Chapter 60 Chapter 10 The Social Revolution 1945-1990 4

4 Another factor affecting the working class and developed society was the important role played by women, especially the role of married women—a revolutionary new phenomenon.The change in this regard is astonishing. In 1940, less than 14% of the working female population in the United States were married women with husbands and families.By 1980, it had exceeded half, and it had doubled between 1950 and 1970.However, the increasing number of women entering the labor force certainly did not start in this world.Since the end of the 19th century, women have entered offices, shops, and certain other service jobs—telephone operators, nursing jobs, and so on—in large numbers.This type of work forms a large expansion of the so-called "tertiary occupation", which will erode the agricultural industry as the primary and secondary industries, and will cause absolute damage to the first two industries; in fact The rise of the tertiary industry is the most remarkable development trend in the 20th century.As for the evolution of female employment in the manufacturing sector, developments have been mixed.In the old industrial countries, labor-intensive industries that traditionally had a large concentration of female workers—such as textiles and agriculture—were now in decline.In countries and regions that have recently become "rust belts", those mechanical industries that tend to be dominated by men, not to mention other industries full of masculine images-such as mining, steel, shipbuilding, and automobile manufacturing- — At this time, it is also on the decline.Conversely, in the emerging developing countries and the growing manufacturing centers of the Third World, labor-intensive industries that are hungry for women workers (traditionally not only lower wages but also easier to manage than men) are thriving.As a result, the proportion of women in the local employed population has greatly increased, but there is only one example in Africa where Mauritius jumped from 20% in the early 1970s to 60% in the 1980s.As for the increase or decrease in developed industrial countries, it depends on the situation of each country. Generally speaking, even if it increases, it will be dominated by the service industry.In fact, no matter whether women work in the manufacturing industry or the tertiary industry, there is not much difference in the nature of their work, because most of them occupy secondary positions.And some service industries dominated by women also have extremely strong trade union organizations, especially public and social service units.

In addition, women also pursue higher education in an astonishing proportion; because today, only education can guide a smooth path to the door of advanced professions.At the end of World War II, the proportion of female students in most developed countries was only 15% to 30% of the total number of students, with the exception of Finland - a country of women's liberation - at that time the proportion of female students in the country was as high as 43%. %.But even in 1960, women never made up more than half of students in either Europe or the United States, with the only exception being Bulgaria, another lesser-known pro-female country (socialist countries, on the whole, were more active in encouraging women to study , such as East Germany outpaced West Germany)—but apart from education, other items that increase women's well-being have been less impressive.Yet by 1980, in the United States, Canada, and six socialist countries—leading by East Germany and Bulgaria—half or more of the students were women.At this time, there are only 4 countries in Europe where female students make up less than 40% of the total (Greece, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom).In a word, women's access to higher education is now as common as men's.

The massive entry of married women into the labor force—many of whom are mothers—and the astonishing expansion of higher education provided the backdrop for a powerful resurgence of the feminist movement (at least in developed Western countries) from the 1960s onwards.In fact, if these two factors are not considered, the women's movement will not be able to understand.Since the outbreak of World War I and the Russian Revolution, women have won great achievements such as voting rights and equal civil rights in many areas in Europe and North America (see Chapter 8 of Age of Empires).But since then, although the fascist and reactionary regimes have been rampant for a while, it has not destroyed their existing achievements, but the women's movement has moved from the sun to the shadows.Afterwards, the victory of the anti-fascist struggle, as well as the success of revolutions in parts of Eastern Europe and East Asia, the rights won since 1917 finally spread to most countries in the world.The most notable of these was the eventual access of women to the vote in France and Italy, and at this time virtually all of the newly communist countries, Latin America (10 years after the war), and, with very few former colonies, women Get this right.By the 1960s, women had gained the right to vote wherever there were elections, with the exception of certain Islamic countries and—oddly enough—Switzerland.However, the women's movement never emerged from the shadows.

