Voices of Guatemalan Women in Los Angeles

Understanding Their Immigration

Gabriele Kohpahl

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• eBook ISBN: 9781317733362
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

First published in 1999. Guatemalan immigration is part of a trend where more women in an increasing number of countries than men participate in transnational migration. This research attempts to clarify the causes for this phenomenon. First, it evaluates which Guatemalan women initiators and pioneers in the decision to migrate. Second, it looks at women's diverse reasons for leaving Guatemala, and third, what are the conditions particular to women left behind? This study will also contribute to an understanding of the increasing diversification of the Latin American immigrant population in the United States.

Chapter 1
Introduction

Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) statistics reported that 50 percent of all undocumented immigrants detained at the U.S./Mexican border are women (Golden 1992). Women from Central America and Mexico are entering the United States in increasing numbers. National statistics show that Guatemalan immigration to the United States is female dominated (Donato 1992:161). Guatemalan immigration is part of a trend where more women in an increasing number of countries than men participate in transnational migration (Donato 1992). This research attempts to clarify the causes for this phenomenon. First, it evaluates which Guatemalan women initiators and pioneers in the decision to migrate. Second, it looks at women's diverse reasons for leaving Guatemala, and third, what are the conditions particular to women left behind?

This study will also contribute to an understanding of the increasing diversification of the Latin American immigrant population in the United States (Lopez et al. 1996, Totti 1987). According to the 1990 census, over 65 percent of Los Angeles County's population are immigrants from Latin America. Although the majority of all Latin American immigrants in Los Angeles are from Mexico, there are other large Latin American immigrant communities in the city. Guatemalans are the third largest Latin American immigrant community in Southern California (Brownstein-Santiago 1992, Ramos 1997), but have received very limited attention from social scientists.

The massive influx of Central Americans into Los Angeles occurred only very recently, during the early eighties, due to increased political violence combined with the economic decline of the region. Due to the Central American political and economic crisis Los Angeles has the largest concentration of Central Americans outside Central America (Ramos 1997). As a largely undocumented refugee population, Central Americans belong to the most disenfranchised and politically least influential sections of the population in Southern California (Ward 1987, Ramos 1997). While the Mexican community has produced its own scholarly research and is fighting heavily for a share of power in Los Angeles, Central American voices remain largely silent. Therefore, there is little knowledge about the identity and origin of this section of the population.

Women’s Complex and Diverse Motivations for Immigration

This study compares selected case studies of Guatemalan immigrant women who decided to immigrate with cases where the women did not make their own decision to immigrate to the United States. It contributes an understanding of the conditions in Guatemala that prompted their migration. Chant and Radcliffe (1992) pointed out that there is a lack of understanding about the diversity of women's causes for immigration and participation in the decision process for migration within one nationality.

Therefore, this study focuses on a range of conditions that perpetuate Guatemalan women's immigration to the United States such as their personal, marital and familial relationships; gender-role constraints; the socioeconomic and political situations in Guatemala. It especially focuses on how women's marital status affect their opportunity to decide to emigrate and how this intersects with socioeconomic and political causes. Case vignettes demonstrate how different causes are represented differently in each woman's lives.

Feminist immigration theory proposes three components for the analysis of female migration: (1) socioeconomic reasons, (2) familial reasons and (3) gender role constraints (Crummett 1987, Morokvaśic 1984, Safa 1987). This feminist framework has been modified for this study. Hamilton and Chinchilla (1991) demonstrated how socioeconomic and political reasons for immigration are intrinsically inseparable for Central Americans. The ongoing civil war in Guatemala demanded a high toll of lives; many Guatemalans left as political exiles. Therefore for the Guatemalan case, political causes for immigration need to be considered as well.

Organization

The aim of this introductory chapter is to present the research problem and questions.

Chapter 2 reviews major theoretical approaches in immigration literature and summarizes the main issues concerning female immigration.

Chapter 3 summarizes research methodology and presents the research setting. It discusses accessing and conducting research with an undocumented refugee population.

Chapter 4 provides background information for understanding the context of Guatemalan women's immigration stories. It introduces economic, marital and political situations of women in Guatemala.

Chapter 5 interprets and presents the case studies of Guatemalan women who made their own decision to immigrate to the United States. It analyzes the conditions that allow women to make their own decision to immigrate and how this fact conforms with the traditional perception of gender roles in Guatemala. Individual case vignettes demonstrate how causes for immigration are differently represented in each woman's life.

Chapter 6 evaluates the cases of Guatemalan women who did not make their own decision to immigrate to the United States. It analyzes the conditions of women who did not come on their own initiative and how this affects women's power to make decisions about their own lives. Furthermore, it examines whether women who migrate as dependents match common notions of immigrant women's passivity in the process of transnational immigration. Case vignettes illustrate the general findings.

Chapter 7, the conclusion, brings together the principal findings of this book. It evaluates their significance in terms of current debates. It discusses how the findings have implications for future research.

