ABSTRACT
The phrase ‘motherhood protection’ (and its related but subtle variants, ‘protection of the mother’s body’, ‘mother-child protection’, and ‘motherhood security’) has had multiple meanings. Both ‘motherhood’ and ‘protection’ have been understood in differing ways, and the combination of these two words in various contexts and by variously interested individuals has produced a dynamic discursive environment for ‘motherhood protection’. ‘Motherhood’ could mean ability to bear children, pregnancy and childbirth, rearing children, or any combination of these and other conditions. The definition of ‘protection’ depended on the particular understanding of motherhood under discussion and had political implications, as it suggested the implementation of policy. ‘Protection’ was variously reified through such policies as limiting work hours for women, removing women from ‘dangerous’ (to whom? to bodily or moral health?) work, prenatal and childbirth leaves, economic assistance to indigent mothers, and menstruation leave. Thus, the discourse on ‘motherhood protection’ was complex and was addressed in many different ways by feminists and others. With each reinterpretation of the term, its discussants explicitly raised the issue of equality and difference, most finding no incompatibility in both recognizing ‘motherhood’ as a distinct category
and facilitating meaningful work for women, but others arguing that equality and difference were mutally exclusive.