Because the above-mentioned changes were not due to the pressure of feminists, nor did they have any direct and significant impact on the promotion of women's rights and status, even in the few countries where voting does have its political effect.However, the situation began to change in the 1960s. First, the United States launched an attack, and then quickly spread to other wealthy countries in the West, and extended to the circle of educated and senior women in the third world-but at the beginning, the heartland of the socialist world did not. Affected - Feminism has made another startling resurgence.Although this type of movement phenomenon basically belongs to the middle class with a certain level of education, in the 1970s, especially in the 1980s, an unprecedented trend was brewing, and the achievements were far from the first wave of feminism. comparable.The awakening of a new wave of female consciousness has less specific forms in politics and ideology, but it pervades the entire female mass.The fact that women as a group are now a major political force is a major change that has never been seen before.The earliest and most striking example of the awakening of women's gender consciousness is the resistance of traditionally devout female believers in Roman Catholic countries.They rose up to protest that the Holy See was no longer bound by popular dogma, most notably when Italian citizens voted for divorce (1974) and more liberal abortion laws (1981).Then the pious Republic of Ireland elected a woman, Mary Robinson, as president.Robinson, a former lawyer, has a very close relationship with the Emancipation of the Roman Church's moral dogma (1990).By the early 1990s, the differences in political opinions between the sexes had become more pronounced, as evidenced by the results of political opinion polls conducted by many countries.It is not surprising that politicians, especially those on the left, have begun to court this new wave of women, as the decline of working-class consciousness has decimated traditional votes for left-wing parties.

The impact of women's new awareness and interests is far-reaching, and the change in women's employment roles in economic activities alone is not enough to cover all of them.The changes caused by this social revolution are not limited to the nature of women's activities in society, but more important changes include the roles they play, that is, the traditional expectations of their roles, especially their status and achievements in public affairs .For while there were many major changes, such as the mass entry of married women into the labor force, there were not necessarily other expected subsequent changes—as in the Soviet Union.After the passionate ideals of a revolutionary utopia in the early 1920s were disillusioned, married Russian women found themselves juggling not only new income-earning responsibilities but also old-fashioned household chores. and status has not changed.In conclusion, the influx of women into salaried work has generally not been associated with changes in their perceptions of their social status and rights.The real impetus may be the need of poverty, or employers' preference for female workers (because they are not only cheaper but also more obedient than male workers), or it may simply be the result of a large increase in the number of female-headed households .A large number of domestic and local men have migrated to other places to survive. For example, rural people in South Africa have moved into cities one after another, and men from Asia and Africa have continued to flow into Persian Gulf countries.In the end, it is inevitable that women will be left alone to run the house and support the family's economic needs.In addition, we must not forget the terrible consequences of several wars that caused a large number of men to be killed. After 1945, Russia became an unbalanced situation of five women to three men.

However, the status of women in society has indeed undergone great changes.There is no denying the fact that what they expect from their roles, and how the world sees them, has undergone significant, even revolutionary changes.However, the new achievements of some women in politics, while visible, cannot be used as a direct measure of the status of women in the country as a whole.Take Latin America, which is dominated by male culture, as an example. In the mid-1980s, the proportion of Latin American women elected to national congresses was 11%, which was far better than that in North America, where women's status was more "liberated".In addition, in the countries of the third world, a considerable number of women have begun to hold national and political leadership positions, but the source of their power comes from the men in the family, such as Mrs. Gandhi in India (Indira Gandhi, 1966-1984) , Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto (1988-1990; 1994), and Aung San Suu Kyi (Aung San Auu Kyi), who would have become the leader of Myanmar if it hadn't been for the military's veto; , to get this position.As for women who hold state affairs as widows, there are Mrs. Bandaranaike (Sirimavo Bandaranaike, 1960-1965; 1970-1977) in Sri Lanka, Corazon Acquino (Corazon Acquino, 1986-1992) in the Philippines, and Mrs. Isabel Peron (Isabel Peron, 1974-1976).The succession of these new generation of strong women to power is no different in the sense that Maria Theresa of the Holy Roman Empire and Victoria of England took over the thrones of the Habsburgs and the British Empire, respectively, many years ago.In fact, in India, Pakistan, the Philippines and other countries where women rule the country mentioned above, the superior status of female leaders is in stark contrast to the suppression of women in the country, which greatly shows that the emergence of female leaders is not normal.

