By Hege Skjeie and Anette Borchorst
A common feature of the mandates of the Norwegian and the Danish power studies – as they were defined by the countries’ parliaments
five years ago – was that both displayed little interest in the problems of gender and power. Gender was not mentioned at
all in the Danish mandate, and only in a subordinate clause in the Norwegian study’s assignment: “the study should also take
into account that social and cultural divides, age and gender could affect the opportunity of individuals to participate in
and influence issues in society” (Parliamentary decision 11.12.97).
The Danish study of power and democracy financed three sub-projects on gender and, in addition, attempted to mainstream gender in the other projects. However, it was realised, in line with experiences of mainstreaming in general, that gender cannot simply be “added” to projects that do not include a gender perspective to begin with. It is also obvious that researchers who have never worked with gender theory find it difficult to apply a gender approach. Instead, an anthology that focuses on a number of central aspects of gender and power, Kønsmagt under forandring (Gendered power in transition), was published (Borchorst 2003).
Power research and public debate
The different emphases on gender in the two power and democracy studies may be explained by the general tendency of Danish research on gender and power which has not been nearly as extensive as corresponding Norwegian and Swedish research. And the Danish project Kønsmagt i forandring concludes, on the basis of this comparison, that specific discourses on gender and power have not had as extensive an impact on the public debate and within the political elite, as they have had in Sweden. This happened following Yvonne Hirdman’s analysis of “The gender system” in the Swedish study of power and democracy in 1990. Hirdman’s conclusions were, for example, stated as crucial for the right-wing government’s initiative in 1995 concerning a month’s parental leave for fathers and for the Swedish debate on women’s representation after the decline in female representation in the 1991 parliamentary election. On the whole, Hirdman’s work has supported the extensive impact of the discourse on the discrimination of women in the Swedish debate on gender and power. Correspondingly, Helga Hernes’s metaphor of “The women-friendly welfare state” for the Scandinavian welfare states left its mark on the gender equality discourses in Norway in the 1990’s. Another remarkable difference between Sweden and Norway on the one hand, and Denmark on the other, is that in the first two countries very different interpretations of the changes in gendered power have been presented. Thus, optimistic and pessimistic scenarios have also competed in the attempts to describe the status of gender and power in Sweden. In Norway, the thesis on women’s integration into “shrinking institutions” has also given rise to debates on interpretations among gender researchers. Seen from a Danish perspective, the competing interpretations have functioned as a fruitful driving force for the research field on gender and power, but they have also polarised and, in certain cases, locked the debate in the 1990’s (Borchorst, Christensen & Siim, 2002).
Familiar dichotomies in power analysis
Much research on gender and power has been characterised by two dichotomies: on the one hand, researchers have emphasized either the perspective of structures or that of actors, and on the other, there has been a focus on either continuity or on change in various power relations. At the end of the 1990’s, one of the theoretical challenges of research on gender and power was to overcome these dichotomies in the understanding of power within gender research. This required a combination of a conceptual openness and empirical flexibility, and a crucial task has been to adopt approaches for understanding power that points beyond these dichotomies. An important task on the conceptual level is to emphasize the interplay between structures and actors, for example, by an increased attention on organisational and institutional perspectives – regarded both as arenas for social distribution of power and for mobilisation and influence. On the empirical level, it is important to show the various processes between and inside groups (Borchorst, Christensen & Siim, 2002). The analyses in the two studies of power and democracy have applied a plurality of approaches to the study of gender and power.
