Conforming Women Citizens in the Making. Targeting Migrants Through Gendered Immigrant Integration Policies in Helsinki and Paris

Chapter
Part of the Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning book series (LARI, volume 17)

Abstract

Although contemporary immigrant integration policies are increasingly geared towards fashioning “good” citizens out of migrant women in France and Finland the institutional socialization process performing this work evolves differently and with different inequality related outcomes in the two countries. However, differential national conceptions of women’s citizenship, as real as they may be, do not alone suffice to explain the observed differences. It is neither enough to explain the divergences by the attributes of individual street-level bureaucrats. A careful analysis the local institutional context and ordinary practices of integration is necessary for understanding why these policies (re)produce inequalities through different kind of boundary-work. The comparative case study shows that inequalities are produced more strongly along ethnic boundaries in France and through the contraction of the gender boundaries in Finland that participate in practice in defining the category of deserving citizens.

Keywords

Gender Immigration Integration Local policies Comparison 

References

  1. Alba, R. (2005). Bright vs. blurred boundaries: Second-generation assimilation and exclusion in France, Germany, and the United States. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(1), 20–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amiraux, V., & Simon, P. (2006). There are no minorities here: Cultures of scholarship and public debate on immigrants and integration in France. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 47(3–4), 191–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, E. (2011). The cosmopolitan canopy: Race and civility in everyday life. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  4. Anttonen, A. (1998). Vocabularies of citizenship and gender: Finland. Critical Social Policy, 18(56), 355–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anttonen, A., & Henriksson, L. (1994). Naisten hyvinvointivaltio. Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
  6. Borevi, K. (2012). Sweden: The flagship of multiculturalism. In G. Brochmann & A. Hagelund (Eds.), Immigration policy and the scandinavian welfare state 1945–2010 (pp. 25–96). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bresson, M. (2006). La Psychologisation de l’intervention sociale: mythes et réalités. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  8. Brubaker, R. (1998). Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brubaker, R. (2001). The return of assimilation? Changing perspectives on immigration and its sequels in France, Germany, and the United States. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 24(4), 531–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruun, M., Skraederdaal Jakobsen, G., & Krøijer, K. (2011). Introduction. The concern for sociality—Practicing equality and hierarchy in Denmark. Social Analysis, 55(2), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crenshaw, K. (1993). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 42, 1241–1299.Google Scholar
  12. Dubois, V. (2009). Towards a critical policy ethnography. Critical Policy Studies, 3(2), 219–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dubois, V. (2010). The bureaucrat and the poor. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  14. Duyvendak, J. W., & Bertossi, C. (2009). Modèles d’intégration et intégration des modèles. Migrations Société, 21(122), 26–34.Google Scholar
  15. Fassin, E. (2006). La démocratie sexuelle et le conflit des civilisations. Multitudes, 26, 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fassin, D., & Mazouz, S. (2009). What is it to become French? Naturalization as a republican rite of institution. Revue Française de Sociologie, 50(5), 37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Favell, A. (1998). Philosophies of integration: Immigration and the idea of citizenship in France and Britain. Basingstoke: Palgrave and MacMillan.Google Scholar
  18. Fernando, M. (2013). Save the Muslim woman, save the republic: Ni Putes Ni Soumises and the ruse of neoliberal sovereignty. Modern & Contemporary France, 21(2), 147–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fraser, N. (2000). Rethinking recognition. New Left Review, 3, 107–120.Google Scholar
  20. Goffman, E. (1961). Asylums: Essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates. Garden City: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  21. Graham, M. (2002). Emotional bureaucracies: Emotions, civil servants, and immigrants in Swedish welfare state. Ethos, 30(3), 199–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guénif Souilamas, N., & Macé, É. (2004). Les féministes et le garçon arabe. La Tour-d’Aigues: Éditions de l’Aube.Google Scholar
  23. Guénif-Souilamas, N. (2003). Des Beurettes. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  24. Hachimi Alaoui, M. (2012). L’intégration sous condition : valeurs non négociables et égalité des sexes. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 24(1), 114–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hajjat, A. (2012). Les frontières de l’identité nationale. L’injonction à l’assimilation en France métropolitaine et coloniale. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  26. Haldrup, M., Koefoed, L., & Simonsen, K. (2006). Practical orientalism: Bodies, everyday life and the construction of otherness. Human Geography, 88(2), 173–184.Google Scholar
