Feminist Theory and Sociology: Underutilized Contributions for Mainstream Theory Author(s): Janet Saltzman Chafetz Reviewed work(s):

Source: Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 23 (1997), pp. 97-120 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2952545 . Accessed: 02/12/2012 15:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Annu.Rev.Sociol. 1997 23:97-120 ? 1997 byAnnualReviews Copyright Inc. All rights reserved

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY: Underutilized for Contributions Mainstream Theory

Janet Saltzman Chafetz
KEY WORDS:

Department ofSociology, University ofHouston, Houston, Texas77204

varieties offeminist feminist theory theory canon theories, ghettoization, ubiquity ofgender, critiques offeminist revision, theories

ABSTRACT Feminist theories in sociologyreflect therichdiversity of general theoretical orientations in ourdiscipline; is no one form there of feminist The detheory. velopment of thesetheories overthelast 25 yearshas onlyrecently begunto themainstream influence whichhas much theory canon, to learnfrom intheir demonstrates versions of thefollowing thesights.This chapter whyfeminist intomainstream orytypesshouldbe morefully integrated sociological theory: neo-Marxist, macro-structural, rational exchange, choice, network, status expectations, symbolic interactionist, ethnomethodological, neo-Freudian, and social role. Feminist standpoint an epistemological theory, critique of mainstream sois discussedat thebeginning, and thechapter witha brief ciology, concludes account ofthenewly effort totheorize theintersection ofrace,class, developing andgender.

INTRODUCTION
The term"feminist to a myriadof kindsof works,protheory"is used to refer duced by movementactivistsand scholars in a variety of disciplines; these are notmutually exclusive and include: (a) normative discussions of how societies and relationships their and strategies current to oughttobe structured, inequities, achieve equity;(b) critiquesof androcentric classical theories, concepts,epistemologies, and assumptions;(c) epistemologicaldiscussions of what constitute from and techniquesoftheorizing a feminist appropriate forms, subjectmatters, theories oftherelationship perspective;and (d) explanatory betweengenderand 97

0360-0572/97/081 5-0097$08.00

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

98

CHAFETZ

various social,cultural, economic, psychological, andpolitical structures and processes.Muchofthiswork is explicitly interdisciplinary in inspiration and intended audience. To complicate matters further, there is no consensus on the exactmeaning of theword"feminist," which makesit difficult to distinguish with between theoretical material that precision pertains togender (e.g.Parsons 1949,1955,which no one wouldlabelfeminist) andgender-related theory that is specifically "feminist." Finally, there is little consensus among feminist soabout thebasictheoretical ciologists questions that require an answer, resulting in theproliferation oftheories ata lowlevelofabstraction that explain specific phenomena (e.g. payinequity), in addition tomore abstract, general works. To remain within thelimits of one chapter, I confine thisreview in several feminist that hasnot ways, beginning byexcluding beenproduced orused theory Whilefeminist is often extensively bysociologists. defined as "womentheory & Niebrugge centered" (e.g.Lengermann 1996:436;Smith 1979,1987;Alway ongender, 1995),I use a definition that focuses more broadly yet maintains the all normative oftheterm which emphasis implied thus by definitions feminist, enablesone to distinguish feminist from other Earlier gender-relevant theory. itinterms (Chafetz 1988:5),I defined offour which criteria, guide myselection to be reviewed in thischapter:(a) "gender a central of theories comprises focusor subject matter of thetheory"; are viewedas a (b) "gender relations problem ... . [F]eminist is related theory seeks to understand how gender to social inequities, and contradictions"; are not relations strains, (c) "gender viewed as. . . immutable"; and(d) feminist "canbe used... tochallenge, theory or changea status or devalueswomen."I counteract, quo that disadvantages on explanatory focusmostof myattention theories of buteschewdiscussion I limit thenumerous, moresubstantively narrow thisreview to ones. Finally, sincethe broad-scale offeminist consciousness writings produced reemergence inthe late1960s, which toaffect discourse after andactivism began sociological that does notmean, no works could about1970. Thislimitation that however, thistime before feminist wereproduced be considered theory by sociologists (see Fitzpatrick 1990,Deegan 1988,Donovan1985,Rosenberg 1982). A decadeago,Stacey& Thorne etal 1992,Alway1995) (1985; also Laslett inparticthefailure ofsociology ingeneral, andsociological bemoaned theory feminist ofitswork.During toincorporate as central ular, insights components and offeminist thelasttwodecades,a significant amount sociological theory broad has beenproduced, as reflected in twobooksthat epistemology provide book overviews Chafetz1988; a moresophisticated (myundergraduate text, oftheoretical collection edited byEngland 1993a),andonelesscomprehensive feminist papers(Wallace1989). Several interdisciplinary theory books,which some sociologicaltheory, have also appeared(e.g. Tong 1989, incorporate textbooks in sociology Gergen1988,Rhode1990). Recent theory (e.g. Ritzer

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

99

1996,Etzkowitz & Glassman 1991,Waters 1994,Wallace& Wolf1995) have they vary widely inthe begun toinclude somediscussion offeminist theory, but typically confine extent and nature oftheir coverage ofthetopic.Thesetexts offeminist section. Thispracdiscussion theory to itsownchapter or chapter ticeis problematic to easilyskip bothbecauseit allowsscholars and students theorists appear thetopicand becauseit makesthecontributions of feminist andhomogeneous many texts still omit more narrow than they are. In addition, feminist anda number ofimportant contemporary theorists theory altogether, Anthony Giddens) have (e.g.,James Coleman, Jeffrey Alexander, Peter Berger, topicofgender in their ignored both feminist theoretical insights andthevery "general" theories (Seidman1994:304). andtexts Some feminists focuson thosecontemporary theories that ignore offeminist theories andthetopicofgender andconclude that thecontributions feminist contributions remain within our discipline (e.g.Ward largely ghettoized & Grant has beenmade 1991,Alway1995). My viewis that, whileprogress and insights intothediscipline's theoretical in integrating feminist concerns to be done. This chapter the demonstrates discourse, muchworkremains canandalready offeminist have that abundance andvariety theoretical insights ofsocial to someextent contributed toa more robust theoretical understanding in virtually all sociocultural life,one whichreflects thecentrality of gender contexts. Italso demonstrates feminist emanate and from, critique, that theories ourdiscipline. revisethericharray of theoretical traditions define Space that canbe much ofprecisely howfeminist theories limitations preclude discussion I focusattention on better with mainstream ones. Rather, primarily integrated inorder tobetter inform those the central offeminist reviewing insights theories aboutthe whomaybe unfamiliar with ofthis bodyofwork sociologists much richarray oftheoretical ideasthat areat their disposal.

EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES
ofepistemology Muchoftheliterature that is labeled"feminist consists theory" reflect andepistemological of"malestream" Itsfoundations critiques sociology. discussions nonfeminist Marx'sandMannheim's several traditions, especially work on knowledge andpower, andphenomenological ofideology, Foucault's and ethnomethodological theexactmixof influences varying by approaches, for Whilethiswork makesimportant contributions to these author. traditions, work feminist I believe itis a misnomer tocallthis that tworeasons epistemology theissuesraisedare notin anyfundamental waydifferent (or theory). First, but have inthese traditions whohaveworked raised scholars from those bymany Feminists tofeminism. inwomen orcommitted notbeeninterested specifically a uniquely butthis does notconstitute their in important extend insights ways,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

100

CHAFETZ

whose approach to sociology. Second,manywomenin sociology, feminist do tradition, thefeminist as well within and others consider they scholarship this perspective. notagreewith as define critique whatthey of disciplines Feminist scholars in a number and science, "positivist" social and "objectivist," "masculinist," mainstream, the theory.In sociology, alternative called standpoint developa "feminist" 1990, also 1979, 1987, Smith (especially are Dorothy cited twomostwidely 1990,also 1986,1989),whosebasic HillCollins(especially 1989)andPatricia 1986,1991). Where (see also Harding ofthis section thefocus ideasconstitute work is directed Collins' ondeveloping a "woman's standpoint," Smith focuses explicitly locates Smith feminist epistemology. standpoint at an Afrocentric Collins ethnomethodology, in Foucault, and Marx, the origins of herideas in theorists feminist contemporary several well-known inMannheim, primarily Jaggar 1986, 1982, Harding 1978, Gilligan 1974, disciplines (Chodorow diverse ofmostly 1983,1985),anda myriad 1987,Harstock 1983,hooks1981,Smith twoscholars bythese Theideasexpressed thinkers. African-American female, 1993 & Zimmerman ofothers (see Sprague number those ofa large incorporate et al andLaslett theory, of standpoint discussion yetcritical fora sympathetic work). a review ofSmith's 1992 for

