emigration M/F (was: chill out)

[Wojtek Sokolowski <sokol@xxxxxxx>]

At 04:51 PM 5/5/99 -0400, Barkley Rosser wrote:
>Wojtek,
>      Now I am not going to dispute your generalization
>too vigorously.  However, I would note that it holds
>more for immigrants from an earlier period.  I don't
>think it holds at all for people who have immigrated
>from Eastern Europe in the last ten years.


Well, as every other generalization, that particular one too is false, if
taken literally :)


But more to the point, if there is such a thing as a general statement that
describes Eastern European immigration (I presume it may also be true of
immigrants from other regions) is that the only difference that really
matters is neither time nor political convictions, but gender.  I do not
think this issue received much attention, but men and women have much
different stakes in immigration, those stakes change quite dramatically
after migrating from the old country, and so do the attitudes toward the
old country.

On the pain of oversimplification, men generally expect a better life in
the new country.  They often emigrate alone, leaving their families behind
on the promise to fetch them after they make necessary arrangements.  I do
not have any stats, but based on anecdotal evidence that often does not
happen, and man's emigration is often a de facto divorce without the need
to pay child support or alimony.

Women, on the other hand, usually follow their husbands or boyfriends.  I
did not meet many single women emigrating on their own.  After the initial
period in the new country, when they literally serve as "comfort women" to
their male companions to ease the discontents of adaptation to the new
environment, two things usually happen.  First, the "old country" wife is
exchanged by her male companion for a newer model, but not necessarily of
the foreign make.  Second, the "old country" husband/boyfriend is dumped by
the woman, but not necessarily exchanged for a newer model.

In each case, the woman is a big winner - because that development means
shedding the "old country" patriarchal obligations (regardless of who does
the dumping).  The woman is lietarlly liberated to have her own money, her
own time, her own style, and her own sex life is she so chooses - without
being pressured to conform to societal expectations.  I can cite numerous
anecdoacl evidence to support that.

Consequently, women have fewer incentives to go back to the old country,
even though they are often emotionally attached to it, and even though
their material situation in the US may be worse than the one they left
behind.  That would mean giving up their newly attained freedom for the old
patriarchal yoke.

Men by contrast, tend to go back if they see an opportunity (e.g. if they
saved some money and can open a business in the old country) especially
that old country patriarchy is often the added value to their material
success.  If they are less successful, e.g. if they sold their property in
the old country but did not gain much in the new country, obviously going
back would translate to a loss of status.  Consequently they rationalize
their decision to stay by fabricated images of horrors of the old country -
persecution, misery, poverty, hopelessness, you name it.

A classiacl work on EE emigration is Thomas & Znaniecki, _The Polish
Peasant in Europe and America_ (edited and abridged by Eli Zaretsky),
Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, [1918-20] 1984, although
they did not seem to pay much attention to gender issues.  I do not think
immigration has been extensively studied since then, let alone from a
feminist perspective. Can any of our resident feminists correct or add
anything  to that?

Wojtek