Magazine: Studies in the Education of Adults, October, 1994
A WOMEN'S TRAINING CENTRE CONSIDERED AS A `SITE
OF LOCALISED POWER': THOUGHTS ON FOUCAULT
-----------------------------------------
The 1980s saw the development of `women only' training centres. These
centres tend to be staffed entirely by women and provide vocational
training within a `women only' environment. This paper considers the way
in which such a centre can be seen as a `closed community', within which
the differences which exist between women, such as race, class or sexual
preference, become more easily identifiable as group-based relationships
of power, privilege and inequality. These women only training centres
tended, at least initially, to owe their existence to the funding
policies of the European Social Fund (ESF).
In 1983 a Decision was adopted by the European Commission which,
reinforcing the 1977 Reform of the ESF, further prioritised the existing
provision for funding the vocational training of unemployed women.[1] Up
to 50% of the costs of such training could be obtained from the ESF
provided that the remaining 50% came from other public funds, such as
those of local authorities (LA). Within Britain, applications to the ESF
originated from the LA itself, mainly through Economic Development Units,
but also from the voluntary sector, although they needed to gain the
financial support of the LA before they could themselves apply to the
ESF. The particular training scheme focused on in this article resulted
from a local authority's own initiative.
The ESF funding for this scheme began in 1985. The LA managed the
project via a management committee. The project was located in its own
especially renovated building, in the centre of a multi-racial
industrial city. In several important aspects it was typical of those
set up throughout the eighties. Its brief was to train unemployed women
in non-traditional manual skills, such as those relating to the
construction and building renovation trades. The intention of the ESF
policy was to provide training, leading, hopefully, to training-related
employment. By its very nature it recruited only women, and likewise
those employed to manage, administer and teach on the courses were
women. One can only surmise over the LA's rationale for appointing white
women with social-work backgrounds to the first three core-management
posts. The decision to appoint social-workers and not adult educators or
trainers indicates the LA's likely perception of the project and the
targeted trainees. It could be argued that this locates the trainees
within a position of `disadvantage', needing professional (middle-class)
help, guidance and support in order to manage their (working-class)
lives, and it does not locate them as adult students who, while needing
certain structural supports such as childcare and travel costs, are
nevertheless capable of effectively engaging in the learning process.
The class-biased notion of `disadvantage' assumes, erroneously, that
poverty, unemployment and lack of previous educational attainment equals
a more general inability to `cope' with one's life, whereas the reverse
might well be true. The subsequent appointment, by the management
workers, of the instructors was, according to the women's own
perceptions, a combination of the general scarcity of manually skilled
trades-women; individuals being in the `right place at the right time';
knowing, through the feminist grape-vine, of the job vacancies; or being
known by others already employed there. In contrast to the `low-
educational attainment' criteria for the selection of trainees, only one
of these women instructors had not received higher education.
My interest in women's training came from my own experience firstly as
an adult educator and subsequently as a coordinator of a similarly
funded project. This experience led me to believe that the LA's
management of the project allowed the workers to exert a great deal of
influence on the actual structure and content of the training provision,
and that, in this way, they could be seen as pivotal to the success or
failure of the project. My research centred primarily on the workers'
perceptions of the project: what they perceived to be the intentions,
aspirations and achievements for the funders, the trainees and
themselves. This article, however, is not concerned with these findings
but with those relating to a secondary interest within the research.
In essence, this is based on an understanding, developed primarily from
feminist practice and theory, of not only the differences which exist
between women, such as can also be found within postmodernist texts, but
of the power-relations also.[2] The motivation behind this specific
interest in the `fracturing' of feminism, is the belief that one of the
strengths of feminism lies in its ability and willingness to address the
power-relations and the basic inequalities and privileges which exist
between women. These power-relations reflect those of society in general,
for instance, class, sexuality, race, education or physical ability.
The meaning of this for this research was that the women within the
Centre, workers and trainees, although all women, could not be seen as a
homogeneous group of simply women. Neither could they be easily
separated into `workers' and `trainees'. Although the case study focused
on the `workers', the issues of `race' and sexual preferences were seen
by them as creating equally strong fractures between the trainees. The
lesbian workers believed they shared a common identity with the lesbian
trainees; the white workers perceived the common identity and struggle
of the black workers and black trainees. The working-class identified
workers recognised their employment and educational-attainment status,
but at the same time identified strongly with the working-class
trainees. It is, however, doubtful that the working-class trainees
shared this class identification with the workers. Similarly, the actual
extent of the shared black identity can only really be ascertained from
the black women involved.
This paper is based on the white workers' understanding of the
identified `issues' taking place within the Centre and which they see as
affecting all the women there -- trainees and workers. The analysis then
refers to the `issues' within the Centre as a whole, and not simply to
the worker-group. Our understanding of the structures, processes and
discourses of such power-relations within women-only training centres
would benefit from further studies, which would indicate whether or not
these findings relate simply to this one Training Centre or are, as I
suspect, part of a wider pattern. From within this framework my concern
was with the workers' individual self-identity. Within feminist research
there is a basic belief that the researcher should make herself known to
the reader.[3] It seemed to me that similarly the interviewees should be
known also. I was interested in the individual workers' self-identity --
for instance, class, race, sexual preference and political background or
active community involvement.
