DOI :10.26650/B/SS10.2020.016.09   IUP :10.26650/B/SS10.2020.016.09    Full Text (PDF)

Women’s ‘Connected Lives’ During The Covid-19 Pandemic: From Home to the Economy

Filiz Baloğlu

COVID-19 became a part of our lives as a global health and economic crisis and it brought with it a new reality where individuals feel an increased need for each other. As a result of quarantining, social distancing and hygiene precautions, “home” became the safest place of all, which in turn increased the effort and burden of caring for family members. The crisis increased the visibility of the double burden that women shoulder by both working at jobs and providing care at home. The purpose of this study is to reveal the intersections of domestic life and economy due to the new burdens that women, who are “working from home” or “unemployed” in the COVID-19 process, had to shoulder in the context of care work. Care work sustains life and involves intimate relationships. Intimate relationships that surround domestic life extend from relationships between family members to parents-children-caregivers or patients and doctors. Intimate relationships, by nature, include the irrational as well as the rational. Yet the fact that care work is provided for free in the domestic realm results in this type of work to be excluded by mainstream economics, to be deemed a nonmarket service, and to be only included in the irrational realm. Economic sociology also stands close to economics and focuses more on phenomena within the market. The pandemic has clearly showed that this approach is deficient. From this premise, the foundation of this study is the ‘connected lives’ approach developed by Viviana Zelizer as an alternative in economic sociology, which explains the relationality between intimate relationships and the economy. Zelizer’s approach is based on a series of negotiations that shape individuals’ obligations and rights inside or outside the home, in the framework of this relationality that includes shared understandings and emotions. Pre-pandemic established negotiations in the context of care work that allow women to participate in labor markets have changed. Accordingly, the study tries to exhibit the way these new negotiations are shaping the relationship between domestic life and the economy, and to present foresight on whether new negotiations will continue or not. It is understood that this new way of sharing care work within the household can bring some opportunities as well as the risk of reproducing and reinforcing existing problems. 