Chapter 2
Women and Immigration

To understand the conditions that perpetuate Guatemalan women's immigration to the United States, it is necessary to know the theoretical foundations of migration research and how it applies to women. First, a history is provided of migration/immigration theory and how it has been applied to the study of female migration processes. Second, the feminist critique of traditional migration research is summarized. Finally, a synopsis of the literature on women's migration provides an overview of what other researchers identified as the conditions and causes for female transnational migration. This summary of other studies will furnish approximate gender ratios in transnational migration, which circumstances hinder women and which conditions expedite women's transnational migration. Because this study concentrates on the women's living circumstances in Guatemala before immigrating, it will specifically focus on what other authors identified as conditions in women's home-communities or home-countries that allowed women to leave.

Immigration Theory

Generally speaking, there are two theoretical perspectives that explain population movements: the micro-analytical and the macro-analytical approach. Recently, both approaches have been combined in the study of migrant households (Crummett 1987, Pessar 1982). All these approaches, developed by economists (Chant 1992), are based on economic explanations for migration and ignore political, environmental or individual reasons.

The earliest model explaining population movement is the equilibrium model of labor migration, also referred to as the microeconomic study of labor migration. The microeconomic orientation is rooted in neoclassical theory which assumes that the economy is ruled by an individual's active choices (Wood 1982:299). Early microeconomic studies of immigration were demographic analysis of such parameters as immigration rates, levels of migrants' formal education, sex and age ratios of migrants (Castro, Gearing and Gill 1984, Crummett 1987:243). Early demographic models described only the phenomenon of immigration, but did not explain what causes migration. The microeconomic approach has been criticized for its neglect of the historical context of migration and the fact that it emphasizes the positive effects of migration. The first theoretical model that sought to explain migration was the microeconomic "push-pull model" (Crummett 1987:243, Spengler and Myers 1977:11). It names labor markets as the cause for population movements. The push-factor points to the lack of economic opportunities and the stagnation of the local economy at the place of origin. For example, restricted land resources, low wages and high unemployment in rural areas force people to leave their communities (Georges 1990). The pull-factor is the demand for labor in the city or country of immigration. The relatively high wages in cities or a highly industrialized country attract migrants. The "push-pull model" describes migration as a process that equalizes the supply and demand in a free labor market. Migrants provide the necessary work force for the receiving country or city and migrants send remittances home and provide for the economic development of their home communities (Georges 1990:3). It ignores the costs of migration, for example, migrants often work in underpaid, dead-end jobs and are more vulnerable to economic exploitation.

In contrast to the microeconomic orientation, the macroeconomic or historical-structural model of labor migration considers broader trends of "social, political and economic change and conflict" (Crummett 1987:244) as main reasons for migration. As the historicalstructural model is ideologically rooted in Marxism, broader socioeconomic forces determine migration and not the individual's free choice (Bach and Schraml 1982:324). The historical-structural approach has had diverse proponents and includes a variety of explanatory models such as dependency theory, the center-periphery model and global accumulation (Wood 1982:301). However, it focuses entirely on economic factors and excludes non-economic factors that influence migration patterns. For example, dependency theory emphasizes the dependency of poorer nations' development on wealthier countries. The center-periphery model assumes migration proceeds from societies on the economic periphery, such as Guatemala, to societies in the core with advanced industries and more capital, such as the United States (Meillassoux 1981, Pessar 1982:342). The global accumulation theory is based on the fact that richer countries accumulate capital which allows them to control world labor markets (Sassen-Koob 1984:1144).

During the eighties, advocates of contemporary immigration theory recognized that both of the existing models of labor migration that focus on economic forces had disadvantages. Whereas the microeconomic model stressed the individual migrant's free choice in the migration process (Portes 1978), the macroeconomic model ignored the microanalytical perspective completely. The latter failed to take into account individual decision making processes (Crummett 1987:304-306) and denied the fact that migrants may be active in attempting to determine their own lives (Bach and Schraml 1982:324).

Recently, household economics or household strategy approach (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:22) has been perceived to be the ideal link (Pessar 1988:195) between the microeconomic and macroeconomic models of labor migration. The household and its members are influenced by both micro and macroeconomic conditions. Internal and transnational migration is perceived as a strategy for household survival. Typically, for representatives of household economics, decisions for migration are seen as made not by individuals but by a collective, the household. The household has an internal structure of microeconomic and social relations and is connected to the outside macroeconomic, historical and social context. For example, the internal power relations in a household determines who migrates and who stays. However, the need to migrate in general depends on the larger socioeconomic situation and changing external structures are accommodated by migration of household members (Pessar 1988:197).