The workers responded to these questions not just with an account of
their own perceived identity but also by positioning themselves, for
instance through their class, to the other workers and to the trainees.
Emerging from the interview responses was the extent to which these
group identities emerged as a major area of concern. The workers
themselves referred to these fractures as `the issues'. These `issues'
intersect the assumed commonality of women, and are seen through the
case study to result in constantly shifting positions and struggles for
individual and group power. This article is concerned with the
subsequent analysis of these `issues'. In particular, certain concepts
of Foucault provide a useful framework for the analysis of this data.
Specific reference is made to his work on the localisation of power,
discourse and reverse-discourse.[4]
The following section of this paper provides an outline of the research
process and the interview situation, for it transpired that this itself
was strongly influenced by `the issues' existing between the women
within the Training Centre, and through my presence I too became
involved in it. The next section considers the importance of the
Training Centre as a `closed community', both as the creation of a space
in which women's voices can be heard, and as `a site of localised
power'. This is followed by the main body of the paper, in which
Foucault's concept of reverse-discourse is applied to the identifiable
fracturing taking place within the Training Centre, whereby reverse-
discourses are constructed against both the external, and the
identifiable internal, dominant discourses. From the concept of reverse-
discourse, the notion of reverse-power is developed and the importance
of the Training Centre as a `localised site of power' is reconsidered in
relation to the wider, external dominant discourses. The concluding
section reasserts and clarifies the main findings of this analysis.
The Interviews
This section is concerned with the interview process and resulting
dynamic. A general feminist methodological concern has been with the
process of research, and in particular, the relationship between the
researcher and the researched. This relationship, based on ideas of
`conscious partiality' (Mies, 1983), or the `shared critical plane',
(Harding, 1987), has tended to stress the over-riding importance of
gender, and the creation of a situation approaching that of an equal
sharing of ideas, leading to research itself becoming a shared
enterprise. Other factors affecting this `conscious partiality' are for
instance, race, class, sexual preference, disability and educational
attainment. A person's class, sexual preference, and in some cases
disability, are less immediately recognisable than a person's gender or
race, and as such, any classification is generally assumed rather than
known. However, in a variety of ways, a person's class position can be,
and often is, judged, although, as in this study, class position can be
fudged by educational attainment.[5] On the other hand, sexual
preference is rarely considered a variable: heterosexuality is, with few
exceptions, generally assumed -- by both the researcher and the
researched.
Furthermore, apart from this fracturing of the shared gender, there is a
tendency within the concept of `conscious partiality' which seems to
assume that the power imbalance inherent within the interview situation
can be effectively challenged. Over the same period, McRobbie (1982),
Riessman (1987), Opie (1992) and Stanley and Wise (1993), are among
those critical of any denial of power-differences between women
researchers and the women researched.
In the interviews with the six white women workers of this case study I
shared race, gender and a recent work experience which was known to
them. Sexuality and class were shared with some of the workers, and my
disability with none. But over and above all this, I was the woman with
the tape-recorder, the questions, the knowledge of the other
interviewee's responses, the mental map into which all this fitted, and
the power to divulge (or not) my own thoughts or experiences. Even if
all the possible differences were shared, this imbalance of power in the
interview situation itself would still remain. The very essence of the
interview -- that of the researcher obtaining information from the
researched, mitigates against such an idealistic egalitarian process.
Furthermore, my presence is evident in the actual choice of workers to
be interviewed, for the initial contact with the Training Centre was
made via two women already known to me. Both these women are white.[6]
This prior personal knowledge had two quite clear consequences. Firstly
it enabled the research to take place; secondly, it had unforeseen
restrictive ramifications for the research. These contacts enabled the
research to take place by `validating my feminist credentials' -- in
practical and metaphorical terms they `allowed me through the door'.
However, there were restrictive consequences from having made these
particular initial contacts, for it caused difficulties with the white
coordinator and with black management workers, there being at that time
no black instructors or tutors.
Eventually, I was successful in my approach to the white coordinator --
partly due to having been the coordinator of a similar scheme myself.
However, my attempts to contact black workers were unsuccessful:
appointments were cancelled; phone calls were not returned.[7] The lack
of response from the black women in this study was reinforced by the
particular situation which existed within the training scheme and which
only became clear to me as a result of the interviews. At the beginning
there had been no grounds for anticipating such a consquence resulting
from this initial contact. The silence of black workers within this
paper is immense; as well as being clearly evident around the comments
of the white workers regarding `race', their voices are also noticeably
absent from the consideration of class and sexual preference.
In the end, attempts at reaching black workers having failed, the case
study was finally based on lengthy loosely-structured interviews with
six white women workers: three were `management': two outreach workers
and one coordinator; and three were instructors. Some of these white
women were clearly middle-class and well-educated, others had strong
working-class backgrounds -- all except one had gained higher education.
Some of the women were heterosexual and some were lesbian: some were in
marriages or partnerships. All of these women had at some time been
politically active: in the peace movement; the women's movement; the
Labour party or the far left; or within the Trade Union movement. None
of the women had disabilities. Some had children and some did not.