Sociology ofMainstream TheCritique

1986,Haraway1988, andCollins(also Cook & Fonow1986,Farganis Smith all knowledge about theidea that to thosecitedabove)beginwith in addition at oftheknower and,therefore, reflects thesocialposition(s) thesocial world is no there innomore than a partial ofthat world; understanding bestcanresult Unconstituted standpoint. outside ofone's socially Archimedian perspective as disofa woman's standpoint whoargue for the superiority likesomefeminists a woman's that andCollinsexplicitly Smith recognize "outsider," empowered thosethey andpartial than critique. or a feminist is no less situated standpoint in terms is defined the"standpoint" of a knower For Marx and Mannheim, to class adds gender andCollinsaddsrace and gender of social class. Smith criof thosestandpoints. Theybegintheir in defining thechiefdimensions the until on thebasisthat, recently, knowledge sociological tiqueof accepted middle classmale;other ofwhite, hadone common knowers standpoint-that social of"credible" silenced as contributors havebeeneffectively standpoints all feminist scholars agree others) (and many scientific Virtually knowledge. areraised insociology, newquestions ofknowers that thekinds bydiversifying ofreandnewinterpretations toanswer them, sociallife, newdatasought about different leadtodifferences In short, areproffered. ceivedwisdom standpoints the is merely this for CollinsandSmith inwhat scholars think about.However, ofmainstream in their sociology. critique starting point

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

101

hencestandpoints, ofexperiences, thediversity recognize CollinsandSmith has a standthat eachgender logicsassume their Nonetheless, amongwomen. and thewayswomen between differences andthat itresults inprofound point to "male(1990) refers about.Smith they think to what menthink, in addition experience, as "objectifying" malethinking andtalksabout discourse" created and experiences between women's subjective "linesoffault" creating thereby to thestanaboutthem (if they conform write theway womensociologists Women's in a "bifurcated consciousness." resulting dardsof thediscipline), of analysis categories is alienated andobjectified bythevery world everyday work, cateto their andexpected to bring aretaught they as sociologists, that, oppress them. that ofruling" that andsupport the"socialrelations reflect gories AfrocenCollins(see also Dill 1979,1983,King1988)speaksofa "distinctive "thesimultaneity represents culture" ofresistance (p. 11) which tricwomen's Thisleads ofdomination." in a "matrix oppression" ofrace,class andgender fora "both/and" rather opting to reject white male "either/or" thinking, them "posilife. Collinsdescribes to intellectual (as well as practical) orientation that is highly problematic masculinist epistemology" as "a Eurocentric tivism" as women's lives.She defines positivism African-American for understanding aimto (p. 205): "[Scientists] to produce generalizations" "objective attempts ... [and and emotions interests, from thevalues,vested themselves distance and tobecome]detached observers decontextualize themselves [inorder thus] notonlybecauseit thisepistemology She criticizes of nature." manipulators butalso becauseof ofresearch as objects(as does Smith), thesubjects treats style andvalues,andbecauseof thepreferred ethics, theabsenceofemotion, Collins claims.Like Smith, debate" in establishing knowledge of"adversarial a system that fosters opthat thismodeofthinking bysociologists concludes Blackwomen. presses and Collins,thetaken-for-granted languageand style concepts, To Smith aliento aremale-created, truth claimsin sociology and of making of writing of ruling" "relations to support specifically, and function patriarchy, women, It is herethat ofdomination" or"thematrix generally. (Collins)more (Smith) with this standpoint company part feminist author) other (including sociologists categorically men'sand women'swaysof thinking that unconvinced theory, masculine areinherently or that waysof doingsociology differ thedominant Coser1989). tofeminists' concerns (see especially antithetical andnecessarily esshould feminist a radical andCollinsshare sociologists empiricism; Smith and beginwith toolsof thefield "masculinist" conceptual chewthestandard, anAfrocentric ofeveryday life.ForCollins, inwomen's experiences immersion as situated "ownconcrete usesthescholar's experiences feminist epistemology

Alternative TheProposed

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

102

CHAFETZ

standpoint" (p. 16). Smith recomknowers inorder toexpress a Blackwomen's world mends we explore bymaking "theeveryday that theworld as "insiders" examination oftextual material, problematic" (1990,p. 26). In a tour-de-force Smith howthedatausedbysociologists areprepackaged (1990) demonstrates (e.g. physicians, policeandcourts, social byagenciesandother professionals therelations ofruling and thereworkers) in waysthat express andreinforce ofthe must be eschewed infavor ofexamination ofthedirect experiences fore peoplewhoseliveswe seektounderstand. Smith toassume that the process ofthoroughly critiquing anddeconappears material textual created bysociologists andother agents oftheruling structing based on thefemalesociologist's ownlivedexperience, will suffice system, and general that reflect to lead to new concepts (theoretical) understandings woman'sstandpoint. Whileshe explicitly rejects a completely "subjectivist" she does notexplicate for anymethod sociologythatavoidsall abstraction, therealmof personal experience to a moreabstract, systemic moving from and a levelshepresupposes bytalking about patriarchy levelofunderstanding, capitalism. somewhat more concrete three comCollins advice byoutlining specific gives on ofanAfrocentric feminist epistemology, inaddition totheemphasis ponents with arisefrom claims should dialogue knowledge beginning experience. First, and stress connectedness between and active of researchers and participation notfrom their adversarial relations between knowers and theobjecsubjects, of research and tification experience, emotions, subjects.Second,"personal are central to theknowledge validation process"(p. 215); emotion empathy from Collinscalls is notseparate intellect seconded bySmith). Third, (a point claims foran ethicofpersonal accountability amongsociologists; knowledge in terms ofwhat aboutthe"character" should be evaluated one knows (values inCollins' unclear andethics) oftheknower itremains (p. 218). Nonetheless, dehowthe Afrocentric feminist should move from the work sociologist exactly tothe more theoretical levelofwomen's experience abstract, scriptive everyday levelshepresupposes women's about African-American oppression bytalking a system that is patriarchal, andclassist. within racist, their of abstraction as a masculine activity prevents Ultimately, rejection thatcan infrom an epistemology proposing Collins,and especially Smith, theprescription feminist andtheoretical form development, beyond conceptual sharewithnonthat it must This shortcoming be thoroughly inductive. they in sociology and their of"positivism" whoshare feminist critique sociologists immersion in theworldof everyday experience (e.g. most opt forthorough wherever and somesymbolic interactionists). However, ethnomethodologists and in thesociological these"male"approaches arediscussed canon,Smith's addrich discussions deserve consideration as well. They serious Collins'swork

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

103

oftheimportance ofthepreviously silenced standpoints of(African-American) womenforunderstanding thetaken-for-granted aspectsof everyday life. In theoretical of ideology addition, discussions andthesociology of knowledge needto include their works, inasmuch as they clearly demonstrate thenecesconcern from sityof broadening focusing on class to including gender and in understanding race/ethnicity thesocial-rootedness of thought systems and theintellectual roots ofsocialpower.

TheIssue ofEssentialism
Feminist standpoint theory, which is highly attuned toreification committed by cannot avoidreifying mainstream sociologists, thegenders. WhileSmith and Collins explicitly considerable variation recognize amongwomen(and preand consciousness, their own logics,and sumably men)in their experiences times makeitclearthat many wording, they assume that there areoverarching, gender-specific standpoints; they couldnototherwise talkabouta "masculine" form of discourse. In addition, Collinsexplicitly citessuch feminist theorists as Gilligan (1982) and Chodorow (1978, also 1974),who arguethat the are fundamentally in their and capacities genders different moralreasoning to interpersonal for/commitments relationships. Positing dichotomous gender differences that aretreated as transcultural and is termed a view that transhistorical has substantial "essentialism," currency in a variety of disciplines in ourown contested amongfeminists butis hotly evidence for (e.g. Lorber etal 1981,Coser1989,Epstein 1988). The empirical itis flawed, often American andtypically basedonsmall, nonrandom, samples, finds modest between thesexes. only differences, alongwith extensive overlap, ofdegree Essentialist thinking converts differences into differences ofkind.The presumed butoften unstated origin ofessential differences includes psychodyinthe namics rooted division oflabor(Chodorow parental 1978)andbiological sex (Rossi 1977,1984). Ithasbecomecommon for feminist scholars torecognizewithin-gender differences awareness categorical (e.g.race,class),butthis ofdifference failed topreclude has often aboutbasicperessentialist thinking of other and value orientations sonality (e.g. theassumption that, regardless womenare nurturant and oriented toward differences, personal relationships, moralprinciples). and oriented toward abstract whilemenare individuating withinbetween-sex andconsiderable Given that theevidence modest suggests all individual-level a dichotomous sex differences on virtually traits, gender ofindividual-level variable is theoretically uselesswhen speaking phenomena. characteristics different thatbeginby categorically Explanations attributing behavioral-not and/or to womenandmen-cognitive, emotional, relational, also differences inthedistribution ofsuchtraits only exaggerate bygender, they as dichotomous rather thancontinuous. treat thesevariables implicitly They

