Moors, Jureidini, Özbay, Sabban 153economy also had an effect on non-oil-exporting countries in the Arab
Middle East, such as Lebanon and Jordan. The latter witnessed the devel-
opment of new middle classes, often based—at least in part—on the remit-
tances sent home from employment in the Gulf states. Changing family
structures also stimulated the employment of paid domestic labor, as the
younger generation tended to leave the extended family early in the life
cycle and the growth of women’s education and their subsequent employ-
ment further increased the need for paid help for housework, childcare,
and elderly care. Simultaneously, local women who may have done this
work previously were able to leave this unattractive field of employment
as other sources of income became available. The net result has been that
it is mainly migrant women from South and Southeast Asia who are cur-
rently engaged in this work. Because they may well earn ten times what
they could make if locally employed, even well educated women who
would never consider working as a domestic at home go abroad to gain
employment as domestic workers.^5
e rise in migrant domestic labor does not only enable female Th
employers to work in the public sphere; it also facilitates a particular
higher-status lifestyle that could not be sustained without domestic work-
ers.^6 While in some settings employing a migrant domestic worker was in
itself an indication of the status and standing of the employer’s household,
further distinctions also become important. Nationality is a major marker
of stratification among migrant domestic workers. Filipina domestics,
among the first to come as migrant labor to the Middle East, tend to be
held in high regard and are often the best paid because of their high level
of education, good knowledge of English—an asset especially appreci-
ated in households with children of school age— their “modern” appear-
ance and their professionalism. Yet the arguments employers provide for
or against particular categories of domestic workers are far from stable.
They are often stereotypical and change over time, partly because they
are developed in contrast to domestics from other nationalities. With the
more recent influx of Indonesian domestic workers in the Middle East, for
example, Filipinas are increasingly seen as “too assertive” compared to the
Indonesians workers’ “obedience.” As Muslims, the Indonesian domes-
tics are also perceived as being “cleaner” and “more civilized” than the Sri
Lankan women working in large numbers in the Middle East.