Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Ethnographic research reveals multiscalar bodily dispossession and unfreedom in migrant domestic workers, highlighting systemic exploitation across national, domestic, and bodily scales.
Singapore's labor-migration regime has come under much scrutiny for the ways in which it unequally positions employers vis-à-vis their migrant "workers." One domestic worker, Rosamie, described the work permit she was issued as a "curse," as it bound her to her employers as property, leaving her vulnerable to exploitation and violence. Drawing on ethnographic research, this article argues that multiscalar geographies of bodily (dis)possession are produced by Singapore's labor-migration regime, which shape migrant domestic workers' everyday lives. By engaging directly with the concepts of possession and dispossession, this article reveals the ways in which migrant domestic workers are themselves rendered bodily possessions in Singapore; with the state, employers, employment agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and ghosts all involved in creating this dynamic. Indeed, as I demonstrate, the permanence, freedoms, and authority of both employers and (shelter-based) ghosts stood in stark contrast to the disposability, unfreedom, and powerlessness that domestic workers (particularly those residing in shelters) often experienced and felt. I also explain how domestic workers' lack of autonomy and bodily (dis)possession was (re)produced at different geographic scales: within the nation, individual dwelling spaces, and the body.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laura Antona (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: