Gender And Sexuality as a Labor Control Regime in the Garment Industry/ Konfeksiyon Sektöründe Emek Kontrol Rejimi Olarak Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Cinsellik

Öz

This study examines how women workers experience despotic market conditions and local patriarchal structures within the context of garment production. It specifically discusses the dynamics that render women's labor temporary, obedient, and disciplined in the workplace. The study focuses on women garment workers in the Free Trade Zone in Mersin, Turkey, and is based on qualitative data derived from in-depth interviews with 19 women garment workers, three employers, one union delegate, and one employer representative. The findings reveal how patriarchal patterns are reproduced in daily workshop practices and how gender roles, sexualized meanings, and harassment serve as tools of power, control, and discipline in the workplace, reinforcing patriarchal hegemony. The study identifies that women are considered "ideal workers" in the garment industry due to being perceived as "loyal," "disciplined," and "docile." Furthermore, patriarchal discourses surrounding femininity and heterosexual relationships (whether marital or sexual) are used to control and discipline women workers throughout the production process as a labor control regime. The competition among female workers is shaped by patriarchal femininity roles rather than by the qualifications required for the job. These mechanisms contribute to the creation of a gendered workplace, reinforcing production politics that undermine solidarity among women workers and foster distinctions based on gender and sexuality

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gender
• hegemonic-despotism
• labor
• patriarchy
• labor control regimes
• women

Gender And Sexuality as a Labor Control Regime in the Garment Industry/ Konfeksiyon Sektöründe Emek Kontrol Rejimi Olarak Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Cinsellik

Öz

Bu çalışma, kadın işçilerin despotik piyasa koşullarını ve yerel patriyarkal yapıları konfeksiyon üretimi bağlamında nasıl deneyimlediklerini incelemektedir. Özellikle, atölye içerisinde kadın emeğini geçici, itaatkâr ve disiplinli hale getiren dinamikleri ele almaktadır. Çalışma, Türkiye'nin Mersin Serbest Bölgesi'nde çalışan kadın konfeksiyon işçilerine odaklanmakta olup, 19 kadın konfeksiyon işçisi, üç işveren, bir sendika temsilcisi ve bir işveren temsilcisi ile gerçekleştirilen derinlemesine görüşmelere dayanmaktadır. Bulgular, patriyarkal kalıpların günlük atölye pratiklerinde nasıl yeniden üretildiğini ve toplumsal cinsiyet rolleri, cinselleştirilmiş anlamlar ve tacizin işyerinde güç, kontrol ve disiplin araçları olarak nasıl kullanılarak patriyarkal hegemonyayı pekiştirdiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, kadınların konfeksiyon sektöründe "ideal işçiler" olarak kabul edilmelerinin, onların "sadık", "disiplinli" ve "uysal" olarak algılanmalarına dayandığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca, kadınlık ve heteroseksüel ilişkiler (evlilik ya da cinsellik) etrafında şekillenen patriyarkal söylemler, üretim sürecinde kadın işçileri kontrol etme ve disipline etme aracı olarak kullanılmaktadır. Kadın işçiler arasındaki rekabet, işin gerektirdiği niteliklerden ziyade patriyarkal kadınlık rolleri tarafından belirlenmektedir. Bu mekanizmalar, toplumsal cinsiyete dayalı bir işyeri yapısının oluşmasına katkıda bulunarak, kadın işçiler arasındaki dayanışmayı zayıflatmakta ve toplumsal cinsiyet ve cinselliğe dayalı ayrımları pekiştiren bir üretim politikası yaratmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Toplumsal cinsiyet
• hegemonic despotizm
• emek
• ataerki
• emek kontrol rejimleri
• kadın öznelliği

Kaynakça

1. Adkins, L., & Lury, C. (1996). The cultural, the sexual, and the gendering of the labor market. In L. Adkins & V. Merchant (Eds.), Sexualizing the social: Power and the organisation of sexuality (pp. 204-223). Palgrave Macmillan.
2. Bair, J. (2010). On difference and capital: Gender and the globalization of production. Signs, 36(1), 203-226. https://doi.org/10.1086/652912
3. Berebitsky, J. (2012). Sex and the office: A history of gender, power, and desire. Yale University Press.
4. Burawoy, M. (1979). Manufacturing consent: Changes in the labor process under monopoly capitalism. University of Chicago Press.
5. Burawoy, M. (1983). Between the labor process and the state: The changing face of factory regimes under advanced capitalism. American Sociological Review, 48(5), 587-605. https://doi.org/10.2307/2094921
6. Burawoy, M. (1985). The politics of production: Factory regimes under capitalism and socialism. Verso.
7. Collins, J. L. (2002). Mapping a global labor market: Gender and skill in the globalizing garment industry. Gender and Society, 16(6), 921–940. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124302237895
8. Connell, R. (2005). Masculinities. University of California Press.

9. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829-859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639
10. Connell, R. (2009). Gender in world perspective. Polity Press.
11. Cornell, D. (1993). The imaginary domain: Abortion, pornography, and sexual harassment. Routledge.
12. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
13. D’Ambrogio, E. (2014). Workers' conditions in the textile and clothing sector: Just an Asian affair? Issues at stake after the Rana Plaza tragedy. European Parliamentary Research Service, 2-10.
14. Davies, S. (1990). Inserting gender into Burawoy's theory of the labour process. Work, Employment and Society, 4(3), 391-406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017090004003005
15. Dedeoğlu, S. (2007). Women workers in Turkey: Global industrial production in Istanbul. IB Tauris.
16. Degiuli, F., & Kollmeyer, C. (2007). Bringing Gramsci back in: Labor control in Italy’s new temporary help industry. Work, Employment and Society, 21(3), 497–515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017007080011
17. Donaldson, M. (1993). What is hegemonic masculinity? Theory and Society, 22(5), 643-657. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993540
18. Edwards, R. (1979). Contested terrain: The transformation of the workplace in the twentieth century. Basic Books.
19. Eraydın, A., & Erendil, A. (1999). The role of female labour in industrial restructuring: New production processes and labour market relations in the Istanbul clothing industry. Gender, Place & Culture, 6(3), 259-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/09663699925024
20. Federici, S. (2004). Caliban and the witch: Women, the body and primitive accumulation in medieval Europe. Autonomedia.
21. Freeman, C. (2001). Is local: Global as feminine: Masculine? Rethinking the gender of globalization. Signs, 26(4), 1007-1037. https://doi.org/10.1086/495646
22. Hartmann, H. (1979). The unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism: Towards a more progressive union. Capital & Class, 8, 1-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/030981687900800102
23. Hoare, Q. (1999). Selections from the prison notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Elec Book. International Labour Organization (ILO). (2016). Wages and productivity in the garment sector in Asia and the Pacific and the Arab states. International Labour Organisation. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/documents/publication/wcms_534289.pdf J ackson, S. (1996). Heterosexuality as a problem for feminist theory. In L. Adkins & V. Merchant (Eds.), Sexualizing the social: Power and the organization of sexuality (pp. 15–34). Palgrave Macmillan
24. Johnson, L. C. (1990). New patriarchal economies in the Australian textile industry. Antipode, 22, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.1990.tb00195.x
25. Jonas, A. E. G. (2009). Labor control regime. In International encyclopedia of human geography (Vol. 6, pp. 147-150). Elsevier.
26. Kandiyoti, D. (1988). Bargaining with patriarchy. Gender and Society, 2(3), 274-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124388002003004
27. Korinek, J. (2005). Trade and gender: Issues and interactions (OECD Trade Policy Papers No. 24). OECD Publishing.
28. Mernissi, F. (2000). The Muslim concept of active female sexuality. In P. İlkkaracan (Ed.), Women and sexuality in Muslim societies (pp. 31-47). A Publication of Women for Women’s Human Rights New Ways.
29. MESBAŞ. (2019a). User companies. https://www.mesbas.com.tr/firmalar.html?s=18 (Accessed: 05.02.2019)
30. MESBAŞ. (2019b). Trading volume and statistics. https://www.mesbas.com.tr/Ticaret-Hacmi-ve-statistikler,29.html (Accessed: 05.02.2019)
31. Millett, K. (2000). Sexual politics. University of Illinois Press.
32. Mills, M. B. (2003). Gender and inequality in the global labor force. Annual Review of Anthropology, 32, 41-62. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.32.061002.093107
33. MTSO. (2019). Company information search by sector. http://oda.mtso.org.tr/mtso/firmasektorsorgula.aspx (Accessed: 09.05.2019)
34. Radice, H. (2015). Global capitalism: Selected essays. Routledge.
35. Ramazanoglu, C. (1989). Feminism and the contradictions of oppression. Routledge.
36. Ramazanoglu, C., & Holland, J. (2002). Feminist methodology: Challenges and choices. Sage Publications.
37. Read, J. (2003). The micro-politics of capital. State University of New York Press. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Trade (RTMT). (2019). Clothing industry. https://www.trade.gov.tr/data/5b8fd6d913b8761f041feee0/Clothing.pdf
38. Ruslin, R. (2022). Gender, power, and patriarchal bargaining: Women’s agency in contemporary societies. Routledge.
39. Salzinger, L. (1997). From high heels to swathed bodies: Gendered meanings under production in Mexico's export-processing industry. Feminist Studies, 23(3), 549-574. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178386
40. Salzinger, L. (2000). Manufacturing sexual subjects: ‘Harassment’, desire and discipline on a maquiladora shopfloor. Ethnography, 1(1), 67-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/14661380022230642
41. Salzinger, L. (2003). Gender in production: Making workers in Mexico’s global factories. University of California Press.
42. Schultz, V. (1999). Male domination of the workplace causes sexual harassment. In L. I. Gerdes (Ed.), Sexual harassment (pp. 14-28). Greenhaven Press.
43. Unni, J., & Bali, N. (2002). Subcontracted women workers in the garment industry in India. In R. Balakrishnan (Ed.), The hidden assembly line: Gender dynamics of subcontracted work in a global economy (pp. 115-144). Kumarian Press.
44. Williams, J. C. (2001). Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it. Oxford University Press.
45. Williams, C. L., Muller, C., & Kilanski, K. (2012). Gendered organizations in the new economy. Gender & Society, 26(4), 549-573.
46. World Trade Organization (WTO). (2019). World trade statistical review 2019. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2019_e/wts2019_e.pdf