But having said that, going back to the pre-World War II era, it would have been politically inconceivable, under any circumstances, for any woman to assume leadership of the country in any republic.But after 1945, things began to change completely—in 1960, Mrs. Bandaranaike of Sri Lanka became the world’s first female prime minister—and by 1990, 16 countries had been or had been political leaders (World’s Women , p. 32). In the 1990s, although they were a minority of women who had risen to the position of national leaders through their own professional and political careers without the help of their fathers or husbands, they also began to appear on the political horizon, such as Israel (1969) and Iceland (1980), Norway (1981), Lithuania (1990), France (1991), not to mention the United Kingdom (1979); in addition, Japan, which is far from feminism, has a woman as the largest Leader of the opposition (socialist) party.Although the place of women in political groups - even in the most "advanced" countries - is still mostly symbolic (at least as a group with political pressure), the face of the political world, indeed is changing rapidly.

Despite this change, the pace of change for women around the world has been inconsistent.Whether it is public life or the related political goals of the women's movement, comparisons between the Third World, developed countries, and the socialist or pre-socialist world can only be drawn reluctantly.In the third world, like Russia under the tsarist rule, even though it is developing or has created a group of exceptionally emancipated and "advanced" women (just like the female intellectuals and activists in the tsarist era, most of them are inherently upper class and wives and daughters of bourgeois families), but from a Western point of view, the masses of poorly educated women of the lower class are still excluded from public life.A rare elite class of women like the one mentioned above existed even in India during the colonial empire; even before the forces of Islamic fundamentalists pushed women back to faceless status again, even several religious restrictions were less stringent. There are also traces of them in many Islamic countries-especially Egypt, Iran, Lebanon, and the Maghreb area in the Atlas Mountains of Northwest Africa.For these emancipated minorities, the upper classes of the country had a public life in which they could operate.There, they can act and feel at ease, just as they (or their female sisters in the West) lived in Europe and North America.The only difference, perhaps, is that they don't give up as fast as Western women, at least not as fast as Western non-Catholic women, in terms of traditional gender customs and family obligations in their culture.From this perspective, the conditions of liberated women in the "Westernized" Third World are far superior to those in the non-socialist Far Eastern countries.Far Eastern countries have strong traditions, and even the special women in the upper class still have to submit.Educated women in Japan and South Korea, once living in the liberated West for a period of time, often fear the constraints of returning to their native culture.In their inherent culture, the social consciousness of women being subordinate to men has just been slightly shaken at this time.As for the situation in the socialist world, there are many contradictions.As a matter of fact, women in Eastern Europe have all entered the salaried employment population, at least equal numbers of men and women (90% each), which is far higher than in other regions of the world.As an ideology, communism has always passionately regarded the equal status and emancipation of women as its own responsibility, and its claims are all-encompassing. - Lenin and his wife Krupskaya (Krupskaya) are a few Several revolutionaries who were particularly in favor of sharing housework between men and women.What's more, from the populists to the revolutionary movements of the Marxists, women have always been enthusiastically welcomed—especially intellectual women—to provide them with a particularly broad space for activities.This phenomenon was still evident in the 1970s, as can be seen from the large number of women members in the leftist terrorist movement.But despite this, with few exceptions—such as Rosa Luxemburg, Ruth Fischer, Anna Pauker, La Pasionaria, Federica Montseny—women At the highest levels of the party, they remain unknown, and sometimes invisible.In the newly established communist countries, their status was even less prominent, and in fact women seemed to have disappeared from the leadership altogether after the success of the revolution.Although occasionally one or two countries, such as Bulgaria and East Germany, did provide their fellow women with exceptionally good opportunities, such as higher education, to help them succeed in public life; Advanced capitalist countries are no different - even if there are some major changes, the benefits will not necessarily follow.Whenever women flocked to certain professions that were open to them—as in Russia, for example, after women doctors became the majority—the status and income of that profession also declined.Soviet women, like Western feminists, long accustomed to work, now dream of returning home to a life of "luxury" with only one responsibility.

