The Paradox of Female Gift Giving
In contrast to our usual thinking, giving is inherently asymmetrical.
Power may be involved in gift giving in several ways. Gifts may enhance
personal status or power. They create a relationship of debt and dependency
between giver and recipient in which the possibility of power abuse
is always present. Gifts, and with them the identity of the giver, may be
refused. Gift giving to some people excludes others from the material and
immaterial benefits implied in this practice. In gift exchange structural
inequality of resources may be involved; on the basis of power inequality
some people feel obliged to give much while receiving little, whereas
others, though poor givers themselves, are endowed with abundant gifts.
How do women, as the greatest givers and recipients, come into this
picture? In the light of the many possibilities to exercise power by means
of gift giving, it is too easy and even misleading to consider women’s
greater liberality as the mere expression of noble feeling. In addition to
affection, respect, or gratitude, also manipulation, flattering, or being
in need of personal attention are common motives to give (of course,
this applies to both genders). Women seem to be no exception when
painful, hurting, or offending gifts are given and, after all, are not the
most notorious poisoners in history of the female sex?
Another explanation draws upon structural power asymmetries between
women and men and upon the difference in resources fromwhich
power may be derived. It is not clear which gender benefits most from
women’s liberality. On the one hand, women’s gift giving may be considered
as a manifestation of gendered power inequality, because this is what
they are expected to do as housewives. Their liberality may turn against
them, for example, when they sacrifice their own autonomy for the sake
of others. On the other hand, giving by women entails many attractive
benefits to themselves as well: closer relationships and more extended social
networks, and, therefore, a greater chance to receive attention, care,
or help from others when necessary.Moreover, women receive relatively
many material gifts themselves, which is also a pleasant aspect. How the
balance of benefits or disadvantages for women as greatest givers will
exactly weigh out depends on their personal power resources and social
circumstances.
Women’s gift giving is caught in a fundamental paradox. On the one
hand, their gift exchange may be considered a powerful means of affirming
social identities and of creating and maintaining social relationships.
Women’s activity in this domain might be interpreted as an effort “to
secure permanence in a serial world that is always subject to loss and
decay” (Weiner 1992: 7). On the other hand, given their unequal societal
and economic power compared with that of men, women incur the
risk of losing their own identity by giving much to others. In the act
of giving, women are simultaneously creating the opportunity to keep
or gain power, and making themselves vulnerable to the loss of power
and autonomy.Weiner’s idea about “keeping-while-giving” – exchanging
things in order to keep them – is a perfect illustration of this paradoxical
tension in women’s gift giving: to overcome the threats of loss – of their
own selves, of their power vis-`a-vis men, and of important social bonds –
they give away abundantly. And, as a consequence of giving abundantly,
they are facing the threat of losing their autonomy. It is as though men’s
greater societal and economic power not only renders it less urgent for
them to engage in substantial gift giving but also protects them from loss
of autonomy through giving to other people.
The gender difference in gift giving illustrates the substantial role of
women in creating the social cement of society. Although many forms of
solidarity are not gendered at all, this applies neither to gift giving nor to
informal care, a type of solidarity that is discussed in Chapters 6 and 7.
Despite their increased emancipation, women still have the largest share
in informal care. In these cases solidarity is clearly related to gender.