The gender projects within the Norwegian power and democracy study
In the Norwegian study, the analyses of gendered power have concentrated on the welfare state and labour markets, on elite structures, democratic politics, forms of mobilisation and public gender debates. A series of books, reports and articles have analysed gender hegemony in modern working life (Ellingsæter and Solheim 2002), problems of wage discrimination (Høgsnes 2001), policies and ethics of authonomy, caring and care work (Vike 2002, Widding Isaksen 2003, Christensen 2001, Elvebakken 2001), problems of fairness and justice in gender equality policy (Holst 2002), internationalisation of gender equality politics, human rights discourses and religiously based patriarchy (Ketcher 2001, Borchgrevink 2002, Skjeie and Teigen 2003, Skjeie 2003), male dominance in Nordic academia (Rogg 2003), voluntary organisations (Berven and Selle 2001), gender policy organisation and minority group lobbying in Norway (Predelli 2003) and trends in the political history of feminism (Hagemann forthcoming). Most of these projects have been organised within a separate programme, while analyses of gendered power have also been included in a number of other publications from the Norwegian power and democracy study. All are presented on a website developed as part of this programme. The Internet presentations will be finalized with a “youth” version of the site in 2004 (see website Kjønnsmakt: www.kilden.forskningradet.no).
“Equality”: Travel metaphors and profitability talk
An extensive analysis of structural male dominance, attitudes to gender equality, and developments in Norwegian policies on
gender equality during the last 30 years, is published in the book Menn imellom. Mannsdominans og likestillingspolitikk (Amongst
men. Male dominance and gender equality policy) by Hege Skjeie and Mari Teigen (2003). It problematises the “self-evidence”
of equality policy as a stated consensus among the national elite, and discusses concrete challenges for Norwegian equality
politics following international debates on equality and gender justice. It analyses the distance between a general interest
in equality in top-level positions of Norwegian society and a continued extreme male dominance on those same levels. We call
this the problem of benevolent non-committal. Principles of gender equality often have to yield “a little”, and become politics
that lack systematic priority. This is the yielding duty of equality: in encounter with freedom of religion, the protection
against discrimination is partly set aside; in encounter with the freedom of negotiation, the right to pay equity is adjusted;
in encounter with the freedom of organisation, the right to equal participation is diminished. An overwhelming male dominance
in central positions of power often create nothing more than just passing embarrassment.
Much of the language on gender equality is constructed within the framework of a travel metaphor - as a nationally encapsulated
“equality journey”. Gender equality is thus seen as a linear process where we all, together, continuously take new steps towards
the goal. This can be “far ahead”, but still securely within reach; we just have to travel for long and far enough. Gender
equality is pasted into a language of concerted action that creates continued illusions of a change in “the right direction”
happening all the time.
Alternatively, gender equality is reduced to a question of what women can contribute. Public debate is characterised by persuasion,
by strategic argumentation on what gender means and how important equality can be. And a rhetoric of profitability adjusted
to market ideology has been the dominant argumentation strategy in much of the Norwegian equality debate during the last decade.
Much of the argumentation for equality has great difficulty in maintaining a perspective of rights and justice. When paid
work free from discrimination is emphasized as important insofar as it is profitable for the employer, the principle of equality
is for sale or when women are to enter boardrooms, judicial offices and professorships in order to “save the institutions”,
to better serve students, to advance the climate in the workplace, to improve risk assessments, to enhance the image. When
gender equality is argued as a means to secure competitiveness, the category of “women” accordingly becomes a representation
of “means” for companies and organisations to use. The rhetoric of profitability puts equality on the defence, as a field
that must be defended with something else than its own value. Such discussions circle around a far too old – and endlessly
patriarchal – requirement that women should contribute “as gender” – with their collective empathy, their collective talent,
their collective reason. Do “we” have something to contribute? If not, what are we nagging about?
Both the travel metaphor and the rhetoric of profitability add to the construction of a seeming consensus on gender equality,
this analysis concludes. They simply bypass problems of individual and structural discrimination and misrecognition. Thus,
they contribute to equality’s yielding duty – as they conceal informal power structures, and hide the fact that equality often
is a matter of concrete clashes of interests and rights.
