|
Synopsis: we
are precarious. Which is to say some good things (accumulation
of diverse knowledges, skills and abilities through
work and life experiences in permanent construction),
and a lot of bad ones (vulnerability, insecurity, poverty,
social exposure). But our situations are so diverse,
so singular, that it is difficult for us to find common
denominators from which to depart or clear differences
with which to mutually enrich ourselves. It is complicated
for us to express ourselves, to define ourselves from
the common ground of precariousness: a precariousness
which can do without a clear collective identity in
which to simplify and defend itself, but in which some
kind of coming together is urgent. We need to communicate
the lack and the excess of our work and life situations
in order to escape the neoliberal fragmentation that
separates, debilitates and turns us into victims of
fear, exploitation, or the egotism of 'each one for
herself.' Above all, we want to enable the collective
construction of other life possibilities through the
construction of a shared and creative struggle.
-From
the invitation to participate in the first derive,
October 2002.
Precarias a la Deriva
is
an initiative between research and activism which arose
from the feminist social center La Eskalera Karakola in Madrid, initially as a response to the general
strike in Spain in June of 2002. Faced with a mobilization
which did not represent the kind of fragmented, informal,
invisible work that we do – our jobs were neither taken
into consideration by the unions that called the strike
nor effected by the legislation that provoked it – a
group of women decided to spend the day of the strike
wandering the city together, transforming the classic
picket line into a picket survey: talking to women about
their work and their days. Are you striking?
Why? Under what conditions do you work?
What kind of tools do you have to confront situations
that seem unjust to you?…
From
this first tentative experience came the impulse to
organize an ongoing research project. It is clear that
we need tools for talking about and intervening in new
kinds of work -this terrain of labor which often doesn't
even have a name - so we set out to map the territory,
with one eye always set on the possibility of conflict.
This is a bid for survival arising out of our own needs:
networks to break solitude, words to talk about what
is happening to us.
But
who is this 'us'? We depart from a tentative category,
almost an intuition: can we use 'precariousness' as
a common name for our diverse and singular situations?
How can we both seek common names and recognize singularities,
make alliances and comprehend difference? A freelance
designer and a sex worker have certain things in common
- the unpredictability and exposure of work, the continuity
of work and life, the deployment of a whole range of
unquantifiable skills and knowledges. But the difference
in social recognition and the degree of vulnerability
is also clear. How shall we articulate our common need
without falling back upon identity, without flattening
or homogenizing our situations?
Instead
of sitting still to settle all these doubts, we decided
to set off and work them out on the move. We chose a
method that would take us on a series of itineraries
through the metropolitan circuits of feminized precarious
work, leading each other through our quotidian environments,
speaking in the first person, exchanging experiences,
reflecting together. These derives
through the city defy the division between work and
life, production and reproduction, public and private,
to trace the spatial-temporal continuum of existence,
the double (or multiple) presence. More concretely:
for a few months an open and changing group of us went
almost every week on a wandering tour through the important
spaces of daily life of women (ourselves, friends, close
contacts) working in precarious and highly feminized
sectors: language work (translations and teaching),
domestic work, call-shops, sex work, food service, social
assistance, media production. In order to structure
our reflections a bit, we chose a few axes of particular
and common interest to guide us: borders, mobility,
income, the body, knowledge and relations, empresarial
logic, conflict. Talking, reflecting, video camera and
tape-recorder in hand, we went with the hope of communicating
the experience and the hypotheses we might derive from
it, taking our own communication seriously, not only
as a tool of diffusion but as primary material for politics.
The
experience has been tremendously rich and a bit overwhelming.
The questions multiply, little is certain. But a few
tentative hypotheses emerge. In the first place, we
know that precariousness is not limited to the world
of work. We prefer to define it as a juncture of material
and symbolic conditions which determine an uncertainty
with respect to the sustained access to the resources
essential to the full development of one's life. This
definition permits us to overcome the dichotomies of
public/private and production/reproduction and to recognize
the interconnections between the social and the economic.
Second, more than a condition or a fixed position ('being
precarious') we prefer to think of precariousness as
a tendency. In fact, precariousness is not new (much
of women's work, paid and unpaid, has been precarious
since the dawn of history). What is new is the process
by which this is expanding to include more and more
social sectors, not in a uniform manner (it would be
difficult to draw a rigid or precise line between the
'precarious' and the 'guaranteed' parts of the population)
but such that the tendency is generalized. Thus we prefer
to talk not about a state of precariousness but about
'precarization' as a process which effects the whole
of society, with devastating consequences for social
bonds. Third, the territory of aggregation (and perhaps
of 'combat') for mobile and precarious workers is not
necessarily the 'work place' (how could it be, when
this so often coincides with one's own home, or someone
else's, or when it changes every few months, or when
the possibilities of coinciding with a substantial group
of the same co-workers for long enough to get to know
each other is one in a thousand?) but rather this metropolitan
territory we navigate every day, with its billboards
and shopping centers, fast-food that tastes like air
and every variety of useless contracts.