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

104

CHAFETZ

inher yet implicit rejected byCollins, explicitly thinking reflect the"either/or" and between females differences talk about average logic. One canlegitimately to avoidreification be taken variables, butcaremust maleson individual-level inexperiences/opportunities/constraints theaverage differences bydelineating andbyexplicitly therange ofwithin-gender account for them recognizing that conceptualizaa dichotomous overlap. Moreover, andbetween-gender variation such ofsocialstructure, aspect meaningful canbe a theoretically tionofgender or segregation ofmale-female occupational as when onetalks about thedegree tomales. females relative devalues towhich an ideology theextent inmacroofkind is also manifest as differences ofdegree Treating differences especially "patriarchy," theorists, by manyfeminist employed levelconcepts and"oppression:' contain varythat Onerarely reads statements "exploitation," A is less patriarchal/oppressive/ (e.g. society ing levelsof thesephenomena is than treated as constants, andtheemphasis B). Theyareusually exploitative theparticular form ofpatriarchy/oppression/exploitaplacedon understanding structure within a specific socioeconomic tionin a giventime, place, and/or demonstrates considYettheempirical literature clearly capitalism). (usually as indicadimensions canbe taken that variation onthose erablecross-societal & Voorhies ofgender (e.g.Martin inequality tors ofthelevel(notsimply form) 1984). 1978,1984,Chafetz 1975,Sanday1974,1981,Blumberg are,their definitions and whenthey defined, are infrequently These terms of gender stratification too broad,thereby thedynamics are often obscuring has been used to refer to some combinaforexample, systems.Patriarchy, offamily and/or a type an ideology (religious tionofthefollowing: structure, Thiskind oftheeconomy and/or polity. and one or moreproperties secular), towhich andhow oftheextent definition obscures oftruth-asserting questions tooneanother their arerelated empirical these various byassuming phenomena as in is often reified by theuse of an activeverb, "Patriarchy" isomorphism. theexplanatory ... ." Whenthishappens, causes/creates/requires "patriarchy in thereofconceptual problems, content Regardless evaporates completely. whose I use thevocabularies bythetheorists ofthis employed mainder chapter arebeing reviewed. works

Problems Conceptual

NEO-MARXIST THEORIES
ofwhich is calledsocialist-feminfeminist most today theory, Marxist-inspired Marxist byinsistfeminism) from orthodox Marxism (andorthodox ist,differs andis done that maintains andreproduces labor thenonwaged workers, ingthat as wagedlabor,and that is equallyas important overwhelmingly by women,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

105

andfrom class structure, women equally from patriarchy for results oppression other feminist It differs from ofclassrelationships. notsimply as a by-product tobring about thedemise ofpatriwhile notsufficient that, theories byinsisting ofcapitalism is a necessary as capitalcondition, inasmuch theabolition archy, institutions, from patriarchal hencesupport ismderives numerous advantages, predated capitalthat patriarchy recognizing practices. While ideology, and in nations, Marxisttwentieth century socialist disappeared ism,and scarcely assumes feminists systems, patriarchy capitalist arguethatwithin inspired supportive ways. forms interwoven with in mutually capitalism that are unique makes women rethe division of labor by gender Within capitalist systems, the current and for reproduction of maintenance and sponsible theunwaged ofuse value,or work, production domestic variously termed future laborforce, termed proinwhat is variously labor.Women mayalso be involved necessary waged work, value through social labor, or surplus exchange value, duction of andprofitable for work donebywomen is crucial as aremen. The nonwaged its for such labor is exploitative therefore, who benefits free, and, get capitalists, in thehistory most forwomen.Although earlier ofcapitalism and oppressive theopportunity tobecome"socialadults" through waged women weredenied by capitalists as a they havebeen sought labor(Sacks 1974), morerecently (Eisenstein labormarket gender-segregated sourceof cheaplaborin a highly inthelabormarket arelinked women experience inequities 1979). Thegender domestic for nonwaged both andideologically totheir responsibility practically & Agger 1993). Thedualexploitawork 1979,Vogel1983,Shelton (Eisenstein meansthat women market tionofwomen within thehousehold andinthelabor & Agger do men(Shelton than valuefor capitalists greater surplus produce far 1993). unof patriarchy, fostered by capitalists, An ideology or male supremacy, Thisideology offemale justifies oppression. andsustains both forms dergirds to biologically withreference domestic responsibilities women'snonwaged andjustifies menandwomen genderdifferences between rooted reproductive domestic reference to women's with obligations basedlabormarket inequities within the both classmenderive advantages working 1979). In turn, (Eisenstein from their andsubservience wives, resulting domestic services household (free paying jobs are andinthelaborforce (better from their economic dependence) ina better totheir paidhusbands reserved for men).No orlowwagestiewomen inturn which todomestic suppresses andtherefore labor, subordinate position, in this their 1984,Sacks 1974). Sacks (1974) arguesthat wages (Hartmann domtocapitalist menfor their subordination manner "compensate" capitalists ofclassconsciousness which the among workers, development impedes ination, domination & Agger1993,Sokoloff 1980). (also Shelton capitalist reinforcing towage-earning men alsoties more Wives'economic jobs, securely dependence

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

106

CHAFETZ

rebellion potential by undermining of capitalists theinterests serving further 1984). 1979,Vogel1983,Hartmann thesystem (Eisenstein against (andits theory world systems Marxist-based haveextended scholars Feminist by core penetration capitalist how bydemonstrating theory) dependency cousin, exacerstatus of women, thereby the usually reduces ofperipheral ones nations inequality) andincome poverty, rates, fertility (e.g. high many problems bating Ward 1989). Blumberg 1993, 1990, 1984, (Ward nations in theperipheral participate that women for assuming world theory systems (1993:48) criticizes in whichthe of households onlyas members worldeconomy in themodern intheglobal role direct women's ignoring thereby male"head"is incorporated, as well market the informal labor in contributions economic andtheir economy and development on women research literature A massive as inthehousehold. developof socioeconomic effects theusually disparate widely demonstrates are largely findings These women. to the detriment of for menandwomen, ment have members household that who assume theorists, world systems by ignored Ward As (1993) corrective, a 1989). 1988, also Blumberg interests (see unitary make contributions women crucial the incorporate theneedtofully emphasizes (see alsoMies 1986). economies ofpoornations andgeneral tothefoodsupplies work on women's thespecific, localeffects that Ward (1984) proposed Earlier, of in terms must be understood preof Western status penetration capital and institutionaland ideology including relations," of "patriarchal existing patterns In addition, the presuppositions gender-based ofmaledominance. izedpatterns andopporofnewresources affect thedistribution ofWestern (male)capitalists that Wardconcluded nations. in peripheral menandwomen between tunities andtheir trade dependency nations inperipheral investment thelevelofforeign inequality. related tothelevelofgender on corenations arepositively andrepromaintenance nonwaged toinclude analysis Marxist By extending ofideology to encompass theMarxian concept ductive andbroadening labor, is as demonstrate that gender feminists Marxist-inspired thought, patriarchal within exploitation/oppression a component central as class in understanding aremaintained howcapitalist systems andin understanding systems capitalist in anyscholarly serious attention merit Thesecontributions andstrengthened. ofneo-Marxist thought. discussion

CULTURAL AND SOCIAL MACROSTRUCTURAL THEORIES

divide neo-Marxist theories that arenotexplicitly feminist Themacrostructural ofculture thecausalprimacy that those emphasize intotwocategories: mostly facof socioeconomic thecentrality and thosethat emphasize and ideology, Collinset al (1993) ofbothsee Dunnet al 1993). Recently, tors(fora review

