 |
|
Dialogues@RU is published annually
by the
Writing Program at
Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey
Volume One
Spring 2002
Removing
Cultural Stereotypes to Find Real Differences
Between Doctors and Nurses -
Page 4
by Jon Laor
Willis uses the term "biological essentialism" to show the limited, unwavering point of view of certain literature, showing that they view the lines between men and women as distinct and inflexible and that they explain everything in terms of men dominating women. She then refutes this outlook, stating, "Such a construction over-looks the reality of the workplace." To assert that some literature "over-looks the reality" is a serious accusation, and depends on the writers of this literature to be preoccupied with using ideas that do not come from scientific observation as a basis for scientific papers. This ties in very closely with Martin's idea of reimportation of biological theories. Instead of creating personalities for gametes, this literature creates images of male dominance in all sectors when this is just not the case with nursing, according to Willis. This "biological essentialism" Willis observes is closely related to that of Smoyak's characterization of nursing. In some theories, Willis notes, "the classic doctor-nurse relationship is seen to mirror that of the 19th century family and allows for the expressive-instrumental split in functional roles whereby the nurses were the maids; the matron the wife; the young sons the early career doctors; and the consultant the patriarchal father (Wicks, 1993)" (Willis 299). Is this metaphor a fair description of the way responsibilities are delegated? The weaknesses of these types of theories, based on cultural and social imagery, are explored in Willis' essay. The idea that men and women agree on stereotypical roles, as is implied by Smoyak, seems to be failing as men and women are agreeing on an ideological level to share work. "While there is considerable agreement amongst men and women about sharing this work at the ideological level, serious gaps still exist in practice" (Willis 299). The change in family perspective has shown that males no longer wish to be stuck in their previous patriarchal position, but are still dealing with the changes that they must go through. While it is true that "from the beginning of its modern history nursing was seen to be a caring profession, not just suitable for women but suitable, for the most part, only for women (Okrainec, 1990)" (Willis 299), that only shows that males have something to contribute to this profession as women have been shown to contribute for the doctor profession in Persuad's article. The stereotypes that "care is the action of the subordinate (woman/nurse)" and that " justice is the action of those who have control over their situation (man/doctor) (Tronto, 1987)" (Willis 300) are shown to be as incompatible as the family structure versus labor structures model by the observations of male nurses doing work supposedly reserved for females. The problem with all these articles is that they do not take into account the growing number of male nurses that are doing bedside services for patients. "The literature on male nurses says little about their emotional labour although, by default, it suggests they shy away from this work, moving up the promotional ladder to enjoy (with medicine) control over the work of their female colleagues (Auster, Issacs and Poole, 1996)" (Willis 302). In these articles, male nurses are usually assumed to move into administrative or other non-emotional sectors of nursing. That is not always possible anymore, and the results of having male nurses doing "emotional labor" can be as helpful to ending the divide as having women doctors. Looking at these facts should dispel the stereotype from the science, but unfortunately, it is not so simple. As Martin commented about the effect of new evidence on biological literature, "Clearly, this evidence shows that the egg and sperm do interact on more mutual terms, making biology's refusal to portray them that way all the more disturbing" (Martin 102), so it is disturbing that nursing and doctoring are not treated more equally. If the problem of inequality is to be solved, not only, then, must the facts be brought out, but scientists must be conscious of and avoid cultural importation into science. It is the scientific community, then, that must challenge the assumptions prevalent in scientific literature especially in specific cases, as Willis has done in her article and as I have done of Smoyak.
In the later part of her article, Willis shows how males behave as nurses doing "emotional work", how they view themselves, and how their unique perspective complicates and challenges Smoyak's ideas of gender roles. She states:
Emotional work involves learning the appropriate emotions for our culture; emotional labour is learning and using emotions in the service of others. Hochschild makes the point, in her study of air flight attendants, that women are ideally employed for this emotional labour because of their socialisation. (Willis 300)
The comparison of nurses with flight attendants shows that female dominated professions can, on a surface level, be grouped together, as Smoyak has done. It would be wrong to define these professions as female, because there are males in each profession. It is important to separate and understand the idea of "emotional labor" apart from the idea of what a feminine profession such as flight attendant or nurse is, so that "emotional labor" as a positive force can be used in other professions. "Socialization," meaning training for preparation for social environments, does often make women more likely to enter these professions, but only by instilling in women the values deemed important for these professions. Like the unfounded ideas Martin points to that falsely portray the roles of gametes, it remains unproven that women actually are suited biologically for these professions. Socialization involves a process of dividing the labor of society between men and women, but that process is completely cultural and social, and involves no scientific consideration; this is the process described by Smoyak and certain authors cited in Willis' essay. Understanding what qualities society socializes women to have to be adept at emotional labor may bring out the values important to nursing as distinct from sexual category. In addition, understanding their contributions as physicians, as in Raj Persuad's article, and the contributions of males as nurses, as in Willis' article, can further elucidate what qualities define and differentiate nurses and doctors. According to male nurses in Willis' study:
Male nurses engage in emotional work more readily because they are excluded from women's cultural pursuits on the ward such as gossiping about family, children and husbands, and sex and, secondly, men bring to nursing a male sense of 'paternal responsibility for the household' particularly to patients under their care on the shift. This means that they hone in on the psycho-social issues in order to get to the heart of the matter. (Willis 304)