Moors, Jureidini, Özbay, Sabban 165Ethiopia had become virtually the only form of paid domestic labor in
the Emirates.^38
resent-day migrant domestic workers find themselves in a very dif-P
ferent position from those engaged in earlier forms of domestic employ-
ment. First, whereas in the case of domestic slavery (but also to a consid-
erable extent with evlatlıks) these girls were cut off from their families of
origin, they were integrated, if in a subordinate position, in the household
of employment. With the development of the nation-state, the legal regu-
lation of nationality and residence—based on patrilineal kinship rather
than on residence—has taken center stage in enabling and disabling forms
of settlement. Such laws have become particularly restrictive in those
states where expatriates outnumber the national population, for instance
in Kuwait and especially the United Arab Emirates.^39 Whereas present-
day domestics have many more possibilities to keep in touch with their
families back home through technologies such as email and cell phones,
they have virtually no possibilities to settle in their country of employ-
ment. The result is that even having worked there for decades, they remain
temporary workers dependent upon their visa-sponsor.^40 Furthermore,
regulatory policies frequently force migrant workers to deal with at least
two different legal systems, that of their country of origin and that of their
country of employment, with certain acts legal according to one system
and illegal according to the other. Some countries, for instance, only allow
women to migrate as domestics abroad if they are over a certain age or
earn a certain minimum income, yet many of the countries where they
work do not follow such legislation.^41
e relation of migrant domestic workers to public space has also Th
been transformed with respect to the activities and positions of their
employers. Migrant domestic workers do not only find themselves in a
different labor relation; the meanings of being present in public space
have also changed dramatically. When, among the better off, the seclusion
of women was still an expression of high status, the presence of domes-
tic slaves and other female low-status workers in the public enabled their
female employers to remain secluded. In other words, these women’s
presence in gender-mixed public spaces was not so much an opportu-
nity for mobility, but rather an indication of, and further contribution
to, their low status position. This began to change with the growth of