Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society Advance Access originally published online on February 14, 2006
Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society 2006 13(1):1-29; doi:10.1093/sp/jxj003
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Politics of Difference and Women’s Rights: Lessons from Pobladoras and Mapuche Women in Chile
Patricia Richards is Assistant Professor of Sociology and Women’s Studies at the University of Georgia.
Correspondence: To whom correspondence should be addressed; Patricia Richards, Department of Sociology and Women’s Studies Program, University of Georgia, 113 Baldwin Hall, Athens, GA 30602; Tel.: 706-542-3235; Fax: 706-542-4320; Email: plr333{at}uga.edu.
Is it possible to represent differences among women in state strategies to promote women’s equality with men? This article considers this question by examining the cases of two groups of women in Chile: poor and working-class urban women (pobladoras) and Mapuche indigenous women. Both groups assert that their particular interests and priorities are not represented in the achievements of the Chilean women’s movement, particularly the establishment of the National Women’s Service, SERNAM. I suggest that the lack of representation of the two groups is due to similar factors: power differences among women, as well as neoliberal socioeconomic and ideological goals, restrict pobladoras’ and Mapuche women’s access to decision making about definitions of women’s rights and policy priorities. At the same time, the neoliberal context also restricts the extent to which SERNAM can respond to claims of difference among women. Despite similarities between the two cases, they have divergent implications for broadening women’s rights and citizens’ rights more generally. While the Mapuche case questions the applicability of universal rights and indicates a need to recognize cultural rights as part of what it means to be Chilean, the pobladora case indicates a need to guarantee universal socioeconomic rights and institute more effective redistributive policies. Together, the cases show that women’s rights cannot be promoted effectively without concurrent attention to cultural difference and socioeconomic inequality.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  L. Ruppanner Conflict and Housework: Does Country Context Matter? Eur. Sociol. Rev., July 29, 2009; (2009) jcp038v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 O. Kangas and T. Rostgaard Preferences or institutions? Work family life opportunities in seven European countries Journal of European Social Policy, August 1, 2007; 17(3): 240 - 256. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|