问答题 {{U}}It is frequently assumed that the mechanization of work has a revolutionary effect on the lives of the people who operate the new machines and on the society into which the machines have been introduced.{{/U}} For example, it has been suggested that the employment of women in industry took them out of the household, their traditional sphere, and fundamentally altered their position in society. In the nineteenth century, when women began to enter factories, Jules Simon, a French politician, warned that by doing so, women would give up their femininity. Friedrich Engels, however, predicted that women would be liberated from the "social, legal, and economic subordination" of the family by technological developments that made possible the recruitment of "the whole female sex into public industry". {{U}}Observers thus differed concerning the social desirability of mechanization's effects, but they agreed that it would transform women's lives.{{/U}} {{U}}Historians, particularly those investigating the history, of women, now seriously question this assumption of transforming power. They conclude that such dramatic technological innovations{{/U}} as the spinning jenny, the sewing machine, the typewriter, and the vacuum cleaner {{U}}have not resulted in equally dramatic social changes in women's economic position or in the prevailing evaluation of women's work.{{/U}} The employment of young women in textile mills during the Industrial Revolution was largely an extension of an older pattern of employment of young, single women as domestics. It was not the change in office technology, but rather the separation of secretarial work, previously seen as an apprenticeship for beginning managers, from administrative work that in the 1880's created a new class of "dead-end" jobs, thenceforth considered "women's work". The increase in the numbers of married women employed outside the home in the twentieth century had less to do with the mechanization of housework and an increase in leisure time for these women than it did with their own economic necessity and with high marriage rates that shrank the available pool of single women workers, previously, in many cases, the only women employers would hire. Women's work has changed considerably in the past 200 years, moving from the household to the office or the factory, and later becoming mostly white-collar instead of blue-collar work. Fundamentally, however, the conditions under which women work have changed little since before the Industrial Revolution: the segregation of occupations by gender, lower pay for women as a group, jobs that require relatively low levels of skill and offer women little opportunity for advancement all persist, while women's household labor remains demanding. {{U}}Recent historical investigation has led to a major revision of the notion that technology is always inherently revolutionary in its effects on society. Mechanization may even have slowed any change in the traditional position of women both in the labor market and in the home.{{/U}}
【正确答案】人们经常设想,劳动的机械化对操作新机器的人们的生活及引进机器的社会有着革命性的影响。例如,在工业生产中雇佣妇女使她们走出家庭——她们的传统活动领域,并从根本上改变了她们在社会中的地位。在19世纪,当妇女们开始进入工厂时,朱利斯·西蒙,一位法国政治家,曾警告说如果这样做,妇女们将会丧失她们的女性特征。然而弗里德里希·恩格斯预言妇女们将从家庭中“社会的,法律的和经济的附属地位中”被解放出来,正是技术的发展使吸收“全部女性……进入公共产业”成为可能。因此,观察家们关于社会对机械化影响的效果问题持不同意见,但是他们一致都认为它必将改变妇女们的生活。 历史学家们,尤其是那些研究妇女历史的历史学家,现在对机械化的转变作用这一假设产生了严重的怀疑。他们得出结论说,这些引人注目的工业革新如珍妮纺纱机、缝纫机、打字机及真空吸尘器,没有在妇女的经济地位上或在对妇女工作的普遍看法上引起同样引人注目的社会变革。工业革命时期纺织工厂里年青妇女的雇佣主要是雇佣年轻单身妇女作女仆的旧模式的扩展。这不是办公技术的改变,而是以前被看作是成为经理前的学徒期的秘书工作与管理工作的分离,从而,在19世纪80年代产生了一个“没前途”的新工作类型,从此以后,这类工作被认为是“女人的工作”。20世纪在家庭以外被雇佣的已婚妇女数量的增加,与家务劳动的机械化及这些妇女闲暇时间增多并无多大关系,而更与其相关的是她们自己经济的需要及高结婚率减少了单身女工的来源,而从前,在许多情况中,只有单身妇女是雇主会唯一雇用的。 在过去的二百年中,妇女的工作有着相当大的改变,从家庭转到办公室或工厂,后来由大部分的白领工作代替了蓝领工作。然而自工业革命之前的那个时代以来妇女们的工作条件没有根本性的改变:由性别因素造成的职业的分隔,妇女们整体上的低报酬,需要相对较低技术水平的工作及提供妇女们极少的晋升机会的情况都依然存在,而妇女们仍需做家务劳动。近来的历史调查导致了一种观念的重大修正,这种观念认为技术与生俱来对社会的影响都是革命性的。机械化甚至可能减缓了妇女们在劳务市场上以及在家中传统地位的改变。
【答案解析】