Clara Zetkin (186? -1932 - one of the founders of the German social
democratic
(i.e. Marxist) women's movement pre WW1 and editor of its journal 'Die
Gleichheit' (Equality).
who were women in the research projects and labs, what was
>their influence (what evidence?) on the direction of the thought that
>developed.
>A second issue is the numerical presence and participation of women in
>a particular field or subfield. My main reference for the following
>comes from the work of Barbara Reskin and her students at the U of I
>and later in Ohio (COlumbus). Reskin wrote a book called Job Queues and
>Gender Queues that argued that whatheppens when an occupation becomes
>feminized is that women gain access, the wages fall, and men leave.
>Reskin and her students haveshown this in realty, bartending, medicine,
>law, and numerous other occupational categories. Other of her students
>have inquired "where do the men go?" when occupations get feminized.
>The answer is that they rise up to middle/senior management and oversee
>"stables" of women dling the jobs they used to do for less money.
>In the NYT in the last 3 mos, there was an article on how colleges are
>overwhelmingly attracting women for liberal arts degrees (this is less the
>case in math/science/engineering still) because the labor market is stron
>enough for men to commang high wages without college degrees (relative to
>10 yrs ago) so they're getting technical or other specialized skill and
>bypassing college. Meanwhile, women with college degrees who could earn
>on par with male high school grads (this has been true in the US for many
>years) are still needing to get those degreees or advanced degreesto
compete.
>College recruiters are trying to make their pitches and brohures appealing
>to men to keep from going all girl....
>SO its interesting that there is a broad feminist literature on work
>(gender/race/class stratification) that predicts to an extent some of
>the changes in the academy, in the composition of students, and points at
>some technological factors...
>rejecting explanations based purely on patriarchy or human capital
explanations
>but assigning more complex interactions between historical forces.
>I always thought of this literature when looking at Engestrom's triangle
>of activity, considering the relationship between the RULES and the
>DIVISION OF LABOR, which I undrstood to be the formal and informal
>rules of the game and the difference in power, in who does the work and
>who gets the credit. I saw these things at work in the workplaces we
>studies, in medicine, in law, ----whose knowledge was valued, relevant,
>carried on, highly waged, and who knew other things that explained the
>tensions, disruptions, contradictions in the systems....
>All grist(le) for the mill(s).
>Katherine BROwn
>
>