Neither the statistical limitations of this study nor the absence of the
black women workers' comments detract from the strength of the white
women's responses. These responses showed that fracturing based on
`race', `class' and sexual preference, were defining features of their
working lives and, from their accounts, of their personal lives also.
Before engaging with this analysis, it is important to note that, based
on my existing knowledge of the field, there is no reason to suppose
that the fractures between the women in this Centre, the `issues'
expressed, are in any way unique to this Training Centre. Nevertheless,
the analysis is based solely on the fractures perceived by the
interviewed white women within this particular Centre.
What does, however, become evident from the following accounts is the
expression of these concerns within a relatively `closed community' in
which existed, certainly among some of the white workers, a `modernist'
assumption of 'sisterhood', an over-riding belief in a degree of
commonality based on shared gender.[8] There is even a sense of painful
surprise from some of the white workers, on their realisation that this
is not necessarily so.
The Training Centre as a `Closed Community'
This idea of the `closed community' needs further exploration. Firstly,
the Training Centre provides a `women only' space: women's struggle for
space against the dominance of men is thereby removed (see, for instance,
Thompson, 1983). Women's voices are not often heard: the voices of white
working-class and black women even less so. For the trainees the
realisation that they had a voice, a right to express themselves and to
be heard, is perhaps one of the main achievements of the project. In a
similar vein the Training Centre provided the opportunity for dialogue
to take place between the workers -- for the black women to express
themselves to white women who had no choice but to listen; for lesbians
to be open about their sexuality; and for the poverty and struggle of
working class women (black and white) to be seen as life-defining and
confining. Here in the Training Centre, women who generally, although to
differing degrees, do not have a voice in the wider (white, male,
heterosexually dominated) society, seem to shout at each other and
jostle and push for new power positions and balances --individual and
group based.
Secondly, this `closed community' can be seen to represent what Foucault
calls a `site of localised power'. Foucault's concept of localised power
is useful in this analysis for understanding that power is not just
something big, institutionalised, out there, but localised, manifesting
itself between various groups of people, and between individuals: men
and men; men and women; and equally importantly women and women. The
power between white women and black women, between lesbian and
heterosexual, between able-bodied and disabled and so on can be, as this
worker explains, individually fought out:
It became one of the most painful working experiences of my life .
. . Tied up with staff interactions, racism issues, classist
issues, lesbian issues. If you like, what we tried to do in that
building, we tried to tackle all the problems what are in the
macrocosm in a microcosm -- what we created was a vacuum where
the staff group nearly blew ah really, in an emotional sense. (Y)
The Training Centre, as a site where power became localised, became also
the site where resistance took place. For instance, it was therefore
possible for black workers to try and take the power of the training
scheme from individual white women for each white woman represented a
far more achievable target than the white male power structures of the
funders themselves. Individuals, or small groups of women, came to
represent, at this localised level, a specific oppression such as racism
or homophobia, and as such they became the target of other women's
resistance.
Basically, underneath, we fear each other. We are frightened of
women and women's power and you've not jest got strong women,
you've got strong lesbian women, strong black women. Very strong
indeed.... As women we are afraid of women's power, we are
conditioned to fear, we are conditioned to compete as women and we
take that right inside ourselves . . . . We are doing it to
ourselves. That's the oppression that's done that to us. That's
sexism, that's racism, that's heterosexism, -- so we internalise
it and I think we can't even name it most of the time. We can't
even see what it is -- it's Her! (W)
Within this Training Centre, the workers and trainees engaged with the
divisive issues of `race', class and sexual preference. The expression
of this, localised as it was within the centre, focused on what were
seen as individual `representatives': the black woman, the white woman,
the working-class or middle-class woman, the `straight' woman, the
lesbian. Such simplistic labelling was in reality further confused by
each individual woman's own combination of class, race and sexual
preference, as well as education and wealth, and role within the centre:
trainee or worker and particular heirarchical job position. Meanwhile,
the external institutionalised structures of racism and homophobia,
through which all the women had been constructed, remained intact.
Reverse-discourse
Foucault argues, through the example of the history of sexuality, that
the construction of the dominant discourse, in this case heterosexuality,
is integral to the maintenance of power, that is through the control of
sexuality. The strength of such power lies in the localised
manifestation of it -- ultimately within the 'knowledge' held by the
individual, hence the extreme effectiveness of the construct of `power-
knowledge'. Although `reverse' discourses can, and are, constructed
against the dominant one and as such represent clear sites of resistance
to it, they are nevertheless automatically marginalised by the dominant
discourse, and therefore any power they might have is necessarily
precarious. It is this understanding, and in particular the concept of
the reverse-discourse which has proved useful in the analysis of the
fractures, the `issues' existing between the women within the Training
Centre.
The analysis of the interview data pointed to four linked factors
involved in the construction of a reverse-discourse within the centre.
The first factor was that the likelihood of a specific `issue' being
raised, and the extent of the fracture caused, was largely dependent on
the presence of 'representative' women. The use of this term is
clarified by its following usage. For instance, the absence of women
with disabilities meant that other than a general policy-awareness, (for
instance, the provision of ramps for wheelchair users), issues around
able-bodied arrogance or ignorance were never aired. This is to say that
there were no women with disabilites to construct a reverse-discourse to
the dominant one of the able-bodied. The presence of lesbians, however,
enabled a strong reverse discourse to be constructed.