  27. Hernes, H. (1987). Welfare state and woman power: Essays in state feminism. Oslo: Norwegian University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hochschild, A. (1983). The managed heart, commercialization of human feeling. San Francisco/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hvinden, B., & Johansson, H. (2007). Citizenship in Nordic welfare states – Dynamics of choice, duties and participation in a changing Europe. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Keskinen, S., Vuori, J., & Hirsiaho, A. (2009a). Monikulttuurisuuden sukupuoli. Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
  31. Keskinen, S., Tuori, S., Irni, S., & Mulinari, D. (2009b). Complying with colonialism: Gender, race and ethnicity in the Nordic region. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  32. Kettunen, P. (2001). The Nordic welfare state in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of History, 26(3), 225–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kumlin, S., & Rothstein, B. (2007). Minorities and mistrust: The cushioning impact of informal social contacts and political-institutional fairness. QoG Working Paper Series, 18, 1–33.Google Scholar
  34. Lamont, M., & Molnár, V. (2002). The study of boundaries in social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 167–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lewis, J. (1992). Gender and the development of welfare regimes. Journal of European Social Policy, 2(3), 159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. 30th anniversary expanded ed, New York: Russell Sage Foundation,.Google Scholar
  37. Lister, R., Williams, F., Anttonen, A., Bussemaker, J., Gerhard, U., Heinen, J., & Johansson, S. (2007). Gendering citizenship in Western Europe: New challenges for citizenship research in a cross-national context. Bristol: Polity Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Manier, M. (2010). Le traitement social de la question des « femmes de l’immigration » dans le champ de l’action sociale Les enjeux d’une catégorisation intersectionnelle – ethnique, de genre et de classe – et de ses effets sociaux. Thèse de sociologie, Nice: University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis.Google Scholar
  39. Morgan, K. (2017). Gender, right-wing populism, and immigrant integration policies in France, 1989–2012. West European Politics, 40(4), 887–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Paugam, S. (2011). Repenser la solidarité. L’apport des sciences sociales. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  41. Rajas, J. (2012). Assemblages of pastoral power and sameness. A governmentality of integrating immigrant women. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 2(1), 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rastas, A., Huttunen, L., & Löytty, O. (2005). Suomalainen vieraskirja: Kuinka käsitellä monikulttuurisuutta. Tampere: Vastapaino.Google Scholar
  43. Revillard, A. (2008). Quelles politiques pour quelles femmes ? Une comparaison France-Québec. Revue internationale de politique comparée, 15(4), 687–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rosanvallon, P. (2004). Le modèle politique français: la société civile contre le jacobinisme de 1789 à nos jours. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  45. Saukkonen, P. (2013). Erilaisuuksien Suomi: Vähemmistö- ja kotouttamispolitiikan vaihtoehdot. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.Google Scholar
  46. Siim, B. (2000). Gender and citizenship politics and agency in France, Britain and Denmark. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Spire, A. (2008). Accuellir ou reconduire : Enquête sur les guichets de l’immigration. Paris: Raisons d’agir.Google Scholar
  48. Timmermans, S., & Tavory, I. (2012). Theory construction in qualitative research: From grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociological Theory, 30(3), 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tuori, S. (2009). The politics of multicultural encounters: Feminist and postcolonial perspectives. Åbo: Åbo Akademi University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Työ-ja elinkeinoministeriö (Ministry of Employment and Economy). (2012). Valtion kotouttamisohjelma. (The State’s Integration Programme), Helsinki.Google Scholar
  51. Työministeriö (Ministry of Work). (1997). Maahanmuuttajanaiset Suomessa (Immigrant Women in Finland), Helsinki.Google Scholar
  52. Vuori, J., & Hirsiaho, A. (2012). Stories of alphabetisation, stories of everyday citizenship. Nordic Journal of Migration Research, 2(3), 232–242.Google Scholar
  53. Wimmer, A. (2013). Ethnic boundary making: Institutions, power, networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yuval-Davis, N. (2011). The politics of belonging: Intersectional contestations. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.École des hautes études en sciences socialesCentre Maurice HalbwachsParisFrance

Personalised recommendations