In
addition to these basic hypotheses and a mountain of
doubts, we have a few clues as to where to look next.
First of all, and thanks to the workshops we conducted
on 'Globalized Care' we have managed to work out a few
points of attack.
The crisis of care, or better, the political articulation
of this fact, which from one or the other side of the
sea effects all of us, is one of those points. We don't
think there is a simple way of posing the question,
a single formula like a social salary, salaries for
housewives, distribution of tasks, or anything like
that. Any solutions will have to be combined. This is
a submerged and many-legged conflict, involving immigration
policy, the conception of social services, work conditions,
family structure, affect… which we will have to take
on as a whole but with attention to its specificities.
And then there is our fascination with the world of
sexwork which we have been encountering bit by bit,
and which once again situates us in a complex map in
which we also have to look at migration policy and labor
rights, but also rights in the realm of the imaginary.
There is a continuum here, which for the moment we are
calling Care-Sex-Attention,
and which encompasses much of the activity in
all of the sectors we have investigated. Affect, its
quantities and qualities, is at the center of a chain
which connects places, circuits, families, populations,
etc. These chains are producing phenomena and strategies
as diverse as virtually arranged marriages, sex tourism,
marriage as a means of passing along rights, the ethnification
of sex and of care, the formation of multiple and transnational
households.
Second,
we have talked about the need to produce slogans
which are able to group all these points. Past ones
have become too limited for us, too general, too vague.
In the last session of the 'Globalized Care' workshops
we realized that some of these slogans could take us
into spaces as ambivalent but as necessary as the re-vindication
of the ability to have and raise children, while at
the same time taking up the radical discourses of the
family as a device of control, dependence and culpabilization
of women.
Third,
the necessity of constructing points
of aggregation is clear. Curiously, our process
of wandering the city has led us to value more the denied
right to territorialize ourselves. If this territorialization
cannot take place in a mobile and changing work place,
then we will have to construct more open and diffuse
spaces within this city-enterprise. The Laboratorio
de Trabajadores that we are considering constructing
would be an operative place/moment to come together
with our conflicts, our resources (legal resources,
work, information, mutual care and support, housing,
etc.), our information and our sociability. To produce
agitation and reflection. A good idea, and a difficult
one: at the moment we are thinking about it, not only
the practical aspects but particularly the capacity
this might have to construct itself as an attractor,
connector and mobilizer of sectors as different as domestic
workers and telephone operators.
Fourth,
we hope to strengthen the local
and international alliances we have established
in the process so far. The book and the video which
we have just published are meant as a means to this
end. We will use the video to return to the spaces we
have passed through in the past year or so, to the health center and to the neighborhood associations,
in the plaza and in cyberspace, to keep open the conversations
we have begun.
Fifth,
we underline the importance of public
utterances and visibility: if we want to break social
atomization, we have to intervene with strength in the
public sphere, circulate other utterances, produce massive
events which place precariousness as a conflict upon
the table, linking it to the questions of care and sexuality.
There are ideas circulating, possibilities yet underdeveloped,
for this kind of intervention both at a local and an
international level, which we hope to pursue together
with the many women and collectives with whom we have
been in contact. For the moment, we detect three types
of latent conflicts (or conflicts which exist but are
invisible or individual): 1) generalized absenteeism
from non-professional work (telemarketing, chain-store
retail and service); 2) the demand for other contents
and other forms within the precarious professions (nursing,
communications) and; 3) the demand for recognition in
the traditionally invisible sectors (domestic and sex
work). The hybridization of these types must be taken
into account, and our strategies be drawn from the resources,
modalities and opportunities that these particular kinds
of work provide. In this we have seen a few interesting
experiments – from the rebel call-shop workers to the
media workers who have used the tools they have at hand
to project other messages – and in coordination we hope
to generate more experiments.
And
sixth, we begin to consciously encounter the need to
mobilize common
economic and infrastructural resources. We want
to be able to 'free' people, just like the parties do:
free from illegality, free from precariousness. We could
organize a marriage agency… we can disobey, falsify,
pirate, shelter and whatever else occurs to us. The
proposal of the Laboratorio
de Trabajadores space, as well as almost any other
proposal, requires money. We don't want to fall into
the star system, touring and talking and not developing
the local network that is so important to us, nor do
we want to fall into the dependency of subventions.
The resources we're concerned about are as much immaterial
and affective as they are material. Our bid is to construct
a pro comun. To do this it is necessary to collectivize
knowledge and networks, breaking the logic of individual
maximization to which the intellectual agencies of the
city of renown
have accustomed us.
One
thing leads to another. From the derives
to more derives,
from workshops to thousands more dialogues and debates,
demonstrations, public spaces, the possibility of accumulation.
Beyond the politics of the gesture: density, history,
links, narration, territory… to be continued.
Article
to be published in Feminist
Review
Precarias a la Deriva, A la deriva por
los circuitos de la precariedad feminina. Madrid:
Traficantes de Sueños, 2004.
|