Gender justice
Several analyses of gendered power in the Norwegian study seek to initiate new feminist debates on what gender justice can mean. What, for example, are the consequences of the new social rights being so strongly differentiated according to a requirement of paid work? How can equal paternity leave be realized when the financial circumstances are so strongly aimed at maternity leave? How can freedom of speech be combined with the right to protection against sexual harassment? And what are the limits of institutional politics in relation to patriarchal forms of control of women? Such debates on gender justice and freedom do not necessarily aim at finding clear political “solutions”. Rather, they imply democratic discussions where perspectives can be weighed against each other. Such are sought in all seven articles on gender justice in the book Kjønnsrettferdighet which Cathrine Holst (2002) has edited for the study of power and democracy.
Modern working life
One of the central premises in the book Den usynlige hånd? Kjønnsmakt og moderne arbeidsliv (The invisible hand? Gendered power and modern working life), edited by Anne Lise Ellingsæter and Jorun Solheim, is that gendered power in working life cannot be fully grasped through a politics-centred power analysis. The editors discuss how public equality debate is tied to traditional political power conceptions and how this framework presents a too narrow field of reference in relation to working life. As a discourse on gendered power, the political debate is of limited relevance for illuminating power mechanisms operating within the field of working life. These are not primarily concerned with representation or rights, but are connected to the actual way in which gender is woven into the organisation and operation of work. Jorun Solheim uses the concept of gender hegemony to describe the dominating patterns of gendering processes. They ascribe meaning – and value – to and by forms of social practices. Often these are subtle processes of creating difference. Gender hegemony might be an important approach for understanding the strongly gender hierarchical Norwegian labour organisations, in what is also one of Europe’s most gender-segregated labour markets. Organisation of time, competence, leadership, class, salary, emotional work and new forms of learning activities provide points of departure for the discussion on gender, power and work in this book, containing articles by 14 labour market and working life researchers.
The price of caring
How are different understandings of power and gender connected to different ways of thinking about money, markets and caring – in the interplay between family, welfare state and labour market? What are the effects of market orientation and globalisation on the care sector? These are important questions in the book Omsorgens pris - om kjønn, makt og marked i velferdstaten (The price of caring – on gender, power and markets in the welfare state), edited by Lise Widding Isaksen. This book presents a series of projects on the gender dimensions of the welfare state that were carried out by the Centre for Women’s Studies and Gender Research at the University of Bergen during the mandate period of the study of democracy and power. The lack of sufficient caring resources is becoming increasingly apparent, and the family institution cannot satisfy all the pressing caring needs. New ideas of femininity and masculinity challenge the traditional caring cultures. And the market economy thinking in terms of “production” of welfare and caring services implies new value priorities. The significance of care values is reduced and caring is objectified. In the same way as Maktens samvittighet Om politikk, styring og dilemmaer i velferdstaten (The conscience of power – On politics, governance and welfare state dilemmas) (Vike et al. 2002), this book also problematises the way in which power and responsibility are separated in the parallel processes of centralisation and decentralisation. Workers in the care sector find themselves in double commitments – on the one hand to the institutions, and on the other to patients and clients. Their work autonomy continually diminishes. Nevertheless, those who carry out the concrete caring work are, in practice, given the responsibility to draw the borders of the welfare state.
The gender projects within the Danish power study
In the Danish study, the book Kønsmagt i forandring (Gendered power in transition) (Borchorst (ed.) 2002) focused on a number of different aspects of gendered power. Bente Rosenbeck’s analysis of the cooperation between women’s organisations and lawyers in the Nordic countries concerning changes in marriage legislation around the turn of the previous century reflects the significance of women and experts as actors. Karin Lützen’s analysis of the arguments for a mandatory enrollment of women who supplemented their income with prostitution as full time registered prostitutes at the end of the 19th century shows that the political elite was strongly influenced by patriarchal values. However, it also demonstrates that the legislation could be influenced by organisations and movements.