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

107

social that emphasizes gender theories of extant a grand synthesis attempted theother types ofgender from most includes elements constructs but structural likewise). effort to do less ambitious a slightly 1990,for ory(see also Chafetz explicaas todefy brief complex aresufficiently theories The socialstructural have theories of What macrostructural central constructs. a listing tion, beyond of gender stratification in the level to explain variation is their goal: incommon toexplain howa given andchanged and/or levelismaintained across time/space, "gender stratification"). definition of for a conceptual 1984:4-7 (see Chafetz and scholars andrelated symbols ideologies all feminist agreethat Virtually andunequaltreatandjustify different andexplain devaluewomen rituals that sysstratification component ofgender an important constitute ment bygender construct intheir explanacentral makea cultural tems.A fewanthropologists Sanday1981,also 1974). 1974,andespecially tions (e.g. Rosaldo1974,Ortner simple:Because arerelatively Ortner's (1974) andRosaldo's(1974) arguments in birth diandthegendered andlactation, functions ofwomen's reproductive society thatare typically thehousehold and broader visionof laborwithin with "nature" and women becomemoreidentified basedon them, constructed In turn, culture andthe "culture" andthepublicsphere. menwith domesticity, themore strongly and,therefore, highly valuedsocially aremore publicsphere inthegreater thelevelofgender differentiated andsegregated thetwospheres, In a morenuanced theory, Sanday(1981) argues developed andfully equality. howrelationships delineates plan"that has itsown"sex-role that each society Theseplansariseoutofoneof menandwomen tobe structured. between ought inwhich nature is sacred and an "inner," cultural orientations: twooverarching in which is emphasized, nature creative andan "outer," the"female principle" andmen'sactivities tonature, is seenas dangerous, humans areseenas superior in the Theseorientations aregrounded arerevered. and warriors) (as hunters increation which emphasize myths, threat andembodied levelofenvironmental Enhanced threat leads ofpower in theuniverse. orbothsources male,female, The andmaledominance. theprimacy ofmaledeities, to an outer orientation, ofsex-role ofthetype function is thus a direct plan ofgender inequality degree orientation. thegeneral cultural as itreflects are typically of genderstratification social theories sysMacrostructural as primary causal feedback often include innature, temic loops,andemphasize techone ormoreofthefollowing: environmental, demographic, mechanisms constructs include variables.Intervening and political economic, nological, structure. Lenski's(1966) and family of labor, division thegender ideology, level of and theresulting based on dominant societaltypology, technology several theories for thestarting (e.g. Huber constitutes point economic surplus, to which 1978). The extent 1988,R Collins 1975,Chafetz1984,Blumberg constitutes orthreatening andsocial-is dangerous theenvironment-physical

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

108

CHAFETZ

in some (e.g. Chafetz1984, Sanday 1981, as construct another independent theroleofwarHarris 1978,whoemphasizes discussed above,andespecially includesex ratio that are considered important variables fare). Demographic 1984,1990),population & Secord1983,also Chafetz (especially byGuttentag rates(Huber1991). density (Harris1978,Chafetz1984, 1990), and fertility base, is recontingent upontechnological The size of theeconomic surplus, in a curvilinear fashion that peaksin stratification latedto thelevelofgender inthehighest The levelsofferlevelsofinequality. societies agrarian/pastoral are andsex ratios harshness, warfare, density, environmental tility, population to thelevelof gender inequality. One final inderelated generally positively Collin's(1975,also structure, specifically, construct concerns political pendent organization of the to whichthepolitical concerning theextent 1972) thesis rather thanthehousehold, monopolizes thelegitimate society (nation-state), that women's levelofeconomic opportuuse offorce.He argues (alongwith individual mentheright structure grants to which thepolitical nity) theextent independent variable themost important tophysically coercewivesconstitutes have thelevelofgender stratification. Whilemany feminist scholars explaining inproducing ormaintaining theroleofmaleviolence against women explored to Collinsis alone in making male coercive powercentral gender inequality, itto a typology ofpolitical structure. bylinking sucha theory inconstructs aretypically linked to thelevelof gender Theseindependent on three their constructs. Like intervening impact through equality primarily all macrostructural feminist theories theMarxist-inspired virtually feminists, theeconomy division oflabor-within and focuson thekeyroleofthegender realms. The moreequal theaccess of between theeconomicand domestic (especially wherethey rolesin thenondomestic sphere womento economic income from their thelower the work), derived of,and/or control theproducts womenhave forthe and themoreresponsibility level of gender inequality, in theeconomic realm(estheless equal their domestic opportunities sphere, 1984,1990). Blumberg 1978,1984,1988,Collinsetal 1993,Chafetz pecially variables of lineality of labor, structural division family Besidesthedomestic constructs & Voorhies 1975, andlocality arealso important intervening (Martin where thesetwoaspects Blumberg 1979,Chafetz1984). Womenfareworst andpatrilocality). Finally, offamily favor themaleside(patrilineage structure than that butwith less emphasis givenby liketheMarxist-inspired feminists, theimportance socialtheories macrostructural recognize thecultural theorists, of gender of religious and seculargender systems ideologiesin buttressing stratification 1984,1990). 1978,1984,1988,Chafetz (Blumberg to demonstrate theimpact theories Macrostructural feminist rarely attempt as feedback ofsocialstructure on other ofgender stratification (except aspects ofsociocultural all aspects that do demonstrate virtually they loops). However, Theories inthegender in all types areimplicated ofsocieties structure system.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

109

economy, political structure, family ideology, work, concerning technology, phetheubiquitous ignore that socialinequality, notto mention demography, to thatattempt as are theories incomplete, are radically of gender nomenon Macrostructogender. reference without and/or stability socialchange explain bethelinkages concerning insights important theories provide feminist tural that andprocesses structures macrolevel stratification andother tween gender theories. structural intogeneral should be incorporated

RATIONALCHOICE AND EXCHANGE THEORIES

scholfeminist byseveral ofcriticism hasbeena target choicetheory Rational 1990, also England(1989, 1993b,England& Kilbourne ars, mostnotably inan essentialist substantially ofitarerooted critiques Zelizer1994). Feminist of assuming a selfish, choicetheory accuse rational as they logic,inasmuch ignoring the thereby actorwho is masculine, and non-emotional separative, motivations, claimedto be characteristiandemotional altruistic, connective, choicetheory feminist criticisms ofrational This andrelated callyfeminine. alsodemonstrate & Diem(1993). They andrebutted arediscussed byFriedman inequality byexamining for understanding gender ofthis perspective theutility Their inseveral studies. feminist choiceanalyses involved theimplicit rational "three mechanisms relied examine utilize is that thestudies they point general constraints, toexplain variation-institutional theorists uponbyrational-choice & Diem 1993:101). Rational . . ." (Friedman andpreferences costs, opportunity inindiscussions offamily change is also usedinsomerecent choicethinking inwomen's rolesanddecision-making which focus onchanges nations, dustrial diand birth, marriage number of children, age of first concerning processes & Hagan 1996). Notonlyis andlaborforce (e.g. Chafetz participation vorce, of feminist critiques ofgender issues, toanalyses choicetheory useful rational Specififurther attention. andgapsthat require onweaknesses itfocus attention selfishness/altruism should include ofthis thefurther theory development cally, include andexplicitly interpersonal consider theroleofemotion, as a variable, & Diem 1993). (Friedman preferences as ratiotradition which reflects thesameutilitarian Social exchange theory, criticism feminist ofexplicit (foran has notbeenthetarget nal choicetheory, thesamecriticisms applyto both.It see Harstock 1985),although exception, & Parker 1979,Bell theorists (e.g.Parker has beenemployed bya fewfeminist in many feminist 1986) and is implicit & Newby1976,Chafetz 1980,Curtis ofthis theme Thegeneral ofhusband-wife perstudies relationships. empirical tomenfrom available resources thetraditionally is that, greater given spective withtheir husbands wivesbalanceexchanges by thefamily, sourcesoutside andaccess inreturn for financial anddeference support compliance providing a considerable, also garner Husbands resources. to other externally generated

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

110

CHAFETZ

over their wives becauseofwhat Curtis (1986) self-reinforcing power advantage ofgifts and basedonthehusband's provision defines as a contractual inequality Theseincur a debtfor thewifewhich is unspecified, and"can diffuse, favors. ineffect" as Parker & Parker (1979; also Chafetz be infinite (p. 179.) However, division of laboroutside changes, men's as thegender thefamily 1980) note, thenature do as well. of spousalexchanges resource advantage and therefore inthe someusesofexchange hands offeminist scholars the macro Unlike theory, which the of resources and therefore the levelenvironment, shapes distribution ofexchange is taken as theexplicit starting partners, opportunities/constraints in turn, in understanding thenature ofmicrolevel are exchanges, which, point in of on terms their feedback macrolevel often impact phenomena. analyzed Risman & therefore exemplifies what The use ofexchange theory byfeminists toas a microstructural tounderstanding gender Schwartz approach (1989) refer inequality.