  • Bandelj, N. (2012). Relational work and economic sociology. Politics and Society, 40(175), 175-201. google scholar
  • Bandelj, N. (2015). Thinking about social relations in economy as relational work. In P. Aspers & N. Dodd (Eds), Re-imagining economic sociology (pp.227-251). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. google scholar
  • Bandelj, N., Morgan, P. J. &Sowers, E. (2015). Hostile world or connected lives? Research on the interplay between intimacy and economy. Sociology Compass, 9(2), 115-127. google scholar
  • Bora, A. (2005). Kadınların sınıfı. [Women’s Class] İstanbul, Turkey: İletişim Yayınları. google scholar
  • Craig, L. (2020). Coronavirus, domestic labour and care: Gendered roles lock down. Journal of Sociology, 1-9. Retrieved from google scholar
  • Craig, L. & Brown, J. E. (2017). Feeeling rushed. Gendered time quality, work hours, work schedules and spousal crossover. Journal of Marriage and Family. 79(19). 225-242. google scholar
  • Craig, L. & Churchill, B. (2020). Dual-earner parent couple’s work and care during COVID-19. Gender Work and Organization. 1-14. Retrieved from google scholar
  • DW, (2020, April 23). İş hayatının yeni normali: Evden çalışma [The new normal in working life: Working from home]. Retrieved fromş-hayatının-yeni-normali-evden-çalışma/a-53219366 google scholar
  • Elson, D. (1995). Male bias in the development process: An overview. In D. Elson (Ed.) Male bias in the development process (pp. 1-28). Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press. google scholar
  • England, P. (2002). Androcentric bias in neoclassical assumptions. In N. W. Biggart (Ed.) Readings in economic sociology (pp.154-167), Maiden and Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. google scholar
  • England, P. and Folbre, N. (2005). Gender and economic sociology. In N. J. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.) The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 625-649). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press and New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. google scholar
  • Feldman, M. S. & Khademian, A. M. (2007). The role of public manager in inclusion: Creating communities of participation. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions. 20. 305-24. google scholar
  • Folbre, N. (2001). The invisible heart: Economics and family values. New York, NY: New Press. google scholar
  • Folbre, N. (2006). Measuring care: gender, empowerment, and the care economy. Journal of Human Development, 7(2), 183-199. google scholar
  • Folbre, N. (2010). Greed, lust, and gender, a history of economic ideas. Oxford, UK: Oxford UniversityPress. google scholar
  • Folbre, N. (2014). Who cares? A feminist critique of care economy. New York, NY: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung. google scholar
  • Frederickson, M. (2020). Women are getting less research done than men during this corona virüs pandemic. The Conversation. Retrieved from google scholar
  • Fligstein, N. (2002). Agreements, disaggrements, and opportunities in the “new economics ociology of markets”. In M. F. Guillen, R. Collins, P. England & M. Meyer (Eds). The new economic sociology, developments in an emerging field (pp. 61-78). New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation Publications. google scholar
  • Gabster, B. T., Daalen, K. V., Dhatt, R. & Barry, M. (2020). Challenges for the female academic during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet. 395, 1968-1970. Retrieved form journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)31412-4.pdf google scholar
  • Guillen, M. F., Collins, R., England, P. & Meyer, M. (2002). The revival of economic sociology. In Guillen, M. F., Collins, R., England, P. and Meyer, M. (Eds.), The new economic sociology, developments in an emerging field. (pp. 1-32): New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation Publications. google scholar
  • Hochschild, A. (2003). The commercialization of intimate life. Berkeley and Los Angeles, USA: University of California Press. google scholar
  • Hochschild, A. &Machung, A. (2012). The Second Shift: Working Families and the Revolution at Home. London, UK: Penguin Books. google scholar
  • ILO (2018). Care work and care jobs for the future of decent work. Geneva, Italy. google scholar
  • ILO (2019). A quantum leap for gender equality, for a better future of work for all. Geneva, Italy. google scholar
  • ILO (2020a). World employment and social outlook, trends 2020. Executive Summary. Retrieved from https:// google scholar
  • ILO. (2020b). Covid-19 krizinin ev işçilerinin iş ve çalışma süresi kayıplarına etkisi [The impact of Covid-19 crisis on job and working hours loss of domestic workers], Retrieved from groups/public/---europe/---ro-geneva/---ilo-ankara/documents/publication/wcms_748223.pdf google scholar
  • İçli, G. (2011). An sociological evaluation of home-based working and woman labor. International Journal of Sciences and Humanity Studies. 3(2), 229-239. Retrieved from: google scholar
  • Kalaycıoğlu, S. & Rittersberger-Tılıç, H. 2001. Cömert “abla”ların sadık “hanım”ları: evlerimizdeki gündelikçi kadınlar, [The loyal “ladies” of generous “sisters”: charwomen in our houses]. Su Yayınları: Ankara. google scholar
  • Lewis, H. (2020, 19 March). The coronavirus is a disaster for feminism. Pandemic affects men and women differently. Retrieved from: google scholar
  • MEB. (2019). Milli Eğitim İstatistikleri Örgün Eğitim 2018-2019 [National Education Statistics Formal Education 2018-2019]. Retrieved from istatistikleri_orgun_egitim_2018_2019.pdf google scholar
  • Meyer, M. H., Herd, P. & Michel, S. (2000). Care work, gender labor and the welfare state. New York, NY: Routledge. google scholar
  • Milkman, R. & Townsley, E. (1995). Gender and economy. In N. J. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.). Handbook of economic sociology (pp. 600-619). New York, NY: Princeton University Press: Princeton and Russell Sage Foundation. google scholar
  • Miller, C. C. (2020). Nearly half of men say they do most of the home schooling. 3 percent of women agree. The New York Times. Retrieved from google scholar
  • Minello, A. (2020). The pandemic and the female academic. Nature. Retrieved from articles/d41586-020-01135-9 google scholar
  • Moen, P. (1992). Women’s two roles: A contemporary dilemma. New York, NY: Auburn House. google scholar
  • Nash M. & Churchill, B. (2020). Caring during COVID-19: A gendered analysis of Australian university responses to managing remote working and caring responsibilities. Gender Work Organization, 1–14. google scholar
  • Nelson, J. A. (2006). Economics for humans. Chicago, IL and London, UK: Chicago University Press. google scholar
  • Nelson, J. A. (2008). Sociology, economics and gender: can knowledge on the past contribute to a better future? Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper. 09-04. 1-20. google scholar
  • Nelson, M. K. (1995). Family day care as mothering. In J. A. Hatch (Ed.), Qualitative research in early childhood settings (pp. 23–42). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. google scholar
  • OECD.Stat (2020). Employment: time spent in paid and unpaid work, by sex. Data extracted on 13 August 2020. google scholar
  • Ossandon, J. (2019). Situating Zelizer, A Beginner’s Guide. Sociologica.13(3), 185-190. google scholar
  • Smelser, N. J. & Swedberg, R. (1994). The sociological perspective on the economy. In Smelser, N. J. &Swedberg R. (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (pp. 3-26). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press and New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. google scholar
  • Standing, G. (2001). Care work: Overcoming insecurity and neglect. In Daly, M. E. (Ed), Care work, the quest for security (pp. 15-32). Geneva: ILO. google scholar
  • Stone, D. (2000). Caring by the book. In Meyer, M. H., Herd, P. & Michel, S. (Eds.), Care work, gender labor and the welfare state (pp.89-111). New York, NY: Routledge. google scholar
  • Swedberg, R. (2003). Principles of economic sociology. Princeton, NJ and Oxford, UK: Princeton University Press. google scholar
  • Trigilia, C. (2002). Economic sociology: state, market, and society in modern capitalism. Oxford, UK: Black Publishers. google scholar
  • TURKSTAT, (2016). Family Structure Survey, Day care of kids by SR Level 1 and Tree Major Provinces, 2016, Retrieved from google scholar
  • TURKSTAT.(2018). Preference of Care Services by Labour Force Status, Quarter II: April - June, 2018, Retrieved from google scholar
  • TURKSTAT. (2020a). Special Statistics Obtained from Database Yearly 2019. Retrieved from https://biruni.tuik. google scholar
  • TURKSTAT. (2020b). Statistics on Family, Press Release, No: 33730, Retrieved from google scholar
  • UN (2020). COVID-19 and the care economy: Immediate action and structural transformation for a genderresponsive recovery. Retrieved from: policy-brief-covid-19-and-the-care-economy google scholar
  • UN Women (2020). The economic and social impact of COVID-19 on women and men. Retrieved from: https://eca. google scholar
  • UNDP (2020). Gender gaps in the care economy during the covid-19 pandemic in Turkey. Research brief. Retrieved from: html google scholar
  • Zelizer, V. (2000). The purchase of intimacy. Law & Social Inquiry, 25(3), 817–848. google scholar
  • Zelizer, V. (2002). Enterculture. In M. F. Guillen, R. Collins, P. England & M. Meyer (Eds). The new economic sociology, developments in an emerging field (pp. 101-125). New York, NY: Russel Sage Foundation Publications., google scholar
  • Zelizer, V. (2005). The purchase of intimacy. Princeton, NJ:.Princeton University Press. google scholar
  • Zelizer, V. (2007). Pasts and futures of economic sociology. American Behavorial Scientist, 50(8), 1056-69. google scholar
  • Zelizer, V. (2011). Economic lives: how culture shape seconomy. Princeton, NJ:.Princeton University Press. google scholar
  • Zelizer, V. (2012). How I became a relational economic sociologist and what does that mean? Politics & Society, 40(2), 145–174. google scholar


Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.