Feminising the Masculine? Women in Non‐traditional Employment

Citation

Ackah, C. (2001), "Feminising the Masculine? Women in Non‐traditional Employment", International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 22 No. 5, pp. 475-486. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijm.2001.22.5.475.4

Gender segregation has been described as “the most important cause of the wages gap between men and women in Western economies” (Walby, 1988, p. 1) and occupational segregation patterns have been highlighted in a number of important works over two decades (e.g. Hakim, 1979; Martin and Roberts, 1984). The rigidity, and endurance of segregation, both horizontal and vertical, has attracted considerable interest from those seeking to explain the phenomenon (Crompton and Sanderson, 1990; Walby, 1988). Stemming from such interest there have also been a number of empirical studies of women in specific male dominated professions (Allen, 1988; Spencer and Podmore, 1987; Greed, 1994). Little attention has been given, however, to the study of women working in male dominated blue‐collar, or manual, employment. Whittock’s book seeks to make good that deficiency and hence to provide a fuller understanding of women in employment.

From research undertaken in Northern Ireland in the early 1990s the book strives to fulfil a number of aims. First it aims to explore the degree to which women are involved in non‐traditional, largely manual, occupations in Northern Ireland, and then to set the position of the Northern Ireland women against a broader “macro” image of the situation in Britain and in Europe. The book has a further stated aim of informing current feminist theory by “developing a theoretical framework for analysing the complexity of agency, social system and gender, which transcends the dualism of voluntarism versus determinism” (p. 9). Allied to that aim is a final aspiration to show that women have the potential for transforming existing gender relations, particularly within the education, training and employment systems.

Perhaps inevitably, given the nature of such work, not all of these, somewhat ambitious, aims are fulfilled with equal degrees of success.

It is perhaps appropriate to focus first on the “theoretical” aims of the book, since they may be said to provide the basis from which the empirical work stems. It is true to say that until relatively recently, i.e. the latter part of the twentieth century, sociological and economic approaches to work largely ignored women, and most of the contribution to understanding the gendering of the labour force has come from feminist theory. One of the successes of this book lies in the review of these theoretical developments which it provides in the chapter entitled “Developing feminist theory.” It does seek to do more than review the theory, however, and in seeking to “develop” feminist theory the book is perhaps less successful. The attempt at theory development relies largely upon Giddens’ (1984) theory of structuration. Whilst acknowledging that Giddens is somewhat silent on gender, the author claims that any understanding of gender inequality must incorporate an account of human agency and social practice, and it is the balance formulated by Giddens as the “duality of structure” that is seen as closest to the requirements of such a theory of gender. What is not entirely clear, however, is whether the book significantly differs from or builds upon the work of, for example, Wolffensperger (1991) or Connell (1993) in this area. What it does do, by examining the work of projects concerned with encouraging schoolgirls in studying non‐traditional subjects and opting for non‐traditional careers, is to demonstrate how new organising principles can succeed in breaking gendered roles and patterns, and can effect structural change. In so doing it goes some way to achieving the fourth aim of the book which is to demonstrate that women are not passive victims, but rather that it is women themselves who, as capable individuals (one of two fundamental human qualities specified by Giddens), can set up, maintain and alter the system of gender relations.

Theoretical concerns apart, the substantive and declared aims of the book are to discover the degree to which women are involved in non‐traditional employment in Northern Ireland, and to set that in the broader context of the situation in Britain and in Europe. In respect of women in Northern Ireland, the book reports on in‐depth interviews with 35 women working in a range of non‐traditional occupations, including driving/transport, engineering, car mechanics, gardening and rather more esoteric occupations perhaps, such as zoo keepers, a stone carver and outdoor pursuits instructors. Such interviews do not, in themselves, provide a complete picture of the “degree” to which women are involved in non‐traditional employment. What they do very effectively achieve, particularly when combined with the results of a large‐scale survey of girls in the education system and interviews with those in the training system, is an insight into why so few girls and women continue to select non‐traditional careers. Such methodologies begin to uncover the factors which persuaded those who are involved to select a career of this nature. Indeed it might be said of this book that its true contribution to the debate on gender segregation in the workforce comes from its examination of change, or lack of it, in education and training systems, rather than from its study of women currently involved in non‐traditional occupations.

In pursuit of the related aim of setting the position of Northern Ireland women in the broader context of Britain and Europe, the book again provides a thorough review of research in this area, and of the effects of Sex Equality legislation in the various jurisdictions. It also seeks to provide “A statistical review of the gendered labour market.”

Whilst acknowledging the difficulties of statistical comparisons, across not just regions of Europe, but across time, and noting also that the aim is to provide a temporal assessment, commencing in the 1970s, the reader is nonetheless left with an impression of rather dated material. In analysing the statistical position in Great Britain, for example, the data used is drawn largely from the British Census Economic Activity Reports of 1971, 1981 and 1991. Hence no analysis is permitted of recent trends, i.e. beyond the 1980s, and no support or challenge is possible in the significant debate opened by Hakim’s (1992) claims, that the 1990s will be seen as an era of substantial decline in occupational segregation. This must surely be viewed as a limitation upon the contribution which this work makes to the study of gender segregation in the labour force as we enter a new millennium.

In conclusion, it would be putting it rather strongly to claim that this book, in itself, bridges the “gaps and limitations characterising the study of work, particularly women and work” so lamented by Walshok (1981, p. 274), and it does suffer its own limitations in relation to the currency of the statistical data used. Nonetheless the study does add to the body of knowledge and understanding in an area which, in the past, has attracted little attention. Perhaps most significantly it achieves the aim of giving a voice to women who, themselves, are breaking new ground and working in non‐traditional employment. In so doing it underscores the rationale for a study such as this which is that “the actions of individuals who behave in ways that differ from the expected norm … may signal the beginnings of important social change and hence … [are] of considerable sociological interest” (p. 11).