NETWORK AND STATUSEXPECTATIONSTHEORIES

feminist versions different theoretical traditions, Although representing very on how interactive relaand network theories focus ofstatus both expectations in differare lines and result structured gender gender tionships shapedalong similar to thosediscussed and inequality. Theirlogicsaretherefore entiation to the in thelastsection in that microstructural approaches they also represent ofgender study inequality. Thefeminist intandem with a systematic redeveloped theory most carefully status between gender, expectations, search program dealswith the relationship andpower/influence ingoal-oriented groups (see review chapter byRidgeway & Berger 1977,Lockheed 1993,Ridgeway 1986,Meeker& Weitzel-O'Neill butis has implications forsame-sex groups 1985,Foschi 1989). The theory and tested 1993). The mostfully on mixed-sex groups (Ridgeway developed to males,both central thesis thehigher social status that accrues is that, given with expectawomen andmentypically enter mixed-sex groups gender-based in moving the willbe morecompetent females tionsthat malemembers than for arehigher toward taskachievement, i.e. "performance expectations" group andthereofgender induced men.However, thesalience status is situationally women if fore expectations mayadvantage context-specific (e.g. performance In theabsenceofa setofspeciconsidered thetaskis traditionally feminine). ofgender-based factors that reduce thesalience fied expectations, performance function to reducewomen'sselfbecomeself-fulfilling that they prophecies in groupinteractions. and influence Moreover, confidence, prestige, power, as legitiare defined because gender-based by groupmembers expectations willbe rejected tocounteract them individual women's byother attempts mate,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

111

& Weitzel-O'Neill 1977). The out(Meeker group members as inappropriate of usuallyreflect thepreferences groupswill therefore comes of mixed-sex willtypically Moreover, theprocessof groupinteraction itsmale members. "thebasis which is often andpowerofthemalemembers, enhance thestatus are of power, position, and respect on whichmanyof thesociety's rewards stratification. 1993:193), that is,thebasisofgender distributed" (Ridgeway "Inonesense, itis impossible Smith-Lovin & McPherson (1993:223)assert: with the is concerned theory ofgender" becausethetheory to havea network characteristics. ofrelationships between actors, notactor nature Nonetheless, of gender differences and inequalin theonlyexplicit theoretical discussion arguethat convincingly theory perspective, theseauthors ityfrom a network develdifferences characteristics, usuallyviewedas essential gender-related in fact from thelong-term of seemresult impact socialization, oped through inthe network positions andstructures small differences ingly inconsequentially withan analysis of in whichboysand girlsare typically located. Beginning literature callupona wealth ofempirical to childhood networks, they single-sex howgender networks cumulate overthelifecourse demonstrate homophilous inadult which foster evengreater differences gender tocreate networks, gender in aspirations, and behaviors. reflect Because they opportunities, differences to changein retheseoutcomes network are amenable ongoing phenomena, structures within, network of,and locations sponseto changesin thenature The authors andmen,andtherefore to publicpolicyintervention. forwomen literature forunofthenetwork also review someofthecurrent inadequacies ifaddressed, and inequality, weaknesses that, segregation derstanding gender unrepthegeneral Theseinclude:a focuson "small, theory. wouldstrengthen a focuson "elites" that arealmost entirely single-sex; resentative populations" on"egonets" losessight oftheorganithat that arealmost always male;a focus in within networks which zational context evolve;anda focuson one network involved from others inwhich actors aresimultaneously (pp.243-44). isolation status expectations, versions ofrational choice, exchange, Together, feminist for structure of sociocultural theories theimportance and network emphasize andthe ofinteraction andindividual thegendered nature choice, understanding from suchinteractions andinequalities that result differences patterned gender thegeneral theointo contribute andchoices.Theythereby insights important ofmacro-micro linkages. retical issueofthenature

SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISTAND ETHNOMETHODOLOGICAL THEORIES

focus andethnomethodology versions ofsymbolic interaction Feminist theory interaction thatemerges on genderas an ongoingaccomplishment during

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

112

CHAFETZ

is succinctly thesexes. Thisperspective and within processes, bothbetween which refers to inWest& Zimmerman's (1987) "doing gender," term captured recreate thepartners' to constantly interactions in order thework doneduring 1993, gender (also West& Fenstermaker sense of their own and theother's 1977). Gender Berk 1985,Goffman Fenstermaker et al 1991,Fenstermaker 1993:151), (West& Fenstermaker is an "emergent feature ofsocialsituations" traits. ofstructure orsetofindividual-level nota static feature is "omnirelevant" inthat as exemplifycanbe interpreted Gender anyaction viewthat there thetaken-for-granted & Fenstermaker 1993). Given ingit(West in(only)oneofthem, people belongs twosexes, andeveryone aretwoandonly selfandothers andthen interpret and attribution") characterize bysex("gender gender "apaccording toitsnormative tovirtually anykind ofbehavior respond varies, butthenotion andfemininity Thenature ofmasculinity propriateness." andwomen arefundamentally different doesnot.Peopleareconstantly that men anddefining selfandothers through that thesenseofgender difference creating (1993: & McKenna1978,Goffman 1977). West& Fenstermaker lens(Kessler can holdthemselves any activity engagedin virtually 157) assert:"persons for ... as women oras accountable andbe heldaccountable their performance A major corollary ordiscredited accordingly. men... ." andwillbe legitimated of gender uponthe is that, whilethespecific relevance is alwayscontingent etal 1991),itis no context inwhich behavior occurs (Fenstermaker interaction to single-sex than tocross-sex interactions (Gerson1985). less relevant it(re)produces gengender difference, not only (re)produces "Doinggender" which gender-construction derinequality. medium through Onevery important ofmale-female conservation work Numerous analyses occurs is conversation. andlanguage 1982,Mayo& Henley (e.g. Fishman usagehavebeenconducted 1975). They 1977,Lakoff 1978,West& Zimmerman 1981,McConnell-Ginet reinforces conversation between menandwomen conclude that gender inequalbeconversation of whatis appropriate ity, primarily because"thedefinition thereality ... maintain of, oftheworld [they] comesmen'schoice.Whatpart women is his choice.. ." (Fishman conversations; 1982:178). Men dominate in ways use verbal andbodylanguage work hardto keepthem going;women their reduce their toassert themselves power and,therefore, that weaken ability 1978, Lakoff1975, Mayo & 1978, West& Zimmerman (McConnell-Ginet Henley1981). is reproduced Another mechanism through gender inequality bywhich major for & Fenstermaker interaction is scripting many 1993). Thesocialscripts (West as part andpeople"do gender" with tasksare specifically associated gender, Fenstermaker Berk(1985,also DeVault1991)shows andparcel ofdoing them. is demonstrate which numerous studies of household howthedivision labor, forbothspousesto "do gender" theopportunity provides highly inequitable,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

113

gendered identities. Hochschild and reinforce their own and their partner's which refers to theneedto (1983) develops theconcept of "emotional labor," inorder indiscussing thegendered hideorfake one'sfeelings topleaseothers, jobs. Kasper(1986) expands scripts associated with many traditionally female to thescripts forfemale behavior in a uponthisconcept, seeingit as integral todeny women an "integrated variety ofinteraction contexts andas functioning oftheir own"(p.40). Inturn, this autonomous impedes women's ability identity in achieve the to publicsphere. Schur(1984) uses an offshoot of symbolic interactionism, labeling theory, that femaleness to demonstrate constitutes a devalued and stigmatized master inwomen status that results perceived andreacted toprimarily being selectively interms ofstereotypes about femaleness of (p. 25). Thisleadstoobjectification ortheir treatment as things than as persons, which allowsothers women, rather to treat them in degrading andexploitative ways.Theresult is a self-fulfilling as inferior and to suffer prophecy, whereby womencome to see themselves andidentification with their from lowself-esteem, passivity, in-group hostility, (male) oppressors. In an application Mead's concepts, Ferguson (1980) of GeorgeHerbert menpossessthepowerto define bothspecific situations and the arguesthat "are defining themselves other.Women, by reference generalized therefore, brand as inferior" their that them to standards undermining (p. 155), thereby In addition, self-blame for andproducing their problems. powerself-identity lessnessforces women to becomehighly theroleofthe(male) adeptat taking malewants in order itprompts to avoidnegative sanctions; other, anticipating women toplease,flatter, tomenfor thesamereason (pp. 161-62). andacquiesce is that malepower is buttressed. The result and symbolic focus interactionism Feminist versions ofethnomethodology differences and inequality are on themicrolevel processes by whichgender in everyday life.By demonstrating that both cross-and constantly (re)created interactions entail that same-sex gender," they suggest gender normally "doing ofall interaction, should is a fundamental feature andoutcome onethat comprise ofgeneral interaction theories. a central component

NEO-FREUDIAN AND ROLE THEORIES

criticized the1960sand No thinkers weremore byfeminists during thoroughly andFreud. Nonetheless, thenewspecialty 1970s thanParsons developed by of sex thesociology calleditself feminist term, sociologists bytheParsonian insociology feminist theories late1970s, oneofthe most influential roles;bythe account ofgender differentiawas Chodorow's (1978,also 1974)neo-Freudian role"has sincebeenabandoned "sex (gender) tionandinequality. The term by

