FEMINIST ANALYSIS OF THE COMMODIFICATION OF WOMEN’S REPRODUCTIVE WORK
Keywords:
commodification, reproductive work, surrogate motherhood, the identity thesis, the autonomy thesis.Abstract
This paper provides an overview of basic feminist thoughts on the commodification of women's reproductive work involving the sale of oocytes and rental of the reproductive capacity of women in the form of commercial surrogacy. Special attention was paid to the critical analysis of feminist arguments „in favor of money” and „in favor of dignity” on the topic of commodification of reproductive labor of women, as well as the meaning of the concepts of commodification and alienability and specific use of these concepts in feminist literature on the topic of women's reproductive work.
Downloads
References
Alpers, A. and Lo, B. (1995). ‘Commodification and Commercialization in Human Embryo Research’. Stanford Law and Policy Review 6/2: 39–46.
Anderson, E. S. (1990). Is Women’s Labor a Commodity? Philosophy & Public Affairs 19 (1): 71-92.
Arneson, R. J. (1992). Commodification and Commercial Surrogacy. Philosophy & Public Affairs 21 (2): 132-164.
Bray, F. (2007). Gender and Technology. Annual Review of Anthropology 36: 37-53.
Briggs, L. (2010). Reproductive Technology: Of Labor and Markets Author. Feminist Studies 36 (2): 359-374.
Carsten, J. (2004). After Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Corea, G. (1992). The Mother Machine. In: K. D. Alpern (ed.)(1992). The Ethics of Reproductive Technology (pp. 220-231). New York: Oxford University Press.
Corea, G. (2005). The Subversive Sperm: ’A False strain of Blood.’In: R. T. Hull (ed.)(2005). Ethical Issues in the New Reproductive Technologies, Second edition (pp. 63-76). New York: Prometheus Books.
Curtis, K. F. (1995). Hannah Arendt, Feminist Theorizing, and the Debate over New Reproductive Technologies. Polity 28 (2): 159-187.
Davies, D. S. (2010). Genetic Dilemmas: Reproductive Technology, Parentan Choices and Children’s Futures. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dickenson, D. L. (1997). Procuring Gametes for Research and Therapy: The Argument for Unisex Altruism: A Response to Donald Evans. Journal of Medical Ethics 23 (2): 93-95.
Dickenson, D. L. (2001). Property and Women’s Alienation from their Own Reproductive Labour. Bioethics 15 (3): 205-217.
Donchin, A. (2009). Toward a Gender-Sensitive Assisted Reproduction Policy. Bioethics 23 (1): 28-38.
Edwards, J. N. (1991). New Conceptions: Biosocial Innovations and the Family. Journal of Marriage and Family 53 (2): 349-360.
Fox, R. C. (1993). Reproduction and Succession: Studies in Anthropology, Law, and Society. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.
Franklin, S. and H. Ragone (1998). Introduction. In: S. Franklin and H. Ragone (eds.)(1998). Reproducing reproduction: Kinship, power, and technological innovation (pp. 1-14). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Ginsburg, F. D. and R. Rapp (1995). Introduction: Conceiving the New World Order. In: F. D. Ginsburg and R. Rapp (eds.)(1995). Conceiving the New World Order: The global politics of reproduction (pp. 1-17). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Handwerker, L. (2003). New Genetic Technologies and Their Impact on Women: A Feminist Perspective. Gender and Society 11 (1): 114-124.
Harrington, J., G. Becker and R. Nachtigall (2008). Nonreproductive Technologies: Remediating Kin Structure with Donor Gametes. Science, Technology & Human Values 33 (3): 393-418.
Hartouni, V. (1997). Cultural Conceptions: On Reproductive Technologies and the Remaking of Life. London: University of Minnesota Press.
Inhorn, M. C. (2002). The ’Local’ Confronts the ’Global’: Infertile Bodies and New Reproductive Technology in Egypt. In: M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds.)(2002). Infertility around the Globe: New thinking on childlessness, gender, and reproductive technologies (pp. 263-282). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Inhorn, M. C. and D. Birenbaum-Carmeli (2008). Assisted Reproductive Technologies and Cultural Change. Annual Review of Anthropology 37: 177-196.
Kass, L. R. and B. Glass (1971). What Price the Perfect Baby? Science, New Series 173 (3992): 103-104.
Keane, N. P. (1992). Legal Problems of Surrogate Motherhood. In: K. D. Alpern (ed.)(1992). The Ethics of Reproductive Technology (pp. 269-276). New York: Oxford University Press.
Krimmel, H. T. (1983). The Case against Surrogate Parenting. The Hastings Center Report 13 (5): 35-39.
Krimmel, H. T. (1992). Surrogate Mother Arrangements from the Perspective of the Child. In: K. D. Alpern (ed.)(1992). The Ethics of Reproductive Technology (pp. 57-70). New York: Oxford University Press.
Levine, H. B. (2003). Gestational Surrogacy: Nature and Culture in Kinship. Ethnology 42 (3): 173-185.
