Susie S. Porter, in “And That It Is Customs Makes It Law,” highlights the class conflict and gender ideology during the 1880s and 1900s in Mexico. The laws denied females the opportunity to take part in business, thus restricting their roles to the home. The women who tried to make a living through their talents faced legal sanctions during this period. Women struggled in the public sphere to receive recognition as working women, which resulted in class conflict. Cultural understandings of women during the period remained in constant flux. Practices of female seclusion remained visible during the period. However, social relationships changed in the upper and middle classes as females represented themselves as part of the working class. Society’s rejection of working-class women was the result of customs that suggested such work was immoral.
Gendered Space and the Exclusion of Working Women
Women during the period found themselves in predicaments with limited opportunities for survival. Women who were concerned about helping their families in miserable situations faced limitations. Regarding the government’s act of removing a poor woman’s selling business, Trejo wrote, “I am obliged to plead to the father of us the poor, that he concedes what would be for me a fortune, that I will be allowed to sell my cakes, and God will compensate you for this act of nobility” (Porter 112). The history of Mexico reveals that women like Trejo struggled to define a place for themselves. Gender ideology resulted in class conflict as municipal regulations promoted the concept of the working woman. Society played a significant role in creating gender stereotypes and beliefs; “a gendered space approach argues that specific spaces have become associated with either masculine or feminine attributes” (Porter 113). Women were not allowed to take roles outside the traditional rules of femininity. Customs associated business with masculinity and eliminated similar opportunities for women. The social relationship between men and women was also dependent on the perceived differences between the sexes. Customs were more focused on assigning power to males and making them dominant members of society.
Female Vendors and Resistance to Municipal Control
The changing roles of women in the public sphere were the result of conflicting relationships between vendors and the upper class. Several attempts were made to remove female participation from public spheres, but women’s recognition as part of the working class increased with time. The struggles of vendors focused on receiving their rights and, more specifically, working rights. Trejo and other women wanted to change their lives by contributing to society. They believed that only through work could they provide relief to their families and support them against poverty. The state took strict actions to remove women from public spheres, as the laws instructed inspectors to remove vendors selling fried and grilled food, coffee, and sandwiches because the majority of them were women. Irrespective of several laws passed to eliminate female vendors from municipal markets, they continued to sell their food. Porter mentions that the women “continue to abuse this tolerance, occupying large sections [of certain municipal markets], interrupting the passage of pedestrians” (Porter 120). Mexican women in 1903 were ready to accept all the challenges to gain recognition as members of the working class. The presence of women in public spheres increased with time as more women started vendor businesses. By 1907, women had developed the strength to deal with social stigmas, but they were in no position to accept strict laws.
Poverty, Morality, and Women’s Public Presence
Gender ideology was also apparent, as the presence of women on the streets became a direct question of morality. Women were able to justify their positions, as the central cause for their presence in public spheres was the need for money. The majority of women engaged in vendor businesses were poor or widowed and lacked financial support. Under such conditions, they exhibited high motivation to work for betterment. Their presence was not a question of morality but rather reflected rejection of the idea that women could compete with men by taking similar roles. Immorality was a less relevant question for males who took advantage of women because of their repressed status. Males were reluctant to recognize women’s rights even when women asserted them in public spheres.
Male Privilege and the Exploitation of Female Workers
Gender ideology was the most prominent force in the promotion of such beliefs, as the state and authoritative entities were not willing to accept new roles for women. Men tried to claim their rights to sell, which played a negative role and resulted in female repression. They denied females the same rights, moving them to the least profitable corners of the market. Porter captures the situation: “men in positions of power felt privileged to attempt to take sex from women who worked on streets regardless of their desires or marital status” (Porter 133). Males exploited females and tried to take advantage of customs and laws. Customs put women in less favored positions where they could not compete with males in public spheres. For years, women accepted restricted working spheres because they lacked the power to claim equal rights.
Class Conflict and the Recognition of Working Women
Class conflict illustrates female inequality in many ways, as it portrays the less favored position of women compared with men. Females remained victims of social sanctions and customs that denied their presence in public spheres. Society was accustomed to seeing females in oppressed positions irrespective of their efforts and talents. Women’s struggles and consistent efforts to gain working-class status changed social relationships. Males associated working women with immorality and identified them as unrespectable. Females never gave up and used their strengths to make a change by entering the public sphere. The need for money and a better life motivated women to work.
Work Cited
Porter, Susie S. “And That It Is Customs Makes It Law.” The Working Classes and Urban Public Space 24.1 (2000): 111-148.
Academic Master Education Team is a group of academic editors and subject specialists responsible for producing structured, research-backed essays across multiple disciplines. Each article is developed following Academic Master’s Editorial Policy and supported by credible academic references. The team ensures clarity, citation accuracy, and adherence to ethical academic writing standards
Content reviewed under Academic Master Editorial Policy.
