Migrant Filipinas: Gender and Globalization

(Source: The Gender of Globalization: Women Navigating Cultural and Economic Marginalities. Ed. By Nandini Gunewardena & Ann Kingsolver. School for Advanced Research Press. James Currey: Oxford, 2007.)

The chapter from the above source, "Geographies of Race and Class: The Place and Placelessness of Migrant Filipina Domestic Workers," explores race and class from the perspective of migrant, Filipina workers. It was written by Rhacel Salazar Parreñas who is a professor of Asian American studies and is "currently doing research (at the time of the book's publication) on migrant Filipina entertainers in Tokyo's nightlife industry" (192). Although the writing is gender specific in that its primary focus is on Filipinas, the bulk of the chapter is focused more on the cultural constructs of race and class. Parreñas concludes her analysis of migrant Filipinas by stating that "although gender relations are a reflection of power relations, the dynamics of power are not always literally about gender" (192). In this regard, this chapter is meant to serve as a warning to social scientists of a more feminist persuasion who limit their studies and arguments to gender alone. I agree with the author. A feminist perspective is certainly warranted in many situations, but it should never be the only factor considered in power relations when, as the author clearly points out, there are so many other dynamics involved in the migrant experience. Very briefly, I will try to touch on some of these.

First, and of immediate interest to me as a reader, Parreñas believes there is a tendency for many social scientists to view traditional systems as being somehow less equal than modern systems. She terms this as the "long-dismissed modernization theory of gender" (174). Modernization theory revolves around the false assumption that modernization, by its very nature, can offer migrants a greater socioeconomic status than traditional systems. It assumes that modernization can be equated to greater equability and class mobility. Some will claim that women will migrate to First World countries to escape the limiting forms of stratification that exist in their source country. This is not always the case, of course, and, at least in my mind, is a terribly ethnocentric perspective to take on countries outside the First World. It creates a false dichotomy of "us" and "them," the free and the enslaved, and is not wholly accurate. As Parreñas states, migrant Filipinas often experience a "drastic decline in social status" in their host society following migration (175). This isn't to mention the isolation migrants must feel when they are no longer in direct contact with their source community.

Second, and of worth note, migrants of other ethnicities, outside Filipinos and Filipinas, do often build strong social networks in host communities. This can be seen in those of Latin descent, for example. However, based on Parreñas' studies, it does not seem Filipinas have these same social networks, and this increases their feelings of dislocation and, as Parreñas terms it, "placelessness" (180). It contributes directly to a loss of cultural identity. One would think that without a strong diaspora, a migrant Filipina would simply allow herself to enculturate into the host community, but this is not as simple as it seems nor is it always desired.

To conclude, the life of a Filipina migrant (Parreñas uses examples from Rome and Los Angeles to illustrate) is a complex one. Many, especially those who are domestic workers, are almost always treated as second-class citizens, regardless of their citizenship status. Even within Filipina/Filipino communities there is an undercurrent of class stratification between the migrants who work as domestics and those who have managed to obtain higher paying and less menial modes of employment. Gender is not the only component of social disparity. Parreñas' study clearly points this out to the reader.