Women's Work.

Ghodsee's conceptualization of the "producerist" identity as one in which "individual subjectivity was primarily determined by one's relationship to work", is reminiscent of the neo-liberal value of productive work/masculine qualities that is present in modern capitalist societies. Ghodsee discusses how many women were happy to becomes stay-at-home moms and housewives, because they assumed the option to work would be there should they decide to return. However, she does not explore, to my satisfaction, the implications on women's "producerist" identities who tried and failed to stay in their jobs due their employment in sectors "most vulnerable to redundancies". The implications of job loss, and the expectations around them are invariably gendered, and it is an interesting topic that I will explore briefly in this blog post.

A recent MSNBC article breifly touches on two of the conflicting pulls on women: does work or family lead to more fulfillment? Many of the women in the article claim that they are happy to be able to spend time with their children (although this has heavy class connotaions for those women who are financially secure enough to enjoy time without income). On the other hand, some women felt as though their lives outside of the home mattered just as much as that within. Sasha Emmons, a former editor, remarked "I just felt kind of lost without a job". A statement like this is almost expected from men, whose job loss is supposed to have had implications for their mental health, self esteem and identity. However it is rare that we consider the "productive" identities that women hold on to and require for their own well being.

The current "Mancession" sees men as being disproportionately laid off compared to women. However, what is neglected is the double burden that is placed upon women who on average earn less, and do more of the household work. In Bulgaria, when women lost their jobs, men were not adversely affected other than having to occupy jobs that may have been seen as previously "feminized". As economic downturns are framed in neo-liberal/ "producerist" terms, the reproductive labor of women is forgotten and taken for granted when women lose their jobs. There is an overarching idea that women, as wives and mothers, can (or should) go back to the home.

When men are laid off, however, the emphasis is on how women or feminized men (e.g. migrants) are taking jobs away from the "burly men" (McKelway, 2010). Articles such as this by Doug McKelway on the Fox News website points to women and more explicitly "feminist groups" as having lobbied for "softer sector" jobs. Even this one in the Atlantic makes use of statistics to showcase how women are faring better than men, the implication being that women's success is detrimental to men.

The Ghodsee article was an interesting look at how gendered roles play out in capitalist economies. In looking at how women were affected in the transition to a market economy it is easier to pinpoint trends and assumptions about gender roles in more established capitalist societies. The recent Mancession is just one area in which we might look to understand how the economy shapes and is shaped by a gendered labor force and norms about gender roles, and it will be interesting to see what the mainstream media will focus on in the coming years and developments in this new, more uncertain, phase of the free market.

Works Cited

Ghodsee, Kristin. "Potions, lotions and lipstick:The gendered consumption of cosmetics and perfumery in socialist and post-socialist urban Bulgaria". Women's International Forum, 30 (2007): 26-39.Online.

McKelway, Doug. "'Mancession' Threatens American Dream". Fox News 9 December 2010. http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/12/09/mancession-threatens-american-dream. Online.