Working class women and Oppression

To a significant extent, the problems of working class women persist because they have not participated in the financial gains of the women's movement. Middle class women reaped the greatest benefits. They dramatically increased their presence in professional fields such as medicine, law, and banking: "in little more than a decade women increased their representation among the most prestigious and lucrative professions by 300 to 400 percent" (Ehrenreich, 1990, p. 217). Granted, middle class women still encounter the "glass ceiling" in their efforts to make it to the highest ranks of corporate life. Nevertheless, the women's movement secured a definite change in fortune for women from backgrounds with high social status. These women can now afford to be independent of men. Their financial future is no longer based on marrying into wealth. If a professional woman marries, and later divorces, the specter of impoverished single motherhood is rarely a threat. In contrast, working class women are still largely dependent on the incomes of their husbands.

The occupational gains of the women's movement have not been as evident in the blue-collar fields. Part of the reason is some blue collar occupations are in

. . .
ying decisions generally shift from wife to husband. Thus the working class wife rarely exerts power in the household. When the family is poor it is she who must face the bill collectors and figure out how to stretch the limited financial resources. She assumes the worries and the stresses that accompany managing a home with so little money. Working class husbands do not mind putting their wives in such binds because it frees them of the shame of not earning enough money to adequately support their families. As the family's standard of living increases, the husband manages the money. Therefore, working class men retain their household dominance regardless of the income level. Working class women are severely limited in their productive and emotional choices and in the realization of their potential. Sennett and Cobb (1972) argue that these limitations define the modern version of low-level work, "the kind of work where people do not feel they express enough that is unique in themselves to win others' respect as individuals" (p. 74). Sharp distinctions are drawn in society between people who exercise control over their working and personal lives and those who do not. Working class women fall into the former category. Th
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
, Sennett Cobb, Advanced Placement, class women, Education Digest, Digest January, Sennet Cobb, Schrof August, HarperPerennial Rubin, women's movement, rubin 1992, World Report, socialization process, math science, cobb 1972, ehrenreich 1990, WW Norton, rubin 1992 131, gendered socialization, gains women's, schrof 1993, gains women's movement, traditional feminine ideal, schrof 1993 43, middle class women,
Approximate Word count = 1353
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Working class women and Oppression