Liesen, L. T. (1995). Feminism and the Politics of Reproductive Strategies. Politics and the Life Sciences 14 (2): 145-162.
Lowry, D. W. (2004). Understanding Reproductive Technologies as a Surveillant Assemblage: Revisions of Power and Technoscience. Sociological Perspectives 47 (4): 357-370.
Marks, K. (1867/1947). Kapital – Tom I. Zagreb: Kultura.
McLeod, C. (2007). For Dignity or Money: Feminists on the Commodification of Women’s Reproductive Labour. In: B. Steinbock (ed.)(2007). The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics (pp. 258-284). New York: Oxford University Press.
Pateman, C. (1988). The Sexual Contract. California: Stanford University Press.
Radin, M. (1991). ‘Reflections on Objectification’. Southern California Law Review 65:341–54.
Radin, M. J. (1987). Market-Inalienability. Harvard Law Review 100 (8): 1849-1937.
Radin, M. J. (1988). Rent Control and Incomplete Commodification: A Rejoinder. Philosophy & Public Affairs 17 (1): 80-83.
Radin, M. J. (1993). Reinterpreting Property. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Ragoné, H. (1996). Chasing the Blood Tie: Surrogate Mothers, Adoptive Mothers and Fathers. American Ethnologist 23 (2): 352-365.
Robertson, J A. (1983a). Surrogate Motherhood: Not So Novel After All. The Hastings Center Report 13 (5): 28-34.
Robertson, J. A. (1983b). Procreative Liberty and the Control of Conception, Pregnancy, and Childbirth. Virginia Law Review 69 (3): 405-464.
Robertson, J. A. (1992). Noncoital Reproduction and Procreative Liberty. In: K. D. Alpern (ed.)(1992). The Ethics of Reproductive Technology (pp. 249-258). New York: Oxford University Press.
Robertson, J. A. (1994). Children of Choice: Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Robertson, J. A. (1995). Reproduction and Rights: A Response to Dorothy Roberts: [Commentary]. Law & Social Inquiry 20 (4): 1023-1032.
Rowland, R. (1987). Technology and Motherhood: Reproductive Choice Reconsidered. Signs 12 (3): 512-528.
Ryan, M. A. (1990). The Argument for Unlimited Procreative Liberty: A Feminist Critique. The Hastings Center Report 20 (4): 6-12.
Sandelowski, M. (1991). Compelled to Try: The Never-Enough Quality of Conceptive Technology. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, New Series 5 (1): 29-47.
Sandelowski, M. and S. de Lacey (2002). The Uses of a ’Disease’: Infertility as Rhetorical Vehicle. In: M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds.)(2002). Infertility around the Globe: New thinking on childlessness, gender, and reproductive technologies (pp. 33- 51). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Satz, D. (1992). Markets in Women’s Reproductive Labor. Philosophy & Public Affairs 21 (2): 107-131.
Scott, E. S. (2009). Surrogacy and the Politics of Commodification. Law and Contemporary Problems 72 (3): 109-146.
Shanley, M. L. (1993). Surrogate Mothering and Women’s Freedom: A Critique of Contracts for Human Reproduction. Singns 18 (3): 618-639.
Shore, C., R. G. Abrahams, J. F. Collier, C. Delaney, R. Fox, R. Frankenberg, H. S. Lambert, M. Melhuus, D. M. Schneider, V. Stolcke and S. Wolfram (1992). Virgin Births and Sterile Debates: Anthropology and the New Reproductive Technologies. Current Anthropology 33 (3): 295-314.
Shultz, M. M. (1990). ‘Reproductive Technology and Intent-Based Parenthood: An Opportunity for Gender Neutrality’. Wisconsin Law Review 297: 287–398.
Steinbock, B. (1994). Reproductive Rights and Responsibilities. The Hastings Center Report 24 (3):15-16.
Strathern, M. (1992). Reproducing the Future: Essays on anthropology, kinship and the new reproductive technologies. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Strathern, M. (1995). Discplacing Knowledge: Teshnology and the Consequences for Kinship. In: F. D. Ginsburg and R. Rapp (eds.)(1995). Conceiving the New World Order: The global politics of reproduction (pp. 346-364). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Thompson, C. M. (2002). Fertile Ground: Feminists Theorize Infertility. In: M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds.)(2002). Infertility around the Globe: New thinking on childlessness, gender, and reproductive technologies (pp. 52-78). Berkeley: University of California Press.
van Balen, F. and M. C. Inhorn (2002). Interpreting infertility: A View from the Social Sciences. In: M. C. Inhorn and F. van Balen (eds.)(2002). Infertility around the Globe: New thinking on childlessness, gender, and reproductive technologies (pp. 3-32). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Walter, L. (1995). Feminist Anthropology? Gender and Society 9 (3): 272-288.
Wertheimer, A. (1992). Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation. Philosophy & Public Affairs 21 (3): 211-239.
Wilkinson, S. (2010). Choosing Tomorrow’s Children: The Ethics of Selective Reproduction. New York: Clarendon Press.