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

114

CHAFETZ

depoliticizing thereby becauseitobscures powerinequities, feminist scholars situational gender (Stacey& Thorne1985), and becauseit failsto articulate (Lopata & Thorne1978, West& Fenstermaker variation in role enactment partof feminist remains an important roleanalysis 1993:154-55). However, (e.g. wife/husband) specific socialrolesareentirely theorizing becausemany playedby members of onlyone sex. or largely occupations) (e.g. numerous byKurzweil (see reviews theory continues tobe developed Feminist Freudian 1989). 1993;also Chodorow 1989andbyWilliams the focused primarily on delineating roleperspective The earlier sex/gender and negamodeling, positive ofchildhood socialization (especially processes aretaught by at birth, boysandgirls through which, beginning tivesanctions) identities gender andlater peers, schools, media, parents, etc,"sexappropriate" normative behaviors byaboutage 3) andgender (said to be all butimmutable in all interacandtherefore applicable trans-situational (which arepresumably 1979,Lewis & Weinraub tions)(e.g. Cahill 1983,Lever1976,Constantinople in is primarily rooted 1979,Coser 1986, 1975,Sattel1976). Thisperspective andsymbolic interaction theories. Besidesthe problems cognitive development also makes itall butimpossiroleperspective mentioned above,thesex/gender atthe level.To the individual orcollective changes bletoexplain gender-related behavior, it shapesall subsequent extent engenderment strongly that childhood hownewgeneris difficult to explain couldchange, andtherefore, howadults Katz (1979) ationsof children couldbe taught different gender conceptions. anapproach toissuesofgender socialization, perspective introduces a life-cycle is elaborated by Lopata that can better accommodate change.This approach rather than socialrolesassociated with women, specific (1994), whoexamines on howthemajorsocialrolesplayed roles.She focuses by general sex/gender andemployee) change women relative, homemaker, wife, mother, (especially andhowandwhy with societal modernhavechanged overthelifecourse they ofearly childhood thehypothesized learning. impact reducing ization, thereby his toshowhowonecanrevise Johnson Parsons (1989, 1993)revisits Likewise, offamily to account for recent andanalysis rolesusefully theory evolutionary in women's roles. changes theofengenderment, feminist neo-Freudian socialization theories Likemost identities and ata very gender early age,thetwosexesdevelop oryargues that, stableoverthelifecourse. that are highly differentiated personalities gender occurs. in theprocesses this differ The twotheory bywhich presumably types but theonewhohas areFrench, feminist scholars Thebestknown neo-Freudian is NancyChodorow in theUnited States feminist mostinfluenced sociologists of intoherrevisions theory objectrelations (especially1978). Incorporating is overbecauseearlychildrearing Freudian Chodorow arguesthat, thought, as their ofboth sexeshavea woman children a female primary task, whelmingly andoutcomes loveobject.However, experiences boys'andgirls'Oedipalstage

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

115

arevastly different becauseonly share thesexoftheir girls primary loveobject. Because girlsneednotseparate form their mothers to attain a gendered idenintowomen whoseprimary tity, they grow concern is with connection toother people. Givena different-sex primary love object,boysdevelopa gendered inmenwhofocus identity through separation, resulting on individuation anda Thegender-specific denialofaffect. psychological orientations that result from that thefact women mother children ofboth sexesunderpin malemisogyny and dominance. Gilligan (1982) usesChodorow's theory torefute Kohlberg's levels of moralreasoning. She arguesthat women's is different morality from (not at a lowerlevelthan)men'sbecauseitis basedon personal relationships and rather than abstract obligations principles (which Kohlberg privileges). These twoworks citedbyfeminist arewidely sociologists, despite extensive critique oftheir essentialist andother logic,psychological reductionism, problems (see Williams1993 fora reviewof thosecritiques, and see Lorberet al 1981). feminist Like socialization explanations, neo-Freudian theory makesgenderall butimpossible related to explain.A different kindof criticism changes of is developed Chodorow's that it is theory byJohnson (1988), who concludes notmothers, whoreproduce differentiation inchildren andgenfathers, gender derinequality adults.Children ofboth sexesbecome"human" among through with their loveobject, interactions whotends primary a mother figure, to mindifference. Fathers children imizegender differentiate their much moreon the basis of gender.In addition, children observe their mothers thewife playing modelsgender inrelationship totheir husbands. role,which inequality

CONCLUSION Trend inFeminist TheNewest Theorizing

inthe1990samong is "the ofrace, The"hot feminist scholars intersection topic" & Collins1995a,Rothenberg class andgender." Editedbooks(e.g. Anderson 1992), specialjournalissues,program sessions,and a new sectionof ASA ofthisemerging focusis that havebeendevoted to it. The central contention are notseparate thethree forms of oppression and additive, butinteractive has in their effects.However, to date,verylittle and multiplicative theory remains been produced on thetopic;thegrowing literature overwhelmingly ofa sampleof women of onlyone race and too often descriptive, descriptive andclass (orevenspecific occupation). is Collins(1990),whosuggests several ideasabout One exception interesting that includes "oneoverarching structure ofdomination" howtotheorize age,reinaddition torace,class,andgender andsexualorientation ligion, (p. 222). She andoppressor, that be oppressed argues peoplecan simultaneously privileged is primary, ofoppression individuals andpenalized; that no oneform although as lesser;andthat andothers andgroups define oneas more fundamental often

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

116

CHAFETZ

group orcommunity has several (e.g. persons, layers ofdomination thematrix todomresistance aresites ofpotential all ofwhich socialinstitutions), culture, degrees on varying may rely of oppression systems different Moreover, ination. (pp. 226-27). domination of mechanisms interpersonal versus ofsystemic in involved themathematical metaphor West& Fenstermaker (1995) reject idea 1995b) & Collins Glenn 1985, Anderson 1989, Collins's(also Almquist of inequality. Theypointout thatno one can expeof intersecting systems so all other statuses, their experiencing simultaneously without riencegender an ethUsing and "classed." "raced," are simultaneously "gendered," outcomes accomplishare all ongoing that these they argue approach, nomethodological in which thecontext from apart be determined cannot ments whoserelevance that West & Fenstermaker et al respond (1995) areaccomplished. Collins they that inequities ofthestructural and lose sight to difference reduceoppression statuses. tothese arefundamental howvarious about oftheorizing the barest beginnings Theseefforts constitute queertheory Therecently developing relate tooneanother. forms ofinequality of (e.g. see Seidmanet al 1994), whichdeals withthesocial construction is are "marginal," thosethat and preference labels,especially sexualidentity thescopeofthis It is,however, with feminist theories. beyond also interwoven theperception Bothof thesenewissuesreflect to discussthetheory. chapter have been too middleclass, theoretical efforts thatprior by manyfeminists must feminist andthat andheterosexist, white, among diversity theory recognize ofoppression, notjust the offorms multiplicity account for women andtherefore progress white women.Theoretical privileged that by otherwise experienced interact ofinequality couldrevolutionize systems on thetopicofhowvarious for toolong,has which, ofsocialstratification, thesociological understanding in terms ofsocialclass/status. aboutinequality theorized narrowly as Lorberstates(1994:36), "For huhavealwaysassumedthat, Sociologists exempted sociologists until recently However, thesocialis thenatural." mans, fundamenthe andlargely this topic.Themost ignored from assumption gender thethoroughly havebeento demonstrate theories offeminist talcontributions of omnirelevance andthe ofthe nature ofall aspects system gender sociocultural thedaily"hard ofwork demonstrates work," to sociallife.Thiscorpus gender and social collectiviand macrolevels byindividuals at themicroconducted ofsociallife, feature as a fundamental gender goesinto(re)producing ties,that socialclass. than a more feature ubiquitous indeed, in sociology traditions all theoretical haveusedvirtually theorists Feminist nature ofsociallife.In theprocess, thegendered as springboards tounderstand oftraditional oftheinadequacies rich andimportant critiques haveoffered they

Sociology and Mainstream Theory Feminist

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

117

theories that haveresulted from themasculine their blinders authors haveworn. revisions ofthose that Theyhavedeveloped traditions broaden anddeepenthe of social life. Gradually, discipline's understanding albeittoo slowly, these arebecoming intothemainstream perspectives incorporated theory canon. It this review is myhopethat mayhasten that process.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am grateful to thefollowing on a draft of thischapter: peopleforfeedback mydepartmental colleaguesHelenRose Ebaugh, and David Joseph Kotarba, also Dana Dunn,Paula England, RandallCollins, Ruth Wallaceand Klinger; an anonymous reviewer.
VisittheAnnualReviews home page at http://www.annurev.org.