The gender profile of elites
Using various theoretical stances, Hanne Nexø Jensen (on academics within the ministries), Peter Munk Christiansen, Birgit
Møller, Lise Togeby (on gender and elites from a general perspective), Lis Højgard (on gender and leadership), and Catrine
Hasse, Inge Henningsen and Dorthe Marie Søndergaard (on gender in academia) explore the gender profile within elites and discuss
the explanations of the male dominance of these. The last analysis concludes that male gender power penetrates the elite by
subtle dynamics, which cannot be explained by existing theories. These chapters also show that there is considerable variation
between the elite groups. This also pertains to the perspective of change: in some places, for example, the private business
sector and academia, hardly any change can be discerned, while there is development towards a more balanced gender representation
in other places, for example, political institutions.
The gender profile of political parties at the organisational level and the focus on gender equality in their programmes are
also investigated. Karina Pedersen’s chapter focuses on the unbalanced gender profile of party organisations against a background
of various arguments for the presence of women.
Drude Dahlerup’s analysis of the equality discourse within Swedish and Danish parties reveals considerable differences in
the framing of gender and equality. A number of chapters deal with caring, professions and discourses. Steen Baagøe Nielsen’s
analysis shows how financial principles have put their mark on the area of day-care institutions and their gendered rationales.
Hanne Marlene Dahl’s analysis of the home help sector demonstrates that an increased discussion and valuation of caring has
taken place within the administrative discourse of this sector. In a chapter on ethnicity, Annick Prieur shows how gender,
ethnicity and generation interact in the way young immigrants tackle the forms of power in their everyday lives in Norway.
Pernille Tanggard departs from the situation of young female members of the Danish Female Workers Association in her study
of whether the changed professional strategy towards the emphases of particular female values is in accordance with a late-modern
identity.
In addition to these analyses, the Danish study on power and democracy has supported three projects on gendered power and
democracy. One crossnational project has particularly focused on discursive and theoretical differences between the Scandinavian
countries (the conclusions are presented in the introduction of this article). The two other subprojects have studied democracy
and identity, and gender, power and decision-making.
The political identity of young women
Ann-Dorte Christensen’s project focuses on young women’s political identities. The main results are published in the book Fortællinger om identitet og magt. Unge kvinder i senmoderniteten (Narratives on identities and power. Young women in late modernity) (Christensen, 2003). The point of departure for the project is young Danish women’s lack of affiliation with the representative institutions of established democracy, such as political parties and trade unions. Using narrative interviews with women involved in social movements and women who are not active at all, the project goes beyond figures and highlights factors that are significant in the creation of the young women’s political identities. The analysis shows that the young women have several reasons for turning their backs on political institutions. For radical left-wing feminists it seems as if the break with the institutions forms a basic part of their political identities. This means that their disidentification with the political parties, of which their parents typically have been members, is a central factor in their identity work. For other women, the institutions are less significant. They take them for granted. They do not, however, relate actively to them, and, above all, they do not regard the institutions as useful or relevant in their identity work. The study also shows that there are great differences in the women’s attitudes to feminist positions and movements. One common feature is that none of the young women interviewed identify with the latest feminist trend. Many do not even know this movement, and the radical left-wing feminist dismiss it as an intellectual upper-class project.
Women in ethnical minorities
Birte Siim’s project focuses on a small group of minority women who are leaders of voluntary associations that organise minority groups in Denmark. The publication Medborgerskabets udfordringer – etniske minoritetskvinders politiske myndiggørelse (The challenges of citizenship – the political empowerment of ethnic minority women) (Siim, 2003) uses a qualitative study to elucidate the specific barriers that women in ethnic minorities must overcome in order to get their voices heard in the Danish society and within their own minority cultures. On the one hand, the narratives express a positive picture of a group of minority women with self-confidence, a strong political involvement and political competencies that they use to organise women. On the other hand, they give a dark picture of the discrimination and marginalisation that these women experience, for example, the lack of opportunity to have a voice on the political public arena or to have their interests represented in the political system. The study illustrates that minority women live with double identities and often experience strong cultural conflicts concerning their demands for greater self-determination in their private and public lives. It also indicates that it is a central challenge for the Danish society to combine the democratic demand for equal participation with an acknowledgment of cultural differences. The study illuminates the tension between multi-culturalism and gender equality, and the need for a cross-cultural dialogue about different family forms and gender equality models.
