Núm. 21 (2024): Dossier: Maternidades y ética de cuidados
Expediente H

Addressing the Paradox: Motherhood and Labor Market Participation in the Netherlands Gabriela Contreras

PDF
  • Gabriela Contreras

Publicado 2025-05-09

Palabras clave

  • maternidad, política, mercado laboral, género, ética, cuidado.

Cómo citar

Addressing the Paradox: Motherhood and Labor Market Participation in the Netherlands Gabriela Contreras. (2025). Con-temporánea, 21, 134-139. https://www.revistas.inah.gob.mx/index.php/contemporanea/article/view/22568

Resumen

La autora compara el discurso sobre la participación femenina en el mercado laboral con los hechos, más allá del criterio economicista, y considera, además, la ética del cuidado, la maternidad y cómo operan estos factores en cuanto a igualdad de género en el ámbito holandés. Se cuestionan las políticas aparentemente emancipadoras que en realidad erosionan la agencia económica de las mujeres a partir de convenciones y expectativas sociales que inciden en ellas como normas casi obligatorias. Es interesante el hallazgo sobre el hecho de que la elección del trabajo a tiempo parcial no es una decisión individual, sino asociada a presiones sistémicas y sociales que perpetúan los roles y las normas de género tradicionales. Una reflexión que apunta a la transformación de las políticas laborales, hacia opciones reales de desarrollo integral de las mujeres.

PDF

Descargas

Los datos de descarga todavía no están disponibles.

Referencias

  1. Acker, Joan, “Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of genderd organizations”, Gender & Society, vol. 4, issue 2, June 1990, pp. 139-158.
  2. Bosch, Nicole, Anja Deelen and Rob Euwals, “Is Part-time Employment Here to Stay? Working Hours of Dutch Women over Successive Generations”, Labour, vol. 24, issue 1, 2010, pp. 35-54.
  3. Cuberes, David y Marc Teignier, “Macroeconomic costs of gender gaps in a model with entrepreneurship and household production”, The BE Journal of Macroeconomics, vol. 18, 2018, pp. 1-15; Esther Duflo, “Women empowerment and economic development”, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 50, issue 4, December 2012, pp. 1051-1079.
  4. Durbin, S. y J. Tomlinson, “Female part-time managers: Networks and career mobility”, Work, Employment and Society, vol. 24, issue 4, January 2011, pp. 621-640.
  5. Eurostat, “Women’s Employment in the EU”, available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20200306-1, accessed in October, 2021.
  6. Gatrell, Caroline, “A fractional commitment? Part-time work and the maternal body”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 18, issue 3, March 2007, pp. 462-475.
  7. Goldin, Claudia, “A grand gender convergence: Its last chapter”, American Economic Review, vol. 104, issue 4, April 2014, pp. 1091-1119.
  8. Grave, Wieteke, “Voorbij de oneliners: kap nou ’s met die ’luie deeltijdprinsesjes’ [Beyond the one-liners: stop with those ’lazy part-time princesses’.”, Eva’s Post, 2021, available at https://www.evajinek.nl/onderwerpen/artikel/5214467/vrouwen-parttime-werkendeeltijdprinsesjes-discussie, accessed on July, 2022.
  9. Kaufman, G. y A.L. Almqvist, “The role of partners and workplaces in British and Swedish men’s parental leave decisions”, Men and Masculinities, vol. 20, issue 5, University of California, Santa Barbara, pp. 533-551.
  10. Kaufman, G., “Barriers to equality: Why British fathers do not use parental leave”, Community, Work & Family, vol. 21, issue 3, 2017, pp. 310-325.
  11. Kleven, H. y C. Landais, “Gender inequality and economic development: Fertility, education and norms”, Economica, vol. 84, issue 334, 2017, pp. 180-209; H. Kleven et al., “Child Penalties across Countries: Evidence and Explanations”, AEA Papers and Proceedings, vol. 109, May 2019, pp. 122-126.
  12. Lewis, J. et al., “Patterns of development in work/family reconciliation policies for parents in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK in the 2000s”, Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, vol. 15, issue 3, Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 261-286.
  13. Liebig, Brigitte y M. Oechsle (eds.), Fathers in work organizations. Inequalities and capabilities, rationalities and politics, Opladen / Berlin / Toronto, Barbara Budrich, 2017.
  14. Marynissen, Leen et al., “Father’s parental leave update in Belgium and Sweden: Self-evident or subject to employment characteristics?”, Social Sciences, vol. 8, 2019, 312 pp.
  15. Miller, Karyn E., “The Ethics of Care and Academic Motherhood amid covid-19”, Gender, Work & Organization, vol. 28, special issue (supp/1), 2021, pp. 260-265.
  16. Portegijs, W. and M. van den Brakel, “Emancipatiemonitor”, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS) en Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau (SCP) Report, The Hague, Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek en Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau, 2018.
  17. Reimer, Thordis, “Why fathers don’t take more parental leave in Germany: Comparing mechanisms in different work organizations”, Community, Work & Family, vol. 23, issue 4, 2020, pp. 419-438.
  18. Sent, E.M. and I. van Staveren, “De keukentafel en de keukendeur – klassenverschillen in de verdeling van huishoudelijke arbeid”, Tijdschrift voor Genderstudies, vol. 23, issue 2, 2020, pp. 143-161.
  19. Spierings, Elisabeth, “A qualitative analysis of the child penalty in the Netherlands”, tesis, Radboud University, 2021.
  20. West, C. y D.H. Zimmerman, “Doing Gender”, Gender & Society, vol. 1, issue 2, Sage Publications, Inc.,1987, pp. 125-151.