In fact it is true.The original revolutionary idea is to change the relationship between the sexes, hoping to change the traditional male-dominated system and customs.But this ideal dissipated like a castle on the sand in an instant, and even countries that seriously pursued it were not spared—such as the Soviet Union in the early years.Generally speaking, the new communist regimes in Europe established after 1944 never made any real effort in this direction at all.In backward countries—in fact, most communist regimes are established in backward countries—attempts to improve women's status and change gender relations are often surrounded by traditional populations with a passive and uncooperative attitude.Regardless of what the law says, these people firmly believe that women should be inferior to men.But the heroics of women's liberation were not all in vain, of course.Legal and political equality, educational and professional access, and even the freedom to remove the veil and go to public places at will, the achievements of women's emancipation are not trivial.The big difference here can be seen in comparison with countries run by religious fundamentalists or revived.What's more, even in some communist countries where women's actual status is far below the level promised by theory; The Soviet Union is the case), just looking at the freedom of personal choice given to them by the new system, including the freedom of choice in sexual behavior, is an unprecedented feat, far greater than before the establishment of the new regime.The reason that really limits the full expression of the ideal here is not all the resistance of laws or customs, but because of material shortages, such as the lack of contraceptive drugs.Such gynecological needs are often not the key production considerations of the planned economy, and their supply is often insignificant to the point of rarity.

The socialist world's efforts to improve the status of women, despite their successes and failures, have never led to the emergence of a specific feminist movement.In fact, just looking at the characteristics of the communist country before the mid-1980s, any political activity, if it is not initiated by the government, is unlikely to be successful, and it can be concluded that feminism naturally cannot survive.Looking further, even if this consideration is excluded, the topics that the Western women's movement cared about before, in fact, it is difficult to arouse the recognition and response of socialist women.