Literature Cited ofminority gender Almquist E. 1989.Theexperiences stratification anddatafrom theThird intheUnited States:intersections of World. J.Fam.Iss. 9:51-84 women A Femi- Blumberg and class. In Women: race,gender, RL. 1989.Toward a feminist theory ofdevelopment. See Wallace1989,pp. 161ed. J.Freeman, pp.414-45. nist Perspective, Mountain View,CA: Mayfield 99 with gender:tales CahillS. 1983.Reexamining AlwayJ. 1995. The trouble of theacquisition feminist revolution in sosexroles:a symbolic interactionist approach. ofthestill-missing SexRoles9:1-15 theory. Soc. Theory 13:209-28 ciological Anderson M, Collins PH, eds. 1995a. Race, Chafetz JS. 1980. Conflict resolution in mara theory of spousalstrategies Belmont, Class and Gender:AnAnthology. riage: toward and marital dissolution rates.J. Fam. Iss. CA: Wadsworth Anderson M, CollinsPH. 1995b.See Anderson 1:397-421 & Collins1995a,Preface Chafetz JS. 1984. Sex and Advantage:A and wives: Comparative, Macro-Structural Theoryof Bell C, NewbyH. 1976. Husbands ofthedeferential In Sex Stratification. Totowa,NJ:Rowman& thedynamics dialective. and Allanheld in Work Dependenceand Exploitation S Allen,pp. 152- ChafetzJS. 1988. Feminist Marriage,ed. DL Baker, Sociology: An 68. London:Longman Overview ofContemporary Theories. Itasca, ReIL: Peacock eds. 1985.Status, Berger J, ZeldichM Jr., San Francisco: Jossey- Chafetz wards andInfluence. JS. 1990.Gender Equity:A Theory of Stability and Change. Newbury Park,CA: Bass SocioecoSage RL. 1978. Stratification: Blumberg nomic Dubuque,IA: Chafetz division and SexualInequality. JS,HaganJ.1996.Thegender Brown oflaborandfamily inindustrial socichange RL. 1979.A paradigm for J.Comp. predicting eties:a theoretical accounting. Fam. Blumberg theposition of women: policyimplications Stud.27:187-219 andproblems. InSexRolesandSocialPolicy, Chodorow N. 1974. Family structure and feminine personality. See Rosaldo & LamJBernard, pp. 113-42. ed.JLipman-Blumen, phere1974,pp. 43-66 Beverly Hills,CA: Sage ofgender Chodorow N. 1978.TheReproduction ofMothRL. 1984.A general theory Blumberg In SociologicalTheory, and theSociology stratification. 1984, ering:Psychoanalysis of Gender Berkeley, CA: Univ.Calif.Press ed. R Collins,pp. 23-101. San Francisco: N. 1989.Feminism and PsychoanaChodorow Jossey-Bass verRL. 1988.Incomeunder female lytic Theory.NewHaven: Yale Univ.Press Blumberg a theory from the outside from of Collins PH. 1986. Learning hypotheses susmalecontrol:

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

118

CHAFETZ

ofblack England P, ed. 1993a. Theoryon Gender! thesociological within: significance AldineDeSoc. Probl.33:514-30 on Theory. NewYork: feminist thought. Feminism of Collins PH. 1989. The social construction Grutyer self: androblackfeminist thought. Signs14:745-73 EnglandP. 1993b.The separative In assumptions. Thought: bias in neoclassical centric Collins PH. 1990. Black Feminist and Theory Economic Man: Feminist Beyond and thePolitics Consciousness Knowledge, 37J Nelson, pp. ed. M Ferber, Economics, Boston:Unwin Hyman ofEmpowerment. 51. Chicago:Univ.ChicagoPress DY,Thorne LA, Takagi CollinsPH,Maldonado criKilbourne BS. 1990. Feminist Winant H. England 1995. Symposium P, B, WeberL, modeloftheself:im"DoingDiffertiqueoftheseparative on Westand Fenstermaker's Ration. for rational choicetheory. plications ence."Gender Soc. 9:491-513 of sexual theory Soc. 2:156-71 Collins R. 1972. A conflict and the Epstein Sex, Marriage, Distinctions: In Family, CF. 1988.Deceptive stratification. New and theSocial OrderNew Haven: Gender, oftheSexes, ed. HP Dreitzel. Struggle Yale Univ.Press York:Macmillan an EtzkowitzH, Glassman R. 1991. The ReSociology:Toward CollinsR. 1975.Conflict nascence(f SociologicalTheory:Classical Science. New York:Academic Explanatory Itasca,IL: Peacock and Contemporary. RL, Coltrane CollinsR, Chafetz JS,Blumberg theandfeminist an integrated S. 1986.Socialtheory the- Farganis J. 1993.Toward S, Turner Soc.Inq.56:50-68 needfor dialogue. Soc. Perspect. ory:the ory of genderstratification. BerkS. 1985. The GenderFacFenstermaker 36:185-216 A. 1979. Sex-roleacquisition: tory. New York:Plenum Constantinople D. 1991. in searchof theelephant. Sex Roles 5:121- Fenstermaker S, WestC, Zimmerman new conceptual terrain. inequality: Gender 33 In Gender, TheTriple andEconomy: and Cook JA,FonowMM. 1986. Knowledge Family, pp. 289-307. issues of epistemology Overlap, ed. RL Blumberg, women'sinterests: infeminist sociological reNewbury Park, CA: Sage andmethodology K. 1980. Self Society, and WomanSoc. Inquiry Ferguson search. 56:2-29 Sheba: on Conn:Greenwood Coser RL. 1975. Stayhome,little kind. Westport, thework women P. 1982.Interaction: and social change. Fishman displacement placement, do. In Women and Work: Problems andPersSoc. Probl.22:470-80 AK Daniels, R CoserRL. 1986.Cognitive structure andtheuse pectives, ed. R Kahn-Hut, ofsocialspace.Soc. Forum 1:1-26 Colvard,pp. 170-80. New York: Oxford onfeminist theory. Univ.Press CoserRL. 1989.Reflections E. 1990.EndlessCrusade: Women Fitzpatrick See Wallace1989,pp. 200-7 intheory Social Scientists and Progressive andfamily Curtis R. 1986.Household Reform. Univ.Press New York:Oxford on inequality. Am.Soc. Rev.51:168-83 stanDeegan MJ. 1988. JaneAddamsand theMen Foschi M. 1989. Statuscharacteristics, In SociologicalTheandattributions. dards, of the Chicago School, 1892-1918. New ed. J Books oriesin Progress:NewFormulations, NJ:Transaction Brunswick, M Zelditch, B Anderson, DeVault M. 1991. Feedingthe Family: The pp. 58-72. Berger, CA: Sage Social Construction Newbury Park, of Caringas Gendered D, Diem C. 1993. Feminismand Friedman Work. Chicago:Univ.ChicagoPress rational choiceMovement; Dill BT. 1979.The dialectics ofBlackwomanthePro(Rational) feminist and genchoice theory, critiques, hood.Signs5:545-55 See England1993a, pp. 91Dill BT. 1983. Race, class, and gender: derinequality. 114 sisterhood. prospectsfor an all-inclusive and Fem.Stud.9:131-48 Thought MM, ed. 1988. Feminist Gergen New York:NY theStructure Theory: The InDonovan J. 1985. Feminist ofKnowledge. Traditions Feminism. Univ.Press tellectual ofAmerican con1985.Boundaries, GersonJM. negotiation, New York:Ungar genderrelasciousness: reconceptualizing Dunn D, AlmquistE, Chafetz JS. 1993. inSoc. Probl.32:317-31 on gender tions. Macrostructural perspectives Voice.CamSee England1993a,pp. 69-90 GilliganC. 1982. In a Different equality. Univ.Press In Capitalist MA: Harvard bridge, Z. 1979.Introduction. Eisenstein women's labor: EN. 1985.Racialethnic and theCase forSocialistFemi- Glenn Patriarchy ofrace,gender andclass optheintersection pp.5-55. NewYork: nism,ed. Z Eisenstein, Rev.Radic.Polit.Econ. 17:86-108 pression. Rev. Monthly the between ofrational- Goffman I. 1977.The arrangment P. 1989.A feminist critique England Soc. 4:301-31 forsociology. sexes.Theory choicetheories: implications M, Secord P. 1983. Too Many Am.Sociol.20:14-20 Guttentag

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

FEMINIST THEORY AND SOCIOLOGY

Women? The Sex Ratio Question. Beverly Hills,CA: Sage HarawayD. 1988. Situated knowledges:the sciencequestion in feminism and theprivilege of partial perspective. Fem. Stud. 14:575-99 HardingS. 1986. The Science Questionin Feminism. Ithaca,New York:CornellUniv. Press HardingS. 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?Thinking from Women's Lives. Ithaca, New York:Cornell Univ.Press Harris M. 1978.Cannibals andKings:TheOriCultures. London:Collins gins 'f Harstock N. 1983.Thefeminist destandpoint: fora specifically femveloping theground inisthistorical materialism. In Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives onEpistemolandPhilosoogy, Metaphysics, Methodology S MB phyofScience,ed. Harding, Hintikka, pp. 283-310. Boston:Reidel HarstockN. 1985. Money,Sex and Power. Boston:Northeastern Univ.Press Hartmann H. 1984. The unhappy marriage of a more Marxism towards andfeminism: proFrameworks: gressive union.InFeminist AlTheoretical Accounts ternative of theRelaBetween Women and Men, ed. A Jagtions gar,P Rothenberg, pp. 172-89. New York: McGraw-Hill HochschildA. 1983. The Managed Heart: of Human Feeling. Commercialization CA: Univ.Calif.Press Berkeley, hooksB. 1981.Ain't I a Woman? BlackWomen End and Feminism. Boston:South offamily, J.1988.A theory and Huber economy gender. J.Fam.Iss. 9:9-26 linksin gender HuberJ. 1991. Macro-micro In Macro-Micro stratification. Linkagesin ed. JHuber, Sociology, pp. 11-25.Newbury Park, CA: Sage Politics Jaggar AM. 1983.Feminist andHuman & Allanheld Nature. NJ:Rowman Totowa, Johnson MM. 1988. StrongMothers,Weak Wives: The Searchfor GenderEquality. CA: Univ.Calif.Press Berkeley, and thetheoJohnson MM. 1989. Feminism riesofTalcott Parsons. See Wallace1989,pp. 101-18 Johnson and femiMM. 1993. Functionalism See Engnism:Is estrangement necessary? land 1993a,pp. 115-30 A. re-evaluated: Kasper 1986. Consciousness andfeminist interpretive theory scholarship. Soc. Inq. 56:30-49 Katz P. 1979.The development offemale idenSexRoles5:155-78 tity. Kessler S, McKenna W. 1978. Gender:An New York: Ethnomethodological Approach. Wiley conKingD. 1988.Multiple jeopardy, multiple