The staff about lesbianism has only really been pushed because
(now) there are two lesbian instructors . . . It's being dealt
with now because it's being pushed, but it wouldn't have been. (X)
The numbers of black and white women (full-time workers and trainees)
within the Training Centre were fairly equal. However, the coordinator
was white, and although there were two white and two black outreach
workers, the black workers had been appointed six to eighteen months
after the first white workers, and whereas the white workers were on
permanent contracts for the three years of the funding, the black
workers were appointed on temporary Section 11 contracts.[9] The other
black women employed within the centre were an administrator and a
creche worker. all the instructors were white.
Secondly, the number of such `representative' women; thirdly, their
centre-status; and fourthly, their broad `political' awareness and
identity, all further affected the extent to which `race' or sexual
preference could be constructed as a reverse-discourse. For instance,
the black reverse-discourse increased considerably with the eventual
appointment of the second black outreach worker, which changed the
`race' ratio of the worker, and particularly the management, group.
The significance of these factors is evident within the following
analysis of the construction of the `black', and then the lesbian
reverse-discourses.
The consideration of the white women's comments on `race' point towards
the construction, by the black women, of a strong `reverse-discourse'
towards the dominant, external, white one. The absence of the black
workers' comments is in stark contrast to the following quotes taken
from the interviews with the white workers. The white women's perception
was that the black women's `black' identity, their experience of racism,
and their need to combat it, overrode all other divides or
subjectivities. However, although the interviews suggested that class
and sexual preference constantly cut across both black and white groups
of women, it seemed that they divided the white women from each other
much more so, and in this way influenced their individual response to
the black women's accusations of racism. Furthermore, the specific
response of the coordinator was highly influential:
Because of (the first coordinator's) background, (that is white,
middle-class), it was total intimidation, so (she) (she) to cave
in.... She was a (that weak because she was so scared of all the
issues that were around - particularly when the black worker . . .
started a challenge on racism and got a support group. (Y)
However, the second coordinator, was described as:
. . . trying to tackle race issues as they come up - head on,
tackling them, not very successfully, but she's tackling them -
it's not spoken about over there in the corner, it's very open and
it's been very painful to various people, white and black.
Previously it had tried to be damped down, but now it's head on.
They didn't know how to deal with it because it is a very
difficult thing to deal with. But she is more open about it. (Z)
Several white workers referred to the perceived solidarity of the black
workers, not only within the centre, but with other women from the black
community. This apparent black solidarity is in direct contrast to the
white workers' accounts of their own solitary painful struggle with
(their) racism.
I mean my social behaviour just changed completely, because it was
highly highly stressful . . . and I was coming home at night and
thinking, 'Am I a racist?' - and working through all these
issues.... And it was like conflict after conflict, after
conflict.... My personal life was actually totally affected by the
conflicts which were within - because I had to take them home to
sort them oat.... in the training scheme ... you didn't have the
support to say 'hang on a minute, I don't, I don't understand, I'm
trying so hard not to be racist. ' . . . It can become a very head-
banging experience. (Y)
The point here is this lack of 'white solidarity', not as a solid
oppositional grouping to the black workers, but as a means of discussion
and support for understanding institutional racism and the personal
roles and benefits gained individually and collectively by the white
workers within it.
This lack of `solidarity' can be seen as the inevitable result of an
essentially pluralistic response to institutionalised racism, typified
in what are generally described as `post modern' readings.[10] This
power of racism, localised into the closed community of the Training
Centre, is resisted locally by the black women, and the effect of this
resistance is felt individually by the white women. Meanwhile the
dominant white (and male) power outside of the Centre remains untouched.
The fractures within the Centre cries-crossed each other. Sexual
preference, for instance, cut across 'race', class and centre-status
lines. Like the black women, the lesbians (black and white), created an
equally strong reverse-discourse to the dominant, external, heterosexual
one. The presence of lesbians was crucial to the confrontation of
heterosexism. The strength of the reverse-discourse reflected the number
of lesbians involved, and their centre-status position. This became
particularly evident with the appointment of the second coordinator.
The new coordinator is more up-front about racism and [being
lesbian - these two issues have got more at the front - especially
being a lesbian, because she's a lesbian herself It's the first
time lesbian issues have been right at the top there, hand in hand
with race issues, whereas it never really got anywhere before. (Z)
The black and lesbian reverse-discourses were identifiable by their
positioning against the dominant white and heterosexual discourses.
Class, however, could not be quite so clearly identified as a basis for
a reverse-discourse from within the worker group. A class-based reverse-
discourse would most likely be that of the working-class constructed
against the dominant middle-class one. The class identity of the workers
was split fairly equally between middle-class; working-class now
identified as middle-class; and those who remained working-class
identified. This was simply the class fragmentation among the white
workers as perceived by them, which was not necessarily how the trainees,
black and white, and solidly working-class, would have defined them.
Whereas the white workers perceived a strong degree of identification
between black workers and black trainees, and between lesbian workers
and lesbian trainees, there was no such, or at most very little,
identification between working-class trainees and those workers who
continued to identify themselves as such. Despite this apparent
fuzziness, the working-class reverse-discourse nevertheless permeated,
and further fractured, the stronger reverse-discourses.
