Prekarisierung

Abstract

»Prekarisierung« ist zum Schlüsselbegriff soziologischer Zeitdiagnostik und Gesellschaftskritik avanciert. Eng gefasst zielt er auf die Erosion von »Normalarbeit«. In erweiterter Fassung bezeichnet er grundlegende Verwundbarkeiten durch ungesicherte Arbeits- und Lebensverhältnisse. Doch was genau ist prekär geworden? Und wer ist auf welche Art und Weise von Prekarisierung betroffen? Diese Fragen sind in sozialen Bewegungen, Politik und Wissenschaft umkämpft. Mona Motakef stellt erstmals die Vielfalt der Diagnosen zu Prekarisierung einführend vor und verbindet Ansätze der Arbeits- und Industriesoziologie, der Geschlechterforschung/Queer Studies und des (Post-)Operaismus.

The Ambiguous Experience of Motherhood in the Western Bohemian Countryside: Exploring Rural Gender Inequalities Through the Framework of Precarity

“…The substantial theoretical contribution of the concept of precarity to inequality research lies in its ability to describe the formation of a structure of inequality and vulnerability, which affects not only the socially most excluded social milieus but reaches far beyond these groups as well. In this regard, it has been suggested that precarity can be understood as an extension of the social exclusion framework because it incorporates the growing fragility and new social risks of broader social milieus into its scope (Motakef , p. 15).…”

“…The concept of precarity has been subject to intense debate within sociology, anthropology and gender studies (Aulenbacher ; Butler ; Castel and Dörre ; Götz and Lemberger ; Vosko et al ; Vosko ; Lorey ; Motakef ; Shaw and Byler ), problematising, amongst others, the immanent narrow concept of work as well as the reduction of precarity solely to contexts of non‐standard employment.…”

“…The concept of precarity has been subject to intense debate within sociology, anthropology and gender studies (Aulenbacher 2009;Butler 2009;Castel and Dörre 2009;Götz and Lemberger 2009;Vosko et al 2009;Vosko 2010;Lorey 2012;Motakef 2015;Shaw and Byler 2016), problematising, amongst others, the immanent narrow concept of work as well as the reduction of precarity solely to contexts of non-standard employment. Vosko (2010) critically examines the relationship between standard, non-standard and precarious employment and argues that even though precarious employment is frequently equated in public discourse with non-standard employment, the processes of precarisation can occur within all forms of work for remuneration.…”