of modernization.

Moreover,

f the

descriptiveconcept

of modernization s taken for a

basic

explanatory

one

when analyzing

the

changes

in women's

situation,

this

may

lead to the idea that the family n its

present phrase represents

n

obstacle to

the ntegration

f women

in

society.

n

this ine of

argument,

he

family

will

in

the future be susceptible to modernization

in order to

adapt

to modern

industrialsociety. On the contrary, f the concept of mode of productionis

taken as the starting oint,

t

will

be

possible

to demonstrate hat

the

family,

s

it stands at present

n

theWest,

constitutes

social institutionwhich is

highly

adapted

to

capitalist production.

This

is

because

it is

precisely

the domestic

character

of the

production and

reproduction

f

labor

power

that

guarantees

capitalism a higherrate

of

exploitation

and

consequently

a

more

rapid process

of accumulation.

Even if women

work outside the

home,

once

they

are also

executing

domestic

duties, they

are

working

for

nothing

to

produce

and

reproduce

the

labor

power

which

will be

exploited by capitalism.

For

this

reason, there s

no

sense

in

Mickey

and

John

Rowntree's statement hat

. . .

capitalism itself s undermining he nuclear familyas mothersbecome work-

ers

(Rowntree, 1970:30).

What

capitalism

has

destroyed

is the

family

as a

productive unit,

but this has not

prevented

t

from

retaining

he functionof

producing commodity

labor

power.

It is

not

convenient

for

the owners of

the means

of

production

o

organize

domestic work

within

capitalist norms,

n

that

this

would mean a rise

in

the costs

of the

commodity

abor

power.

On

the

other

hand,

this

process

would liberate

the

female labor

force

from

domestic

duties,

thus

increasing

the

pressure

on an

economy

which is not

capable

of

absorbing

the whole

of

society's

abor

force

even

in

expansionist conjunctures.

For this reason, women remain a veryconvenient nd elastic part of the

industrial

eserve

rmy Benston,1969:23).

Thus,

even

though

women

may considerably improve their situation in

capitalist nations, they

will

never reach

total equality

in

relationr o men. The

limits

of

women's

liberation re to

be found

in

the active existence of capital.

This statementdoes not

express

the

belief

n some

kind of

social automatism.

The

mere abolition

of

capitalism

n favor of the

mplantation

f

socialism does

not

signify

he

total iberation of

women. The fight or the historical achieve-

ment of

sexual

equality

should

be one of the most

mportant tems n the class

struggle nd

should

be the object of more than one cultural revolution,once

socialism is already being implanted. The relative inertia of the ideological

superstructures mposes

the

necessity

of

constantly revising

not

only the

political

conduct of those who decide

the destinies of

a nation but also the

possibilities

of

self-realization eingoffered

o

the differentex categories.






SAFFIOTI: MODE OF PRODUCTION

37

REFERENCES

Althusser,.

1970 Ideologie t appareils deologiques 'Etat, a Pens6e,151 June),2-16

Benston, .

1969 Political conomy fWomen's iberation,

onthly eview, XXI September)

Boserup, .

1971

Women's ole

n

Economic evelopment,

ondon:GeorgeAllen nd Unwin, td.

Chaney,

lsa M. and Marianne chmink

1975 Las mujeres la modernizaci6n:ccesoa la tecnologia, n Maria del Carmen lu de

Lefieroed.),

La

mujer

n Am6rica

atina,

Mexico:

epSetentas

DallaCosta,

Mariarosa

1972 Women

nd the Subversion

f the

Community,

n

The Power of Women

nd the

Subversion

fthe

Community, ristol, ngland:

he

Falling

Wall

Press,

td.

Gerstein,

ra

1973 DomesticWork nd Capitalism, adicalAmerica,VII (July-October)

IBGE

1970Tabulac6es vancadas

do censo

demogrffico,

III Recenseamento

eral,

Rio de

Janeiro

ILO InternationalaborOrganization)

1970Labor tatistics nnual, Geneva

Luxemburg,

osa

1967L'accumulationu capital, Vol. 2, Paris:

rangois

Maspero

Meillassoux, laude

1975

Femmes, reniers

t

capitaux,

Paris:

rangois

Maspero

Poulantzas, icos

1968Pouvoir olitique t classes ociales, Paris:

Frangois

Maspero

1972 Les classes ociales, 'Homme t a Soci6t6,24-25 July, ugust, eptember)

Rowntree, ickey

nd

John

1970 More on the PoliticalEconomy

f

Women's Liberation, MonthlyReview,

XXII

(January)

Saffioti,eleieth. B.

1969A mulher a sociedadede classes:mito realidade, Sao Paulo:

Editora

QuatroArtes,

currentlyeing ranslatedyMonthly

eview

ress

Singer, aulo

1973 Desenvolvimento

repartigao

a rendano Brasil, ebate Cr1tica, July-December)

Latin

American

erspectives:

ssues

12 and

13,

Winter

nd

Spring

1977, Vol.

IV,

Nos.

1

and

2

Women, Mode of Production, And Social Formations

Documents