This 'class' permeation of 'race' in particular, was emphasised by those
white workers who remained working-class identified. For instance, a
white working-class worker compared herself - the daughter of a miner
suffering from emphysema, and self-educated through evening-classes -
with a 'black politicised woman', the daughter of African professionals,
and privately educated. At the time of the interview, around four years
after the incident, she was still struggling with the argument given
that black people cannot be middle-class because they're so totally
disadvantaged by the racist society which we live in.
Another instance was recalled of a white, working-class identified
worker being told by a black worker that if she 'really cared about
racism' she would resign or else she should be sacked.
And this was in an open meeting where everybody was being awfully
nice to each other, and l said don't you ever tell me l should be
sacked. And like, there was my 'class' - upfront - and like you're
not the only person, you're not the only person who's had to
struggle, and suddenly there l'd taken on board all the issues
that other white women were bringing up - so yet again l was there
in the firing line. (Y)
In both these instances, the absence of the black workers' perceptions
of class, job position, and the struggle with white women for power, or
even simply equality, is extremely obvious. Some would argue that
because of the absence of the black women's voices, these two
'instances' quoted above should be omitted. However, I believe that the
interest of this paper lies as much with those power-relations operating
around 'class' and sexual preference, as it does with 'race'. My
particular concern has been with the intersections between them, the
multi-subjectivity of each woman, and within this, the evident tensions
resulting from the limited privileges and opportunities available to
black women, 'out' lesbians and working-class women. The reason for the
inclusion of these two 'instances' is that they give examples, from the
white working-class women, of this tension between 'race' and 'class' as
they themselves experienced it.
The analysis of the white workers' interview responses as well as
indicating the strength of the 'issues' present and the resulting
fractures between the women, also indicated the basis for a degree of
commonality between them. Cutting across class, 'race', and sexual
preference borders as well as those existing between trainee and worker
were the women's experience and understanding of male violence. The
interviews point not only to the widespread shared understanding of the
threat of male violence, but also to the almost equally widespread
extent of women's actual experience of it. This ranged from the ultimate,
expressed by one worker, who said:
I've changed a lot because my sister was murdered - by her
husband. (W)
to an example of the general sea-bed of its existence:
When you actually talk to trainees, I think a lot of women are
very reticent to talk about personal things - because they've
never been taken seriously you know, it's always been, it's the
way their sisters are treated, it's the way their mums were
treated, you know, it's what happens to them, you don't talk about
it. . . A lot on the training scheme - I would say, a conservative
estimate, that at least 7 5 %of our women have suffered extreme
physical and mental abuse from either fathers or partners.... One
woman tells a story, and then the next-but-one to her, you know,
has got something similar to say, and then someone over the other
side, and the other thing that is coming out very strongly is the
women who were abused as children by their relatives, brothers,
fathers, uncles, whatever, this sort of thing. A lot of women talk
about the abuse of their own daughters, and they - do you know, we
got women, we've had woman whose daughters are prostitutes you
know, and they eventually start talking about it, and it's -
unfortunately, the actual instances I'm thinking of - it hasn't
changed, these girls, these young women, are still into their
lifestyle, but I mean once you get into it, it's night on
impossible to get out of it. And the violence, the brutality. When
I say how angry I am, when I realise that there but for the stroke
of luck go 1, because I mean - now whether the women think that, I
don't know. (U; the emphasis is mine)
And, a work-related instance of male violence towards a worker:
After one social event a worker was driving a trainee home and got
badly beaten up by her husband.
[The worker got beaten up by the husband?]
Yeah . . . he came dashing out with a lamp-hammer and it was
horrible. (V)
These examples of the reality of male violence in women's lives were
told in passing, they were not the result of any explicit or even
implicitly intended questioning - hence their importance in pointing
towards such a possible gendered commonality.
>From their experience as 'women', irrespective of 'race', 'class', or
sexual preference, the women constructed, from their experience and
understanding of male violence towards them as women, a noticeably
unified reverse-discourse to the dominant external one - the established
male discourse. The strength of this particular reverse-discourse seemed
to lie firstly in the extremely high number of women who identified with
it, and secondly, in the extent to which it was not fractured by 'race',
'class' or sexual preference. A significant feature of this reverse-
discourse was that it was most frequently constructed in the morning,
when women came back to the Centre from the 'outside'. However, once in
the Centre, this temporarily constructed reverse-discourse then
fragments, to be replaced by several others, in reverse to the now
internal dominant discourse: that of the white middle-class heterosexual
women. Within the Training Centre, these discourses of black women,
lesbians, working-class women, are constructed as reverse-discourses to
both the external and, importantly, the internal dominant discourses.
The space provided by the Training Centre allowed the reverse-discourses
to the white, middle-class/educated, heterosexual dominant ones to be
constructed. At this juncture it bears repetition to point out that
Foucault argued that reverse-discourses, despite being clear sites of
resistance, have only precarious power, for their discourses are
automatically marginalised. From this understanding, it can be argued
that this power, this reverse power can also only exist within that
localised site, or sites: it too remains essentially marginalised, with
the fundamental power-relations remaining untouched.
