[照顾孩子,一个工作就像其他人一样?]

IF 0.3 4区 教育学 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI:10.1080/00309230.2010.526350
Françoise Bloch
{"title":"[照顾孩子,一个工作就像其他人一样?]","authors":"Françoise Bloch","doi":"10.1080/00309230.2010.526350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article has its roots in the basic contradictions, which go back to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, between the self-interest and the care of others, exemplified by the delegation of responsibility for the care of children and other vulnerable persons. This splitting of human life-supporting activities has sealed women's dependence on men by setting off the lucrative area from the private, non-lucrative sphere of activities. These contradictions become paradoxical as soon as we consider the delegation of responsibility for the care of a child to someone not related to the child. This article addresses the question of how the child's developmental needs can be met without damage to his/her sensitivity, and his/her perception of others or of the cooperation involved. As soon as it is born, the child, a thoroughly interactive being, discerns the relationships it entertains with those who are in charge of him/her. The persons - mostly women - who take care of the child are not interchangeable, since they bring their own subjectivity into their dealings with the child and this is reciprocal. The women's skills, frequently thought to be “undefinable”, but which many women, whether related or not to the child, have developed or should develop, are brought into play and are either transmitted or acquired in the course of their care of the child; these skills are not by nature “feminine skills”, but they require a great deal of reactivity and sensitivity and therefore, many child professionals, mothers' aids and children's care-takers in the home are hurt and insulted by the low esteem in which they are held. These skills and human qualities, which are the result of feelings more than of formalised knowledge, techniques or theories - albeit these are also necessary - make child care and child rearing an art. These skills seem to be in total contradiction with those that are current in the world of labour, where the tempo of work, flexibility of working hours, the evaluation criteria and anxiety are conditioned by economic considerations and rest on purely monetary factors. Finally, a recognition of these sensitive qualities - when it is given - must of necessity be inter-subjective but also be societal. The latter requires a new, different organisation of the labour world, one which recognises the diversity of human activities, where each can find a sense of social usefulness by contributing to the satisfaction of others' social needs and having one's own needs satisfied by others - by many others. This would presuppose reversing the meaning of the division of labour and of life-maintaining activities by placing greater emphasis on “interest in others”.</p>","PeriodicalId":46283,"journal":{"name":"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA","volume":"46 6","pages":"833-45"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00309230.2010.526350","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Take care of a child, one work like any other?].\",\"authors\":\"Françoise Bloch\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00309230.2010.526350\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article has its roots in the basic contradictions, which go back to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, between the self-interest and the care of others, exemplified by the delegation of responsibility for the care of children and other vulnerable persons. This splitting of human life-supporting activities has sealed women's dependence on men by setting off the lucrative area from the private, non-lucrative sphere of activities. These contradictions become paradoxical as soon as we consider the delegation of responsibility for the care of a child to someone not related to the child. This article addresses the question of how the child's developmental needs can be met without damage to his/her sensitivity, and his/her perception of others or of the cooperation involved. As soon as it is born, the child, a thoroughly interactive being, discerns the relationships it entertains with those who are in charge of him/her. The persons - mostly women - who take care of the child are not interchangeable, since they bring their own subjectivity into their dealings with the child and this is reciprocal. The women's skills, frequently thought to be “undefinable”, but which many women, whether related or not to the child, have developed or should develop, are brought into play and are either transmitted or acquired in the course of their care of the child; these skills are not by nature “feminine skills”, but they require a great deal of reactivity and sensitivity and therefore, many child professionals, mothers' aids and children's care-takers in the home are hurt and insulted by the low esteem in which they are held. These skills and human qualities, which are the result of feelings more than of formalised knowledge, techniques or theories - albeit these are also necessary - make child care and child rearing an art. These skills seem to be in total contradiction with those that are current in the world of labour, where the tempo of work, flexibility of working hours, the evaluation criteria and anxiety are conditioned by economic considerations and rest on purely monetary factors. Finally, a recognition of these sensitive qualities - when it is given - must of necessity be inter-subjective but also be societal. The latter requires a new, different organisation of the labour world, one which recognises the diversity of human activities, where each can find a sense of social usefulness by contributing to the satisfaction of others' social needs and having one's own needs satisfied by others - by many others. This would presuppose reversing the meaning of the division of labour and of life-maintaining activities by placing greater emphasis on “interest in others”.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46283,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA\",\"volume\":\"46 6\",\"pages\":\"833-45\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00309230.2010.526350\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2010.526350\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PAEDAGOGICA HISTORICA","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2010.526350","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这一条款的根源在于可以追溯到18世纪和19世纪的基本矛盾,即个人利益与照顾他人之间的矛盾,例如将照顾儿童和其他弱势群体的责任委托给他人。人类维持生命活动的这种分裂,通过将有利可图的领域与私人的、非有利可图的活动领域区分开来,使女性对男性的依赖得到了加强。一旦我们考虑到把照顾孩子的责任委托给与孩子没有关系的人,这些矛盾就变得自相矛盾了。本文探讨的问题是如何在不损害儿童敏感性的情况下满足儿童的发展需要,以及他/她对他人或所涉及的合作的看法。孩子一出生,作为一个完全互动的存在,就能辨别出他与那些负责他/她的人之间的关系。照顾孩子的人- -主要是妇女- -是不可互换的,因为她们把自己的主观性带进她们与孩子的交往中,这是相互的。妇女的技能常常被认为是“无法界定的”,但许多妇女,无论与孩子有无关系,已经发展或应该发展这些技能,并在照顾孩子的过程中发挥作用,要么是遗传的,要么是获得的;这些技能本质上不是“女性技能”,但它们需要大量的反应性和敏感性,因此,许多儿童专业人员、母亲艾滋病患者和家中儿童的照顾者受到伤害和侮辱,因为他们受到的尊重很低。这些技能和人类品质是情感的结果,而不是形式化的知识、技术或理论的结果——尽管这些也是必要的——使照顾孩子和抚养孩子成为一门艺术。这些技能似乎与目前劳动世界中的技能完全矛盾,在劳动世界中,工作节奏、工作时间的灵活性、评价标准和焦虑都是由经济考虑决定的,完全取决于金钱因素。最后,对这些敏感品质的承认——当它被给予时——必须是主体间的,但也必须是社会的。后者需要一种新的、不同的劳动世界组织,一种承认人类活动多样性的组织,在这种组织中,每个人都可以通过为满足他人的社会需求做出贡献,并使自己的需求得到他人——许多其他人的满足,从而找到一种社会有用感。这将预先假定通过更加强调“对他人的兴趣”来颠倒劳动分工和维持生命活动的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Take care of a child, one work like any other?].

This article has its roots in the basic contradictions, which go back to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, between the self-interest and the care of others, exemplified by the delegation of responsibility for the care of children and other vulnerable persons. This splitting of human life-supporting activities has sealed women's dependence on men by setting off the lucrative area from the private, non-lucrative sphere of activities. These contradictions become paradoxical as soon as we consider the delegation of responsibility for the care of a child to someone not related to the child. This article addresses the question of how the child's developmental needs can be met without damage to his/her sensitivity, and his/her perception of others or of the cooperation involved. As soon as it is born, the child, a thoroughly interactive being, discerns the relationships it entertains with those who are in charge of him/her. The persons - mostly women - who take care of the child are not interchangeable, since they bring their own subjectivity into their dealings with the child and this is reciprocal. The women's skills, frequently thought to be “undefinable”, but which many women, whether related or not to the child, have developed or should develop, are brought into play and are either transmitted or acquired in the course of their care of the child; these skills are not by nature “feminine skills”, but they require a great deal of reactivity and sensitivity and therefore, many child professionals, mothers' aids and children's care-takers in the home are hurt and insulted by the low esteem in which they are held. These skills and human qualities, which are the result of feelings more than of formalised knowledge, techniques or theories - albeit these are also necessary - make child care and child rearing an art. These skills seem to be in total contradiction with those that are current in the world of labour, where the tempo of work, flexibility of working hours, the evaluation criteria and anxiety are conditioned by economic considerations and rest on purely monetary factors. Finally, a recognition of these sensitive qualities - when it is given - must of necessity be inter-subjective but also be societal. The latter requires a new, different organisation of the labour world, one which recognises the diversity of human activities, where each can find a sense of social usefulness by contributing to the satisfaction of others' social needs and having one's own needs satisfied by others - by many others. This would presuppose reversing the meaning of the division of labour and of life-maintaining activities by placing greater emphasis on “interest in others”.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
40.00%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: "Paedagogica Historica is undoubtedly the leading journal in the field. In contrast to a series of national journals for the history of education, Paedagogica Historica is the most international one." A trilingual journal with European roots, Paedagogica Historica discusses global education issues from an historical perspective. Topics include: •Childhood and Youth •Comparative and International Education •Cultural and social policy •Curriculum •Education reform •Historiography •Schooling •Teachers •Textbooks •Theory and Methodology •The urban and rural school environment •Women and gender issues in Education
期刊最新文献
Subject-specific classroom: technologisation of the pedagogical space in East Germany (SBZ/GDR, 1949–1989) Article of the Year Award Julian Huxley and a biological approach to education in British East Africa during the interwar era “Looking for pen pals”: internationalist upbringing in a school of the Lithuanian SSR in the late Soviet era Experimental education projects and their data collection. Policy history on experiments with “children’s life questions” in welfare-state Sweden late 1960s to early 1970s
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1