In the beginning, women in the West, especially those in the United States who pioneered the women's resurgence, focused mainly on issues that mattered to middle-class women, at least those that affected them formally—especially in the United States.The United States is the first stop for feminists to seize the city and break the stronghold, and first exert pressure to achieve breakthrough success. The employment status of American women greatly reflects the extent of this effort. Before 1981, American women not only swept men out of non-managerial office and white-collar jobs (however, although these positions are respected, the status is very low, it is true), but also attacked the real estate agent stronghold (almost half) , and about 40 percent of bank and financial manager job titles.As for knowledge-based professions, traditional medicine and legal professions still restrict women to activities around the bridgehead; however, although their gains are not ideal, they cannot be ignored.In addition, there are still 30% of teaching staff in colleges and universities, more than 25% of computer professionals, and about 22% of natural science practitioners are currently held by women.However, in terms of labor occupations dominated by men, whether technical or unskilled, women have never made any significant breakthroughs: only 2.7% of truck drivers, 1.6% of electrical workers, and 0.6% % of auto mechanics are women.The resistance of these professions to the female offensive is as strong as that of male doctors and male lawyers, who only set aside 14% of the space for female doctors and lawyers.However, women have a strong offensive against this type of industry dominated by men, and their all-out momentum must not be underestimated. We only need to browse a few works about the vanguard of new feminism in the 1960s to find the underlying class meaning behind women's issues (Friedan, 1963; Degler, 1987).These questions mainly revolve around the same theme, that is "how should women balance career, marriage and family".But only women who have this opportunity face this kind of distress; and the vast majority of women in the world, and all poor women, do not have this opportunity.The purpose of this type of issue is equality between men and women, and the American Civil Rights Act of 1964 (American Civil Rights Act) was originally intended to prevent racial discrimination, but since the word "gender" was added, the concept of equality has become a legal and institutional status for women in the West. best weapon.However, the term "equality" is not the same as "equal treatment" or "equal opportunity", which assumes no difference between men and women, social or otherwise.However, from the eyes of the vast majority of women in the world, especially poor women, the reason why women are inferior in society is mainly due to gender differences-they are not men-therefore, "gender issues" must be Use "gender means" to solve it-such as special care and protection for pregnancy and motherhood, or protection of women from fear of violence by the other sex, etc.However, American feminism has been slow to address issues that are relevant to working-class women, such as maternity leave.Although feminism has developed to a later stage, it has also begun to notice that "gender difference" and "gender equality" are equally important. However, feminists are emphasizing abstract individualism with a liberal spirit and using "equal rights" laws In addition to thinking of weapons, it is difficult to coordinate with the concept of "men and women do not have to be exactly the same" for a while. What's more, the women's call in the 1950s and 1960s to get out of the family and enter the professional market, in fact, among the economically well-off, educated middle-class married women, there is also a very strong conscious motivation. What women don't have.Because for the former, the psychological factor has nothing to do with economic motivation.Conversely, poor or poor married women went to work after 1945 for no other reason than, more cruelly, because children no longer work.Child labor has now almost completely disappeared in the West. Instead, the expectation of educating children and thus improving their chances of development in life places a greater financial burden on parents than ever before.Simply put, "In the past, children had to work, keeping the mother at home with the care of the family. Now, when the family needs extra income to supplement the household, it is the mother, not the child, who goes out to work."( Tilly/Scott, 1987, p. 219) Although the new generation of women has household appliances to help them (the washing machine is especially important), and a variety of ready-made food to solve the hardships of cooking, it is impossible to work outside the home unless the number of children is reduced.But for middle-class married women, the husband already has a considerable income suitable for his status, and the wife goes out to work, which actually does not help the family much.Just look at one fact: In the jobs that were open to women at that time, women were often paid much less than men.Especially when the wife goes out, another person has to be hired to do the housework and take care of the children (such as a cleaning lady; in Europe, there are foreign female students who help with housework in exchange for board and lodging and language learning).After deducting this expense, the remaining amount becomes insignificant. Therefore, in these middle-class circles, if women still go out to work, the biggest motivation is the need for freedom and self-reliance.A married woman has her own status, she is not just a husband and an accessory of the family, she wants the world to treat her as an individual, not just a member of a certain ethnic group ("just a wife and a mother" ).As for the importance of income, it is not in the actual economic significance, but in the independent spirit it represents: she can freely spend the money or save it without asking her husband for instructions.But with the increase of double-income middle-class families, the family budget naturally began to be based on two incomes.And the phenomenon that middle-class children go to college is becoming more and more common, and the time period for parents to provide financial help for their children is also longer, which may extend to the age of 25 or even longer.So far, the occupation of middle-class married women is no longer a symbol of declaring independence, but has become the same as the needs of the poor, and has become a source of income to supplement the family.But at the same time, the emancipatory meaning of work representation still exists, as can be seen from the increasing number of "commuting marriage" cases.The cost (and not just the financial cost) for a husband and wife to work in two distant places is very high, but with the help of transportation and communication revolution, this kind of separation marriage is now popular in professional circles such as academic circles, since the 1970s Beginning but becoming increasingly common.In the past, middle-class women often moved with their husbands' jobs without saying a word (though children did not necessarily follow their fathers once they passed a certain age).Not so today, the wife's career, and the wife's right to decide where her career takes place, are sacrosanct domains, at least in middle-class intellectual circles.Therefore, at this level, men and women are finally treated as equals. In developed countries, feminism belonging to the middle class, the feminist movement aimed at educated and intellectual women, finally began to spread outward, becoming a broader call, that is, "women's liberation", at least The moment of "women's self-identification" has finally arrived.Although the early middle-class feminism had narrow targets and sometimes could not directly touch the focus of other women in Western society, it raised issues of common concern to all women after all.Social turmoil has triggered various moral and cultural revolutions, resulting in major changes in many social and personal behaviors and customs, and women's issues have become increasingly urgent.The role of women in this unprecedented cultural revolution is important; as it matters and marks a change in the definition of traditional family forms.And women have always been the most central members of the family. Next, let's take a look at what kind of cultural revolution this is.