The significance of this for the concept of 'localisation of power' is
that the resistance is expressed, the reverse-discourses of say,
lesbians and black women, are constructed against the internal dominant
discourse of the white heterosexual women, which although itself
constructed against the external dominant one of the white heterosexual
middle-class men, is, within the localised site, seen as quite separate.
Therefore, even any group-based reverse-power which is temporarily
achieved can only be in relation to the internal dominant power, not the
external one. Within the centre, the reverse-power of lesbians and black
women increased whilst the internal dominant power of heterosexual women
and white women, decreased. The transition from 'reverse-discourse' to
'reverse-power' can find expression only within localised sites and
therefore, despite occasional often violent temporary 'spill-overs', it
is contained there.[11]
Therefore Foucault's localisation of power is not simply the site where
'institutional' power manifests itself, and where individuals can resist
it, but, as a closed community, it is also the place where 'reverse'-
power can emerge, or is it even, will - perhaps inevitably - emerge?
However, this construction of reverse-power points to the underlying
conflict existing between an essentially localised response to power and
one which is based on theories constructed through the analysis of the
over-arching causes, maintaining structures and processes of, for
instance, capitalism, patriarchy and imperialism. Separated from theory,
localised resistance to the perceived dominant discourses can become
merely individualistic reactive responses to the particular localised
manifestation of the over-riding power. In this way the struggle against
oppression, or the struggle for equality can be simply turned against
other oppressed groups or individuals. This struggle between the women
within the Training Centre shows very clearly the insidiousness of
ingrained racism and homophobia, and the extremely painful process of
localised resistance to it.
The consequence of such localised resistance, set adrift from theory, is
that the gendered oppression experienced by black women remains quite
separate from that experienced by white; the gendered oppression
experienced by middle-class women remains separate from that experienced
by working-class women; and so on with each group, each individual
experiencing the oppression centred on gender, is prevented also from
developing theories of it, and furthermore, prevented from group-based
action against it - or indeed perhaps any action other than violence.
This means the gendered status quo remains as is.
Conclusion
The multiple reverse-discourses constructed within the Training Centre
related primarily to the internal dominant discourse, rather than the
external one. Any reverse-power gained from these reverse-discourses -as
well as being only temporary, was, crucially, only gained in relation to
the internal dominant power, not the external one. The only unified
reverse-discourse to be constructed against the external dominant one,
centred on the women's experience of male violence. Being so constructed
against the external discourse, this particular reverse-discourse did
not acquire any power whatsoever, reverse or otherwise. The question of
'Why not?' can, I believe, be addressed through a reconsideration of the
importance of the localised site.
The discourse of male violence did not exist within the Training Centre,
and therefore the reverse-discourse constructed against it remained
simply a discourse. In order for a reverse-discourse to acquire reverse-
power, the dominant power relationship itself must be present within the
localised site. In a different localised site, with men and women
present, it would be possible, given the factors mentioned earlier, that
is representative numbers of women, their status and their broad
political awareness, for a reverse-discourse constructed against male
violence to acquire a degree of reverse-power. However, externally,
outside of such localised sites, it is essentially impossible for the
feminist constructed reverse-discourse to male violence to acquire
reverse-power, any more than can those constructed against the dominant
white power-relations, or the equally dominant construct of
heterosexuality. For these dominant discourses represent and maintain
the power-relationships and the privileges, the oppression and the
inequality of capitalism, patriarchy and imperialism.
These power-relations can be identified as operating on three levels:
firstly, the tangible maintaining structures and processes -particularly
those of exclusion and reward; secondly, the more obscure, but
nevertheless effective, process of' normalisation'[12]; and underpinning
and informing these, the third level, the discourse itself-the bedrock
of its ideas, its view of the world, and the texts and language of its
expression. Action, either individual or collective, can engage to
greater or lesser extents with the upper two levels. Theory, however,
engages with the discourse itself.
The acquisition of reverse-power can only be temporary and, needing a
localised site for its construction, can and is easily contained there.
In contrast to this localised containment, the ongoing challenge of the
'external' dominant power-relations of privilege and oppression require
the combination of action (individual and collective), against the
maintaining structures and processes of levels one and two, and the
engagement with the discourse itself through the ongoing construction of
critical theories. Feminist theories constructed from the differences
between women, from critiques focusing on the lines of fragmentation as
well as on the commonalities which, centred on gender, transcend the
fragmentation, are a necessary part of this process.
Notes and References
[1]'Decisions' are part of the legislative structure of the EC and as
such are legally enforceable. For further consideration of the
development of ESF policy relating to vocational training for unemployed
women, see Brine, 1992.
[2] The following texts are a sample of those from which this
understanding can be located: Amos and Parmar, 1981, 1984; Carby, 1982;
Barrett and Phillips, 1992; Bryan and others, 1985; 'Feminism and class
politics', Feminist Review, 1986; Griffin, 1985; Hooks, 1987; Jackson,
1989; Jackson, 1992; Martin, 1992; Moi, 1990; Morgan, 1984; Phillips,
1987; Rich, 1980; Rowbotham and others, 1979; Segal, 1987; Walby, 1986,
1992.
[3] See, for instance, Mies, 1983; Gunew, 1990; Stanley and Wise, 1990;
Duelli-Klein, 1983.
