Citation

Febbraro AR. Fem. Psychol. 2003; 13(2): 201-223.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0959353503013002005

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In this article I analyse two research traditions in feminist psychology and apply them to the work/family literature. The similarities tradition (`beta bias') emphasizes how women and men are alike in order to promote the equality and integration of women into existing male-dominated structures. The differences tradition (`alpha bias') emphasizes women's distinct experiences in male-dominated structures in order to bring about more fundamental change. Using the concept of functional equivalence, I argue that the enhancement and scarcity hypotheses in the work/family literature provide a case in point. On the one hand, the enhancement hypothesis suggests that multiple roles (parent, worker, spouse) enhance women's wellbeing, and it has been used to promote the integration of women into existing male-dominated workplaces. On the other hand, the scarcity hypothesis suggests that women, more so than men, experience tremendous work/family stress, and it has been used to highlight the need to systemically transform male-dominated structures. In examining the functions that these hypotheses serve, their utility and consequences, I explore their ideological, epistemological and political implications. I suggest that, rather than viewing these hypotheses/traditions as mutually exclusive, dichotomous alternatives, it is more useful to view them as two sides of a necessary contradiction, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, in particular contexts.