Parental leave in Scandinavia
Anette Borchorst’s project investigates the meaning of gender in political negotiations on various types of caring policies.
The publication Køn, magt og beslutninger. Politiske forhandlinger om barselsorlov 1901-2002 (Gender, power and decision-making.
Political negotiations on parental leave 1901–2002) analyses political negotiations concerning parental leave over a 100-year-period.
This study also adopts a comparative Scandinavian approach. Through this long historical perspective, it is obvious that the
presence of women in top politics has affected decision-making. Extension of the period for parental leave, increased financial
compensation and strengthened rights against dismissal are expressions of the shifting border between the private and the
public. This development has supported the financial autonomy of women. However, the extension of the parental leave is also
a double-edged sword for women, since this has resulted in the caring right of fathers being developed relatively late. A
comparison of negotiations of daddy quotas in Scandinavian parental leave arrangements displays rather different understandings
of the issue, particularly in relation to the political significance of gender. While family and childcare policies are systematically
combined in Norway and Sweden, there is a tendency in Denmark to separate the two. Here, the two weeks parental leave earmarked
for fathers was repealed in 2002, despite it being a success judging from the fathers’ use of the opportunity. It is characteristic
of a dominating discourse in Denmark that earmarking leave for fathers is seen as an expression of a tutelary state, even
though the Danish parental leave period earmarked for women is much longer than the Norwegian or Swedish ones (Borchorst,
2003).
The power and democracy studies reflect how discourses on gendered power and social practices are connected. The emphasis
on power mobilisation and empowerment of women in Denmark has presumably strengthened a discourse claiming that equality has
“almost” been achieved in that country. An explanation of the more limited focus on gender in Denmark should also be seen
in relation to the very movement-oriented character of the Danish women’s mobilisation. But the weakening of the collective
extra-parliamentary women’s movement in the 1990’s has made it visible that gender and equality also hold a weaker position
within the political institutions and that gender is not regarded as a legitimate criterion for regulation in Denmark.
Notes
Berven, Nina and Per Selle, eds. (2001): Svekket kvinnemakt? [Weakened power of women?]. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.
Borchorst, Anette, ed. (2002): Kønsmagt under forandring [Gendered power in transition]. København: Hans Reitzel.
Borchorst, Anette, Ann-Dorte Christensen & Birte Siim (2002): ”Diskurser om køn, magt og politik i Skandinavien” [Discourses
on gender, power and politics in Scandinavia]. In Anette Borchorst (ed.): Kønsmagt under forandring [Gendered power in transition].
København: Hans Reitzels Forlag, pp. 246–266 .
Borchorst, Anette, Ann-Dorte Christensen & Birte Siim (2002): ”Kontinuitet og forandring i kønsmagt. Et svar til Yvonne Hirdmans
anmeldelse af bogen ”Kønsmagt under forandring”, Hans Reitzels Forlag” [Continuity and change in gendered power. A reply to
Yvonne Hirdman’s review of the book ”Kønsmagt under forandring”, Hans Reitzels Forlag”], Nyhetsbrev for netværk for nordisk
velfærdsstatshistorie, no 19, pp. 19-22.
Borchorst, Anette, Ann-Dorte Christensen & Birte Siim (2003): ”Magtens kønnede ansigter” [The gendered faces of power]. In
Peter Munk Christiansen & Lise Togeby (eds.): På sporet af magten [The traces of power]. Århus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag,
pp. 61-73.
First published in NIKK magasin 3 2003 © NIKK