[4] To ease the readability of this paper, the key texts for all
references to Foucault are: Foucault, 1980a, 1980b; and also Diamond and
Quinby, 1988; Martin, 1988.
[5] Working-class women who gain access to higher education are not the
same as the working-class women who do not. Yet to say they are then
middle-class ignores the cultural, social and economic realities of
their lives, setting them adrift from their past, and assumes from them
a knowledge and way of being in the world which does not come with
education alone, but is more essentially materially/economically, and
even culturally, based.
[6] Although critical of the terms, I use 'black' and 'white' in a way
similar to that used by the interviewees themselves, which reflects the
common usage within Britain - that is, 'black' refers to people
descending from the Indian sub-continent as well as Africa and those
islands of the Caribbean which were colonised by Britain. 'Asian'
differentiates simply between people originating from the Indian sub-
continent and people from Africa and the Caribbean. Within this study
one 'Asian' woman is referred to: a very late appointed worker. 'Whites'
are people of European descent. I believe the majority, probably all, of
the women, 'black' and 'white', referred to in this study are British.
[7] These difficulties are very similar to those described by the white
feminist Rosalind Edwards, 1990.
[8] It can be argued that western feminism, up to the late 1970s, was
essentially 'modernist'. White middle-class, educated, women of Europe,
North America and Australasia, attempted to speak on behalf of 'woman'
and made little concession to difference. It was assumed that all women
would share their perspective. The white middle-class women could speak
for all others: they did not need, they were not given, a voice of their
own. Although during the late 1970s British white middle-class feminists
often spoke of wanting more white working-class women to join them, and
more black women to join them, it was just that - they wanted the others
to join them and essentially to agree to the already established agenda,
and their established mode of conduct. Just as male modernists subsumed
woman within 'man', so these white middle-class feminists subsumed black
women, working-class women, and disabled women within the terms 'woman'
and 'we'. However, throughout the 1980s, within Britain, other feminist
'voices' have critiqued these assumptions: black, working-class, lesbian
and disabled feminist theories are now being constructed.
[9] 'Section 11' funding refers to that section of the Local Government
Act 1966 which enables the Home Secretary to fund additional Local
Authority staff who are employed to work with communities of New
Commonwealth origin to enable them to access mainstream education and
employment. Such funding is temporary with little job security or
status. The 'New' Commonwealth countries are, to name just some,
Bangladesh, India, HongKong, the ('British') West Indies, and those
countries within Africa which were previously colonised by Britain. In
contrast to this the 'Old' Commonwealth refers to Canada, New Zealand
and Australia. In the simplistic 'race' terms defined in note 6, the
'Olaf' Commonwealth is 'white', the 'New', 'black'.
[10] A discussion of postmodernism can be located within the following
texts: Bauman, 1988; Berman, 1983; Boyne and Rattansi, 1990; Harvey,
1989; Lovibond, 1990; Skeggs, 1991; Jackson, 1992; Jameson, 1984.
[11] The distinction is made between the 'group-based' acquisition of
reverse-power, and any sense of increased power acquired by individual
women as a result of either that groupbased change or the educational
processes within the Training Centre. The possibility of individuals
increasing their ability to act as agents of action upon their world is
fundamental to adult education. However, the 'group-haled' reverse-power
is contained within the localised site.
[12] This refers to Foucault's concept of 'normalisation' whereby
various 'knowledges and practices' such as medicine, sexuality,
punishment and education, construct the binary classification of
'normal' and 'abnormal' (Foucault, 1979, 1980a). 'Gender' and
'sexuality' can be seen as normalising constructs. These ensure that the
vast majority of women, across time and space and irrespective of race
or class, construct themselves through femininity and heterosexuality as
'normal' women. Foucault points to a powerful aspect of normalisation
being that it happens with the individual hardly being aware of it. The
power of the process is such that to question, to deny the given 'truth'
of ourselves - for instance, the constructs of femininity and
heterosexuality, is to move ourselves from 'normal' to 'abnormal' end to
be judged accordingly.
Amos, Valerie and Parmar, Pratibha (1981). 'Resistance and responses;
the experiences of black girls in Britain', in A. McRobbie and T. McCabe,
(eds), Feminism for Girls, Routledge.
Amos, Valerie and Parmar, Pratibha (1984). 'Challenging imperial
feminism', in Feminist Review 17, pp 3-19
Barrett, Michelle and Phillips, Anne (1992). Destablizing Theory:
Contemporary Feminist Debates, Cambridge: Polity Press
Bauman, Zygmunt (1988). 'Is there a postmodern sociology?' in Theory,
Culture and Society, 5, No 2/3
Berman, Marshall (1983). All That is Solid Melts into Air, Verso
Boyne, Roy and Rattansi, Ali (1990). 'The theory and politics of
postmodernism: by way of an introduction', in R. Boyne and A. Rattansi
(eds), Postmodernism and Society, MacMillan.
