英语论文网

itutional child care
as the major constraints upon women’s employment (Bruegel, 1996; Crompton &
Harris, 1998; Crompton & Le Feuvre, 1996; Ginn
et al
., 1996). This ultimately means
that children are seen as a barrier to a career although the reality is that many women
want to pursue both a career and motherhood, expecting both to be equally rewarding
(Meiksins & Whalley, 1998; Procter & Padfield, 1999; Walsh, 1999). In addition,
Hakim’s critics focus only on the presence of children as influencing women’s orientations
to work when Hakim (2000) herself mentioned women without children preferring
to work reduced hours because they were involved with politics, voluntary
work and the like.
The central theme of this paper is that contemporary literature concerning women’s
careers is based on assumptions held by researchers and not actually on views held
by women themselves. Many feminist researchers, especially the critics of Hakim, are
guilty of assuming ‘false consciousness’ on the part of their subjects by explaining
these women as being victims of gender or patriarchal systems (see Anderson, 1981),
instead of making a mindful decision founded on choice. The empirical work draws
on in-depth interviews with 37 women architects who, to varying extents, represent
Hakim’s three typologies of work-centred, home-centred and adaptive women; but
the main emphasis is on those women who have adapted their career to accommodate
either their caring responsibilities or their involvement with other non-work activities
such as politics and voluntary work.
Choice and diversity in women’s careers: the current perspective
Existing economic and sociological theory has a male bias in that it was developed primarily with
reference to
male
labour market participation and the characteristics of
men’s
work life histories.
Modifications and extensions were added later in an attempt to cover the visibly different patterns
of female employment. However, it is not satisfactory to explain women’s employment as a small
deviation from the employment patterns of men, or under the heading of sex discrimination, as so
many textbooks do. Far better is a theory that starts from the substantial body of new research
evidence on women’s work and that focuses on what is distinctive about the choices women make
(Hakim, 2000, pp. 1–2).
The value of Hakim’s contribution cannot be overlooked; she challenges dominant
thought and argues that because women are different, then different theories apply to
them. Until now, the prevailing view has been that the systems are ‘designed and
administered by and for men – taking men’s careers and attitudes as the norm and
never questioning that this is in the interests of the organization’ (Rothwell, 1982, p.
19) nor questioning whether they are in the interests of women or society in general.
In mainstream career theory, the belief is that the masculine career pattern is suitable
for women if marriage and childbearing are taken into account (Super, 1984). Super’s
explanation for this is that because career choice is affected by self-concept, which he
hypothesized was the same in both men and women; they both make decisions based
on self-concept and their image of the environment in which they live. However, it is
argued that this fails to take into account the experiences of women and onc