Last week recap- Servants of Globalization-
- Why did we read this? This was another family pattern that was no nuclear; it is of relevance to us
today because in Canada we have many nannies taking care of children. This is a pattern that
affects Canada today.
- Chapter 2 good for context
- Research on families in the Philippines in which families separated because usually the woman
has left and emigrated to work as a nanny, leaves behind children and husband
- The women studied in this book emigrated to US or Italy a word on Canada: the program in
Canada is different from US and Italy. In Canada we have a program established by government,
where contracts are made with Philippines government, matched with employer, must work with
them for 2 years, 2 years of mandatory live in service, at end of service they can apply for status
- In Italy mostly illegal, smuggled, can only work for 7 years legally but if you come in as a guest
worker you have to work as a nanny for those 7 years then leave
- In US you can come in under many programs but must not work well because a lot of the
women come in through personal contacts but after several years can apply for citizenship
Why are women leaving Philippines?
- 1. Bad economic conditions, high unemployment rates. The country is a mess, government made
many bad decisions! Debt-ridden
- 2. Government set up agreements with Canada for things such as jobs not favoured, aka nanny
work- More women leaving Philippines to do work abroad than men since 60s
- 3. Philippine tradition, mother not only responsible for children but a daughter and son (all) Are
responsible for care of elders. So the responsible in Philippine family extends beyond nuclear
family, extends to grandparents etc. So the daughter is targeted in the family, perhaps precisely
to be sent away, mostly middle class women immigrating, very well educated (nursing degrees
even). This responsibility for my family is the third reason, she will move to feed kids and parents.
The result of this immigration, you get huge amount of money going back to Philippines. Women sent
back most of their money home. Government even mandates a certain % to be sent back to Philippines.
Working abroad means= economic gain, furthering next generation= thus women emigrate and
yet lose civil rights (come into country where not citizens, follow abuses) Canada is one of the
better, US and Italy too Saudi Arabia worst and Singapore too
Chapter 4 Transnational Family
- She describes the Values of collectivism which mean that there is a lot of
evidence of collectivism in this whole phenomenon to take care of parents and
children in exchange for moving and sending money back to
parents/kids/husbands, the grandparents are the ones who take care of the
children= AN EXCHANGE!!! (similar to Stack) this exchange is a kind of an
extended family of taking care of children from another country
- Men???? What about them men
o Many women left because of family obligations and because of abusive
husbands thus women left - thus a push and pull out of Philippines.
o Another issue that was clear when she spoke to women men did not feel
responsible for taking care of children on a daily basis this is a very
traditional family pattern! Apparently that is only womens work (taking
care of kids)
o Money goes back for children
Canada, Italy and US benefit from Philippine women labour- reproduced in the
Philippines in the sense Philippines is subsidizing Canada, Philippines is
paying for education of people who grow up in Canada.
1 What to draw from 2 samples an answer from one of first weeks questions
- What is necessary to have a nuclear family?
- The 2 cases show = MONEY, you need the material conditions necessary to
have a family; it is hard without financial resources! = this is the lesson we take
from the two readings!
- 14 of 200: financial stability, stable jobs, decent income, social policies that
Last week RE-CAP two different family patterns not about nuclear families!
Carol Stack- the pattern was that got people through daily lives were women
centered networks- organized around and by women, poor African American
community in 60s and 70s networks built on exchange of goods and services
Why did this involve women?
1. Women responsible for kids in this community. So if you cannot feed
family these problems fall on women
2. Women in this community back in the 70s had a steady source of income,
yet poor, but on social assistance AFDC program was a source of a low
amount of money men do not have access to good jobs! They were not
union jobs; they could not get these jobs because of discrimination.
Carol Stacks argument- this was a good adaptation to poverty in contrast to
Daniel Patrick M she said look if you look at their circumstances, this is a very
powerful adaptation; they are surviving and taking care of children. This pattern
however seems to have disappeared. Researchers now find poor African
Americans are no more likely to get assistance from extended kin than middle
class or poor white
Week 5: Families in Pre-Industrial Europe
- Highlight differences in Pre-industrial setting as a family pattern
predating last weeks. This we can see where we came from in terms of
where the nuclear family came from?
- Why/What are the causes of different family patterns
- What is the cause of the nuclear family pattern we see so commonly in the
- Use history to address misconceptions .
- Ex :gay marriage and the definition of marriage Marriage has been
many different things. Thus to look at history we want to educate and make
less susceptible to arguments like the gay-marriage definition.
- Agriculture working as peasants, produced goods for markets, artisans
- The work done in this time was done in and around the household by
members of the household = CALLED A FAMILY ECONOMY / A th
HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY (Tilly and Scott- look at family economy in 18
century - capitalistic economy developing, good description of pre-
capitalist but also periodically talk about wage work and the family wage
2economy which is an industrial pattern!) Do not pay attention to where Tilly
talks about wage work focus on family economy
- The other piece is less ithortant Cohen- used to focus on gender, on the
womens position. (19 century Ontario, pre-industrial)
I. The change from foraging to simple agriculture
The development of kinship structures that organized society-patrilineages and
- Agriculture opposed to hunting/gathering
- There is no clear understanding of why people began to grow crops, stopped
foraging, not all stopped foraging but why some people went from foraging to
agriculture- happened about 12,000 years ago
- Possible Explanations:
o Climate change of some kind in areas- vegetation less fruitful in some
areas, animals scarce, people had to resort to planting crops to survive.
As gatherers, women would have understood how plants grow (Seeds and
o People began to also domesticate animals. on the hoof keeping live
animals to butcher, thus good access to meat
o Some parts of the world, ex. Vancouver, was so lush in terms of
vegetation, fish and animals, people did not have to move frequently. If
people do not move, not migrating not mobile, for women their body fat
goes up which may have happened in rich lush areas and thus women
had more babies, spacing between birth down, the ratio of dependence to
producer gone up so high that people no longer had option of migrating
and thus more or less