art-e-conomy _ reader - marko stamenkovic

50
influenced by ethnicity, class, or religious denomination. Of course, as important as it is
to understand that race, class, gender and age differences are significant elements of
deconstruction and realistic understanding of globalisation, it is equally important not
to fall into opposite extremes. It is also dangerous to conclude that there is nothing else
but the difference.
Generalisations are also necessary for political and economic debate. For example,
there is a widespread opinion that globalisation leads to feminisation of poverty and that
poverty is most present in women-headed households. It should also be considered that
such households are not homogenous in terms of marital status, age and class position,
race, and legal status. Thus developed image of women-headed households is greatly
diversified. Also, the direct correlation between women-headed households and poverty is
oversimplified. Households are not poor by definition, that is, poverty in economic sense
does not necessarily mean socio-cultural and psychological poverty. Finally, situation in
a household may be changeable over time. Therefore, the debate on globalisation and
gender can avoid many pitfalls if it understands the multidimensionality of gender.
Translated from Serbian: Women’s Centre for Democracy and Human Rights, Subotica, Serbia
The paper presented at the International Conference “Myths and Reality: Feminist Perspectives
on Globalisation”, organised by the University of Graz, Austria, and Feminist ATTAC Austria, on 11-
14 September, 2003
1. Appadurai Arjun, 1999, “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy” in
Featherstone Mike ed., Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity, London: Sage
2. Appadurai Arjun, 1996, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization, Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press
3. Baden, Sally, 1996, “Gender Issue in financial liberalization and financial sector reform”,
Bridge Report No. 39, Brighton: Institute of Development Studies
4. Davids Tine and van Driel Francien, Globalization and Gender: Beyond Dichotomies in Shuurman
J. Frans, Globalization and Development Studies, Challenges for the 21st century, London, Thousand
Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE Publications
5. Goetz Ann Marie and Sen Gupta Rita, 1994, “Who takes the Credit? Gender, Power and
Control over Loan Use in Rural Credit Programmes in Banglades”, IDS Working Paper No. 8, Brighton:
Institute of Development Studies
6. FENN Seminar Report, 2002, Gender Tools for the Development. A Feminist Economics
Perspective on Globalisation, The Hague: Institute of Social Studies
7. Marchand H.Marianne and Runzan Sisson Anne, 2001, “Feminist sightings of global restructuring:
Conceptualizations and Reconceptualizations” in Shuurman J. Frans, Globalization and Development
Studies, Challenges for the 21st century, London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE Publications
8. Pearson, Ruth and Jackson, Cecile, 1998, «Interrogating Development: Feminism, Gender and
Policu, Introduction” in Jackson, Cecile and Pearson Ruth eds. Feminist Visions of Development:
Gender Analysis and Development, London: Routledge
9. Ross Frankson, Joan, 2002, Women Challengin Globalization, Gender Perspective on the
United Nations International Conference on Financing for Development, Monterrey: WEDO
10. World Economic Outlook, 1997, Washington DC: International Monetary Fund