Immigration Theory and Women

The neoclassical, microanalytical approach has not been used to conduct research on female immigration, but it has been utilized as a theoretical framework to understand women's immigration processes. It assumes that there are no differences between male and female migration and that higher wages in cities or industrialized countries attract both women and men. Furthermore, it considers the migration of women exclusively as marriage partners. The neoclassical, microanalytical approach has been criticized for addressing female migration processes inadequately because it does not recognize that women's migration processes are different from those of men. It fails to consider gender and class related causes for women's migration and regards women as disconnected from macroeconomic conditions (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:20).

Early studies using historical-structural approach failed to consider addressing gender differences in the migratory process (Crummett 1987:244). Later studies used a historical-structural perspective describing female migration as a result of changes in the global economy (Saasen-Koob 1983, 1984). Female migration is seen as the result of unequal development in the worldwide capitalist system. Capitalism draws specialized labor from specific areas (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:21). For example, women from poorer nations are incorporated into the United States manufacturing industries, such as garment industry in the United States, an industry that would not exist in the industrialized countries if it did not use a supply of underpaid immigrant women to compete with low-cost producers in other countries (Sassen-Koob 1983, 1984). Similarly, young women have been migrating to "Free Trade Zones" in Mexico, Puerto Rico and South East Asia to provide cheap labor for manufacturing industries (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:21). The historical-structural approach has been criticized for emphasizing women's role in production and neglecting women's reproductive roles. Productive roles consist of women's participation in wage labor. Reproductive roles include childbearing, child care and domestic chores (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:22, Brydon and Chant 1989:10-11). Those responsibilities often limit women's participation in migration processes.

Household economics has especially been used to understand women's migration processes. Among the different theoretical approaches, household economics appealed to researchers who are concerned with female migration such as Patricia Pessar (1982,1988), Sarah Radcliffe (1986, 1992) and Sylvia Chant (1992). Using the household as the unit of analysis, they were able to include gender relations as a variable to analyze migration processes. Household economy brought attention to how power relations in the household shape decision making processes and division of labor in the household (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:23). Those gender role expectations, might for instance, make women solely responsible for raising children and absolving men from involvement in household activities. Therefore, those men might be more likely to participate in migration than women (Chant and Radcliffe 1992:23). Although, household economics presents a breakthrough in the study of female migration it has some major drawbacks. The problem with theoretical models in general, such as household economics, is that there is a tendency to homogenize women's situations within a nationality and not to consider the variety of cases. Furthermore, household economics portrays women only acting as part of a group, the household. It ignores the fact that women, besides pursuing collective interests, might have individual, noneconomic reasons for migration, like the desire to escape from oppressive, violent situations. In addition, household economics heavily emphasizes economic motivations as a counter-reaction to traditional immigration research that postulated that women do not have any economic reasons for migration.

Feminist Critique of Traditional Migration Research

Early immigration research used a neo-classical or a historicalstructural perspective primarily on men's migration (Morokvasic 1984:899) and then generalized those findings for all migrants, men and women. It regarded men as pioneers and risk-takers in the migration process (Brettell and Simon 1986:3, Lamphere 1986:274). Those studies denied that women could be pioneers in the migration process and could have gender specific reasons of their own to participate in the migratory process. These traditional research approaches studied female migration only in terms of sex ratios and not of gender roles (Castro, Gearing and Gill 1984:4). The prototypes of sex ratio oriented studies are demographic analyses based on census material which are not concerned with the women's own reasons for migration because they were presumed not to have any reasons of their own. Reasons for female emigration were considered to be private and linked to men's migration because supposedly, they always followed male authority figures in their process of migration. Female migration was considered uninfluenced by macroeconomic conditions (Crummett 1987:242, Morokvasic 1984:898). This ideology is still reflected in how scholars and governments define women's migrant status as dependents of spouses or relatives (Morokvaśic 1984).

Feminist research opposed these traditional approaches. For instance, the title of Morokvaśic's (1984) review-article on female migration "Birds of Passage are also Women ..." was a reaction to Michael Piore's (1979) important and widely cited book "Birds of Passage" which was mainly concerned with male migration. Feminist migration research first drew attention to the importance of gender in the migration process and how it might be related to factors associated with class, race and socioeconomics while embracing the macroanalytic reasons as well (Castro, Gearing and Gill 1984, Crummett 1987:247, Morokvasic 1984). It focussed on the meaning of being female in the migration process (Castro and Gill 1984:8) and included sex roles, sexual division of labor, ideological constructions and self-perceptions of women in the study of migration. Furthermore, feminist migration research demonstrated that female migration processes differed from male's and that women could take the initiative to migrate (Boyd 1986, Caspari and Giles 1986, Morokvaśic 1984).

However, there are three major limitations in the new feminist literature on migration. Feminist mig...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Tables
• Acknowledgments
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Women and Immigration
• Chapter 3: Specific Characteristics of the Research Population and Research Methodology
• Chapter 4: Guatemalan Women in Context
• Chapter 5: Women Who Made the Decision to Immigrate
• Chapter 6: Women Who Did Not Make Their Own Decision to Immigrate
• Chapter 7: Conclusion
• References