Tüccar Olarak Kadınlar: Gresik’te Üçlü Roller ve Cinsiyet Eşitsizliği Çalışması

Year 2020, Volume 4, Issue 1, 1 - 13, 24.01.2020

Roudlotul CHOİRYAH Arum Sekar RATRİE Sari Kurnia PUTRİ Budi PRASETYO

Abstract

Bu çalışma, piyasada tüccar olarak çalışan kadınların çifte yükünü analiz etmektedir. Prensip olarak, bu çalışma kadın tüccarların üçlü rollerini araştırmayı ve keşfetmeyi amaçlamaktadır, yani kadın tüccarlar tarafından deneyimlenen iş ve eşler ve koca arasında aile içinde sistem iş bölümü. Bu çalışma ile ilgili yöntemler, nitel derinlik önceliği, verilerdeki zenginlik ve karmaşıklıktır. Bu çalışma gözlem ve derinlemesine görüşme yoluyla veri toplamıştır. Bu çalışmaya katılan katılımcı sayısı 10 kişidir. Çalışma, piyasada ticaret yapan kadınların kamusal alanda çalışmaya karar vermeleri için bir nedenleri olduğunu ortaya koymuştur: (1) ev dışında bir faaliyet aramak; (2) aile ekonomisine yardımcı olmak; (3) eşinin çalışmaması. Üçlü roller, mağdur kadın işçi olan bir kadın olduğu için bir tür cinsiyet ayrımcılığıdır. Bu çalışma aynı zamanda ataerkil kültürünün bir sonucu olarak kadınların çifte yükünü etkileyen çeşitli faktörleri de incelemektedir.

Keywords

Üçlü roller, kadın tüccarlar, iş bölümü sistemi, toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliği

Women as Traders: Study on the Triple Roles and Gender Inequality in Gresik

Abstract

This study analyses the double burden of women who are doing trades in the market. Principally, this study aims to explore and discover the triple roles of women traders, meaning work experienced by women traders and system division of labour within the family between the wives and husband. Methods that are relevant to this study are qualitative depth priority, wealth and complexity in the data. This study collected data through observation, and in-depth interview. The number of informants participated in this study is 10 people. The study found that women who trade in the market have a reason for deciding to work in the public sphere because (1) looking for an activity outside home; (2) help the family economy;( 3) the husband does not work. Triple roles are a form of gender discrimination as the victim is a woman being a female worker. This study also looks at several factors affecting women's double burden as a result of patriarchal culture.

Keywords

Triple roles, women traders, the system of division of labour, gender inequality

References

• Berg, B., (1989). Quaitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Boston. Allyn and Bacon.
• Bianchi, BC, Milkie, MA, Sayer, LC, & Robinson, JP. (2000). “Is anyone doing the Housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor”. Social Forces, 79, 191-228.
• Bianchi, BC, Sayer, LC, Milkie, MA, & Robinson, JP (2012). Housework: Who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter? Social Forces, 91 (1), 55-63.
• Brines, J. (1994). "Economic Dependency, Gender and the Division of Labor at Home." American Journal of Sociolo-gy 100 (31): 652-688.
• Butler, Judith. (2004). Undoing Gender. New York: Rouledge.
• Nymana, C., Reinikainenb, L. and Erikssonc, K. (2018). Women's Studies International Forum. 68, 36-46.
• Dewi, Putu Martini. (2012). “Traders Women's Participation in Family Income Generation”. Denpasar: Journal of Applied Quantitative Economics. Vol.5, 2: 119.
• Early, E. A. (2014). “Dual Role of Women Traders Clothing Street: A Case Study in Kemiri Muka Market Depok, West Java”. Thesis. Depok: Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.
• Shastria D. and Rao, U. (2014). “Women Entrepreneurs of Gujarat”. Procedia Economics and Finance. 11. 745-752.
• Dong, Xiao-Yuan. (2015). “Gender Patterns and Value of Unpaid Care Work Findings from China 's First Large-Scale Time Use Survey. Review of Income and Wealth”. Series 61.
• England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender and Society, 24 (2), 149-166.
• Fontana, A., and Frey, J. (1994). “Interviewing: The of Science”. in N., and Lincoln, Y., (Eds.), Handbook of Qualita-tive Research, California: Sage.
• Geist, C. (2005). The welfare state and the home: Regime differences in the domestic division of labor. European Sociological Review, 21 (1), 23-41.
• Glaser, B. and Strauss A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldine.
• Goldscheider, F., Bernhardt, E., & Lappegård, T. (2015). “The gender revolution: A framework for understanding the changing family and demographic behaviour”. Population and Development Review, 41 (2), 207-239.
• Haralambos and Holborn. (2000). Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London: HarperCollins.
• Hochschild, A.R. (1989). The second shift. New York: Avon Books.
• Hochschild. A. R. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender and Society. New York: Avon Books.
• Krishnaraj, M. (1988). "Feminist Scholarship and Feminist Movement," Social Change, 18, no. 3, pp. 186-202).
• Lahiri Kuntala-Dutta and Pallabi Silb. (2014). “Women "s" double day "in middle-class homes in small-town India”. Contemporary South Asia. Vol. 22, No. 4, 389-405.
• Matthew, Rincy V. and N. Panchanatham. (2011). “An Exploratory Study On The Work-Life Balance Of Women Entrepreneurs In South India”. Asian Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2, 77-105.
• Mayaswari, Wayan Hesty and I Gusti Wayan Yasa Murjana. (2015). “Dual Role of Women in Art Market Traders Nadi Mertha Legian Bali”. Denpasar: Populasi. Vol, 23, 2: 72.
• Minichielo, et al., (1995). In-depth Interviewing: Principles, Techniques, Analysis. Melbourne: Longman.
• Momsen, Janet Hanshall. (2004). Gender and Development. London: Rouledge.
• Moser, C. (1993). Gender Planning and Develompment. London: Rouledge.
• Neetha, N. (2010). "Estimating Unpaid Care Work: methodological Issues in Time Use Surveys." Economic and Polit-ical Weekly XLV (44): 73-80.
• Newman, W. Lawrence. (2002). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. London.
• Ng-Lun, Kelly, Natasha Shahbaz & Nuray Ozbay. (2013). “The Importance Of Female Entrepeneurship”. Entrepre-neurial Learning, Vol 3 No. 1, 39-48.
• Nordenmark, M. (2013). “Disagreement about the division of household labor and experiences of work-family con-flict in different gender regimes”. Multidisciplinary Journal of Gender Studies, 2 (3), 205-232.
• Oun, I. (2013). “Is it fair to share? Perceptions of fairness in the division of Housework among couples in 22 coun-tries”. Social Justice Research, 26 (4), 400-421.
• Parsons, T. (1943). “The Kinship System of the Contemporary United States”. American Anthropologist. 45 (1), new series, 22-38. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/662863
• Ritzer, G. (2012). Classical Sociological Theory of Sociology until Recent Developments Postmodern. Yogyakarta: Library Learning.
• Ruppanner, L. (2010). “Conflict and Housework: country Does context matter?”. European Sociological Review, 26 (5), 557-570.
• Sparringa, D. T. (1997). “Discourse, Democracy and Intellectuals in New Order Indonesia: A Qualitative Sociological Study”. Flinders University.
• Stockman, N; Bonay, N, Xuewen, S. (2015). Woman Work in East and West. London: Routledge.
• Toffoletti, Kim and Karen Starr. (2016). Women Academics and Work-Life Balance: gendered Discourses of Work and Care. Gender, Work and Organization.
• Weeks, K. (2011), The Problem with Work. London: Duke University Press.