119

sciousness: thecontext ofblackfeminist ideology. Signs14:42-72 KurzweilE. 1989. Paychoanalytic feminism: Implications for Sociological theory. See Wallace1989,pp. 82-97 Lakoff R. 1975.Language and Woman's Place. New York:Harper Colophon LaslettB, Thorne C, ConnellRW, B, Lemert CollinsPH. 1992. Symposium on Dorothy E. Smith. Soc. Theory 10:60-87 Lengermann PM, Niebrugge J. 1996.Contemfeminist porary theory. See Ritzer1996,pp. 436-86 Lenski G. 1966.Power andPrivilege: A Theory ofSocial Stratification. NewYork:McGrawHill Lever J.1976.Sex differences inthe gameschildren play.Soc. Probl.23-24:478-87 Lewis M, Weinraub M. 1979. Origins of early sex-role development. SexRoles5:135-53 Lockheed M. 1985.Sex andsocialinfluence: a meta-analysis guidedby theory. See Berger & Zeldich1985,pp.406-29 Lopata HZ. 1994. Circlesand Settings:Role ChangesofAmerican Women. Albany, New York:SUNY Press LopataHZ, Thorne B. 1978.On theterm "sex roles." Signs3:718-21 LorberJ. 1994. Paradoxes of Gender.New Haven: Yale Univ.Press Lorber CoserR, RossiA, Chodorow N. 1981. J, On the ofmothering: a methodreproduction ologicaldebate. Signs6:482-514 Martin B. 1975. Femaleof the MK, Voorhies Species.New York:Columbia Univ.Press N. 1981.Nonverbal behaviour: MayoC, Henley barrier oragent for sexroleschange?In Gender and Nonverbal Behavior, ed. C Mayo, N Henley, pp. 3-13. New York: SpringerVerlag ina man's S. 1978.Intonation McConnell-Ginet world. Signs3:541-59 MeekerB, Weitzel-O'Neill P. 1977. Sex roles behavior in taskoriented and interpersonal Am.Sociol.Rev.42:92-105 groups. andAccumulation on MiesM. 1986.Patriarchy a World-Scale. London:Zed is to tomaleas nature Ortner S. 1974.Is female culture?See Rosaldo& Lamphere 1974 of male H. 1979. The myth Parker S, Parker riseanddemise. Am.Anthropol. superiority: 81:289-309 ofthe famParsons T. 1949.Thesocialstructure and Desily.In The Family: Its Function ed. RN Asher, tiny, pp. 173-201.New York: Harper itsrelaParsons T. 1955.TheAmerican family: topersonality andtothesocialstructure. tion ProandInteraction In Family, Socialization RF Bales,pp.3-33.Glencess,ed.T Parsons, coe, IL: FreePress

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

120

CHAFETZ

RhodeD, ed. 1990.Theoretical Perspectives on Problematic: A Feminist Boston: Sociology. Sexual Difference. New Haven: Yale Univ. Northeastern Univ.Press Press Smith DE. 1989.Sociological theory: methods Ridgeway C. 1993.Gender, status, andthesoofwriting patriarchy. See Wallace1989,pp. cialpsychology ofexpectations. See England 34-64 1993a,pp. 175-97 Smith DE. 1990. The Conceptual Practicesof Ridgeway C, Berger J. 1986.Expectations, lePower:A Feminist Sociology ofKnowledge. gitimation, and dominance behavior in task Boston:Northeastern Univ.Press groups. Am.Sociol.Rev.51:603-17 Smith-Lovin L, McPherson JM.1993.You are RismanB, Schwartz P. 1989. Beinggendered: whoyouknow:A network approach togena microstructural view of intimate relationder.See England1993a,pp. 223-51 ships. In Gender in Intimate Relationships, Sokoloff N. 1980. Between Moneyand Love: P Schwartz, ed. B Risman, pp. 1-9. Belmont, TheDialecticsof Women's Homeand MarketWork. New York:Praeger CA: Wadsworth Ritzer G. 1996.Sociological Theory. NewYork: SpragueJ, Zimmerman MK. 1993.Overcoming McGraw-Hill dualisms: a feminist agendafor Sociological RosaldoMZ. 1974.Woman, Culture, and Socimethodology. See England1993a,pp. 25580 See Rosaldo& Lamphere 1974 ety. RosaldoMZ, Lamphere L, eds. 1974. Women, Stacey Thorne B. 1985.Themissing feminist J, Culture and Society. CA: Stanford revolution in sociology. Stanford, Soc. Probl.32:30116 Univ.Press Rosenberg R. 1982.Beyond SeparateSpheres: TongR. 1989. Feminist A CompreThought: Intellectual RootsofModern Feminism. New hensive Introduction. CO: Westview Boulder, Haven: Yale Univ.Press VogelL. 1983. Marxism and theOppression onparRossiAS. 1977.A biosocial perspective a Unitary of Women:Toward Theory. New Daedalus 106:1-31 enting. NJ:Rutgers Univ.Press Brunswick, Rossi AS. 1984. Gender and parenthood. Am. WallaceR, ed. 1989.Feminism and SociologiSociol.Rev.49:1-19 cal Theory. CA: Sage Newbury Park, Rothenberg PS, ed. 1992. Race, Class and WallaceR, WolfA. 1995. Contemporary SociGender in theUnited States.New York:St. the Classical ological Theory: Continuing Martins Tradition.EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Sacks K. 1974. Engelsrevisited: women, the Hall ofproduction, andprivate organization prop- Ward K. 1984.Women the in World-System: Its erty. See Rosaldo & Lamphere 1974, pp. New York: Impacton Statusand Fertility. 207-22 Praeger in thepublic Ward SandayPR. 1974. Femalestatus K. 1990.Women Workers and GlobalRedomain.See Rosaldo& Lamphere 1974,pp. New York:ILR structuring. Ithaca, 189-206 WardK. 1993. Reconceptualizing worldsysto includewomen.See England Sanday PR. 1981. Female Power and Male temtheory the Dominance: On Originsof Sexual In1993a,pp. 43-68 Press Ward oftheir equality. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. L. 1991.Ona wavelength K, Grant SattelJ.1976. The inexpressive Curr. male: tragedy own?Women andsociological theory. orsexualpolitics? Soc. Probl.23-24:469-77 Soc. Theory 11:117-40 Perspect. Schur E. 1984.LabelingWomen Deviant:Gen- Waters M. 1994.Modern SociologicalTheory. and Social Control. New York: der,Stigma, London:Sage Random House WestC, Fenstermaker S. 1993.Power, inequalof gender: an S. 1994.Contested Social Seidman Knowledge: ityand the accomplishment Era. Cambridge, in thePostmodern view. See England Theory ethnomethodological MA: Blackwell 1993a,pp. 151-74 SeidmanS, SteinA, Plummer S. 1995. Doing differK, EpsteinS. WestC, Fenstermaker Soc. 9:8-37 1994. Symposium: queertheory/sociology: ence.Gender a dialogue. Soc. Theory 12:166-248 WestC, Zimmerman D. 1977.Women's place on parent-child Shelton B. 1993.Shotgun in everyday talk:reflections BA, Agger wedding, no-fault rethink- interaction. Soc. Probl.24:521-29 divorce? unhappy marriage See WestC, Zimmerman D. 1987. Doing gender. ingthefeminism-Marxism relationship. Soc. 1:125-51 Gender England1993a,pp. 25-41 In and A for Williams CL. SmithDE. 1979. sociology women. 1993.Psychoanalytic theory ofgender. See England1993a, thesociology ThePrism ofSex: EssaysintheSociology of ET Black,pp. ed. JASherman, Knowledge, pp. 131-49 Zelizer VA. 1994. The Social Meaning of WI: Univ. Wisc.Press 135-87.Madison, New York:Basic Books Smith DE. 1987. The EverydayWorldas Money.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.215 on Sun, 2 Dec 2012 15:32:38 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions