Hipótesis especifico 4 a) Redactar la hipótesis

As illustrated by the discussion above, migration does not always bring economic gain to the sending household, and in some cases it may represent a loss. Where remittances are received, the household mechanisms of power may mean that some members have more control over their use than others. In the same way, the non-economic impacts of migration are varied, and are also differentiated within migrant households.

The independent migration of a male household head may be conjectured as removing a source of female subordination, and hence increasing the autonomy of the female household head. The necessity of taking on new responsibilities both inside and outside the household, including paid employment, may be said to increase the range of a woman’s activities, and in doing so raise her sense of self-esteem. This in turn may be translated into a claim for greater authority and recognition within the household (Ahem et a l, 1985; Baca and Bryan, 1985; Chant, 1987,1992a,19926; Gonzalez de la Rocha, 1993; Hondagneu-Sotelo, 1992; Roldan, 1985). For women who have suffered from

domestic violence, male migration may also remove the threat of physical violence. On the other hand, male absence may reduce financial security, and cause economic hardship for the woman, as discussed above. If she does manage to obtain paid work, it is in a gender-segmented labour market, which may merely exchange or augment the gender exploitation to which she is subject (see Arizpe and Aranda, 1986; Bruce and Dwyer, 1988; Elson and Pearson, 1981; Nash, 1985; de Oliveira, 1988).

Furthermore, male migration cannot always be invoked as an explanation of female paid employment, or of women’s participation in community and political organisations, or of their role as household managers, since many women undertake these activities even where thî^t-is no absent male migrant (see Bruce and Dwyer, 1988; Craske, 1994; Lozano and Padilla, 1988; Stichter and Parpart, 1990). It is of course possible that participation in these activities increases during the male migrant’s absence. In the sample, 26 per cent of female household heads were economically active outside the household. In fact, women’s work both outside and inside the household may effectively facilitate male migration (Ahern et a l, 1985; Baca and Bryan, 1985; Gabayet and Lailson, 1990).

When my husband was there [the US] he sent money, but not always regularly. But I was working.

(Rosita, see page 123}

In that the migration of the male household head creates a de facto woman-headed household, further implications can be drawn from the more general literature on such households. While paid work for women may in some senses be positive, leading to a sense of satisfaction, self-fulfilment and financial independence, it can also increase the overall burden of work if there is a continued responsibility for household work in the classic scenario of the double or even triple day (de Oliveira, 1988; Holcomb and Rothenberg, 1991; Moser, 1987; Townsend and Momsen, 1987). Alternatively, some or all of the household tasks may be shifted onto other household members. It has been argued that this sharing of domestic work is easier in extended households which include more than one adult woman (Chant, 1987). In nuclear households, the load may fall on the children, especially daughters, so that although some of the traditional constraints of gender may have been loosened for the female household head, they are perpetuated and at times exacerbated generationally for her daughters (Beneria, 1991; Moser, 1989, cited in LeVine, 1993). This lends further support to the claim made in the previous section

that daughters of household heads may be the most disadvantaged household members even if the gender roles and relations of the household head(s) are ‘non-traditional’.

The overall experience of women with absent migrant husbands may therefore not conform totally to either of the contradictory scenarios of advantage or disadvantage depicted in the literature. Furthermore, the emotional aspect of separation may be important.

I missed him [respondent’s husband] when he was away, and it was very difficult in some ways. I had to look after the children alone and everything. I didn’t work because my husband likes me to stay at home with the children. But I didn’t have any economic problems because he always sent money, or if he didn’t, I borrowed money. And if I had other problems, I had my family around me.

(Inès, a 3] year-old mother o f three young children, with a brother in California. Her husband went to California very soon after they were married, and fo u r years before the interview had gone again to work in Los Angeles.)

This example also illustrates that male dominance may continue even in the absence of the male migrant’s physical presence - in this case, Inès does not work because she knows it is against her husband’s wishes. Her conformity may stem from her general subordination to her husband, but also from the proximity of their families, who may act as ‘checks’ on her behaviour. It is clear that male absence in itself does not produce automatic female independence. One source of male domination may simply be replaced by another through a transferral of authority from the male migrant to his male relatives, who may monitor a woman’s behaviour in the absence of her migrant husband (Ahern et a l, 1985; Alarcon et a l, 1987, Cardenas, nd). The negative aspects of this situation can be exacerbated still further if the woman lives with these relatives. The problems of living with parents-in-law in particular have been noted (Romanucci-Ross, 1973, cited in LeVine, 1993; Varley, 1993). This is the situation in which Alicia, mentioned above, found herself when her husband migrated to the US. Often dependent on her in-laws for money, she also felt her vulnerable position was exploited in terms of the amount of work she was expected to do in the household and she felt restricted in what she was able to do.

She [respondent’s mother-in-law] doesn’t do anything ... I do nearly all the work. I cook, I clean, I look after the children ... I don’t go back to my pueblo much to see my mother, no me dejan^.

(Alicia, see page 124)

Another worry for stay-at-home wives is the fear of abandonment or infidelity on the part of the migrant husband (Lopez, 1986).

Some end up abandoning their families, leaving their wives and families here and finding other women there. It’s a scandal.

{Gloria, a 48 year-old married woman, who is looking fo r work. She has a sister in California.)

Neither is it just women who are affected.

Children are affected the most if their father migrates and they are left behind. He can send money but they lose out on affection and guidance, and in the end they lose trust and closeness.

(Monica, a 28 year-old woman with one 10 year old son.)

Depending on the length and frequency of the migration(s), children of male migrants may effectively grow up without a father figure. In a cultural context which places the father at the apex of the household pyramid of authority, this can cause rowdiness and indiscipline. Some children of migrants come to resent their father for abandoning both them and their mother, or because they have always seen him only as a temporary visitor, and a source of money and gifts, come to relate to him not on a familial or emotional level but on a material one.

My father has been going backwards and forwards for about ten years. It’s not fair or logical. I lived with my grand-parents for most of the time until I got married ... All us children have suffered, we missed the advice of a father. My brother is always drinking, hanging around being a layabout. My mother can’t do anything with him ... She [Sylvia’s mother] did everything, she had to be a mother and a father to us. She had all the responsibilities, all the worry, all the economic problems ... My father looks super-young now, and my mother looks old. I think it’s because of all the worries she’s had being in charge of the family. All he did was send money every now and again.

(Sylvia, a 26 year-old woman, married, with a young baby. Although she did not have paid work at the time o f the interview, she said she would eventually like a jo b as a secretary. Her father has been a recurrent migrant to the US fo r the last 10 years, normally staying away fo r nine months at a time.)

6 Literally, they don’t let me. Alicia is referring to the fact that she is mainly responsible for looking