Brine, Jacky (1992). 'The European Social Fund and the vocational
training of unemployed women: questions of gendering and regendering',
in Gender and Education, 4, pp 149-162
Bryan, Beverley, Dadzie, Stella and Scafe, Suzanne (1985). The Heart of
the Race: Black Women's Lives in Britain, Virago
Carby, Hazel (1982). 'White women listen! Black feminism and the
boundaries of sisterhood', in Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies,
The Empire Strikes Back: Race and Racism in 70s Britain, Hutchinson
Diamond, Irene and Quinby, Lee (1988). Feminism and Foucalt: Reflections
on Resistance, Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Duelli-Klein, Renate (1983). 'How to do what we want to do: thoughts
about feminist methodology', in G. Bowles and R. Duelli-Klein (eds),
Theories of Women's Studies, Routledge and Kegan Paul
Edwards, Rosalind (1990). 'Connecting method and epistemology - a white
woman interviewing black women', in Women's Studies International Forum,
13, p 477-490.
Feminism and Class Politics: A Round Table Discussion (1986). In
Feminist Review, 23 Foucault, Michel (1979). Discipline and Punish: the
Birth of the Prison, New York: Vintage/Random House
Foucault, Michel (1980a). Power-Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other
Writings 1972-1977, New York: Pantheon
Foucault, Michel (1980b). History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, New York:
Vintage
Griffin, Christine (1985). Typical Girls?: Young women from school to
the marleet place, Routledge and Kegan Paul
Gunew, Sneja (1990). 'Feminist knowledge: critique and construct', in S.
Gunew (ed.), Feminist Knowledge: Critique and Construct, Routledge.
Harding, Sandra (1987). Feminism and Methodology, Milton Keynes: Open
University Press
Harvey, David (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford: Blackwell
Hooks, Bell (1987). 'Feminism: a movement to end sexist oppression', in
A. Phillips (ed.). Feminism and Equality, Oxford: Blackwell
Jackson, Margaret (1989). 'Sexuality and struggle: feminism, sexology
and the social construction of sexuality', in C. Jones and P. Mahony
(eds), Learning our Lines: Sexuality and social control in education,
The Women's Press
Jackson, Stevi (1992). 'The amazing deconstructing woman', in Trouble
and Strife: the Radical Feminist magazine, 25, pp 25-30
Jameson, Frederic (1984). 'Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late
capitalism', in New Left Review, 146, pp 53-91
Lovibond, Sabina (1990). 'Feminism and postmodernism', in R. Boyne and
A. Rattansi (eds), Postmodern Society, Macmillan
Martin, Biddy (1988). 'Feminism, criticism, and Foucault', in I. Diamond
and L. Quinby (eds), Feminism and Foucault: Reflections on Resistance,
Boston: Northeastern University Press
Martin, Biddy (1992). 'Sexual practice and changing lesbian identities',
in M. Barrett and A. Phillips (eds), Destabilizing Theory: Contemporary
Feminist Debates, Cambridge: Polity Press
McRobbie, Angela (1982). 'The politics of feminist research: between
talk, text and action', in Feminist Review, 12, pp 46-58
Mies, Maria (1983). 'Towards a methodology for feminist research' in G.
Bowles and R. Duelli-Klein (eds), Theories of Women's Studies, Routledge
and Kegan Paul
Moi, Toril (1990). 'Feminism and postmodernism: recent feminist
criticism in the United States', in T. Lovell (ed.), British Feminist
Thought: a Reader, Oxford: Blackwell
Morgan, Robin (1984). Sisterhood is Global, New York: Anchor Press with
Doubleday
Opie, Anne (1992). 'Qualitative research, appropriation of the 'other'
and empowerment', in Feminist Review, 40, pp 52-69
Phillips, Anne (1987). Divided Loyalties: Dilemmas of sex and class,
Virago
Rich, Adrienne (1980). 'Compulsory heterosexuality and lesbian
existence', in Signs, 5, pp 631-660
Riessman, Catherine (1987). 'When gender is not enough: women
interviewing women', in Gender and Society, pp 172 -207
Rowbotham, Sheila, Segal, Lynne and Wainwright, Hilary (1979). Beyond
the Fragments, Merlin
Segal, Lynne (1987). Is the Future Female.; Troubled thoughts on
contemporary feminism, Virago
Skeggs, Beverley (1991). 'Postmodernism: what is all the fuss about?',
in British Journal of Sociology of Education, 12, pp 255-267
Stanley, Liz and Wise, Sue (1990). 'Method, methodology and epistemology
in feminist research processes', in L. Stanley (ed), Feminilt Praxis,
Routledge
Stanley, Liz and Wise, Sue (1993). Breaking Out Again, Routledge
Thompson, Jane (1983). Learning Liberation, Croom Helm
Walby, Sylvia (1986). Patriarchy at Work, Cambridge: Polity Press
Walby, Sylvia (1992). 'Post-post-modernism?' in M. Barrett and A.
Phillips (eds), Destabilizing Theory: Contemporary Feminilt Debates,
Cambridge: Polity Press
~~~~~~~~
By JACKY BRINE, Division of Education, University of Sheffield
Copyright of Studies in the Education of Adults is the property of
National Institute of Adult Continuing Education and its
content may not be copied without the copyright holder's
express written permission except for the print or download
capabilities of the retrieval software used for access. This
content is intended solely for the use of the individual user.
Source: Studies in the Education of Adults, Oct94, Vol. 26 Issue 2, p201,
18p.
Item Number: 9502226097
