Barbara Ehrenreich's works “ Nickel and Dimed” and “Global Women” align with feminist perspectives and reveal the gendered nature of economic oppression. In “Nickel and Dimed”, American author Ehrenreich exposes the challenges faced by women in low-wage jobs by going undercover in a variety of minimum-wage jobs, emphasizing that women are overrepresented in precarious positions. Beyond this, “Global Women” extends this analysis globally, showing how women from poorer countries take on demanding roles to maintain the lifestyles of first-world women. It also shows that women do not meet as allies and that women suppress their demands and are more patient in doing the division of labor they complain about, marking the perpetuation of the global class economy. Feminists argue that Ehrenreich's findings reflect broader societal expectations of women, both domestically and globally. The plight of women in low-paying jobs has led to the perpetuation of traditional gender roles in which women are expected to be carers and suppress their needs. The global context highlights how these gender dynamics persist across cultures and economic systems, reinforcing feminist critiques of systemic gender inequality. From a Marxist perspective, Ehrenreich's work offers a perspective on the structural inequalities embedded in the capitalist system. The emphasis on the inability of a single low-paying job to meet the basic needs of life in "Nickel and Dimed" emphasizes the economic disparity between the working class and the bourgeoisie. The lack of health insurance, savings, or the right to join a union further illustrates the vulnerability of the working class within the framework of capitalism. In The Global Woman, images of women from poor countries working in demanding, low-wage jobs reflect the Marxist narrative of capitalist exploitation on a global scale, in which the working class from poorer regions maintains the lifestyles of the bourgeoisie in the First World. Marxists see Ehrenreich's findings as consistent with the inherent contradictions of capitalism, whereby the working class is exploited for the benefit of the bourgeoisie. The division between employers and employees is evident in both works, symbolizing the class relations perpetuated by capitalism.

Although feminist and Marxist perspectives agree on the existence of systemic inequalities as depicted by Ehrenreich, they differ in their focus of attention. Feminists emphasize the gender dimension, focusing on social expectations and the traditional emphasis on gender roles. Marxists prioritize class struggle, emphasizing the exploitation of the working class by the bourgeoisie. Despite these differences, the two theories share commonalities in their critique of systemic inequality, pointing to the interconnectedness of gender and class dynamics in shaping women's labor experiences within the capitalist framework.

In conclusion, Barbara Ehrenreich's works “ Nickel and Dimed” and “Global Women” offer insights from both feminist and Marxist perspectives that reveal the gendered nature of economic oppression and structural inequality within the capitalist system.

Feminist Perspective:

From a feminist point of view, Barbara Ehrenreich's studies in "Nickel and Dimed" and "Global Woman" highlight how being a woman and working in jobs with low pay connect in a big way. Feminist thinkers would say that ladies, particularly those doing jobs that don't pay much, deal with both money problems and the expectations society has just for them. In "Nickel and Dimed," where lots of women are in low-wage jobs, often looking after kids as well, it fits with what feminists say about how work and home duties are divided. The battle to make enough money is tied to the fight against traditional views on what women should do. In "Global Woman," it shows how poorer women from different countries work hard in demanding jobs for very little money. Feminist thinkers might say that this exploitation of these women helps richer women in richer countries keep their comfortable lives, making the power difference between women even stronger.

Marxist Perspective:

Thinking like a Marxist, Ehrenreich's work helps us see the problems and unfairness in systems like capitalism. Marxist thinkers would say that jobs with low pay, like the ones in "Nickel and Dimed," show how workers are being used to make the rich even richer. The workers do a lot, but they don't get enough money to live well. In "Global Woman," the movement of women from poorer countries to richer ones for jobs like cleaning or sex work shows how capitalism works globally. Marxists would say this keeps rich countries powerful and poorer countries weak. The connection between bosses in rich countries and workers in poor countries, whether they're doing housework or sex work, is a clear example of how the rich keep getting richer by taking advantage of the working class.

Barbara Ehrenreich's insights, viewed through feminism and Marxism, highlight the intertwined issues of gender, work, and economic systems. Feminism exposes the double burdens on women in low-paying jobs, while Marxism shows how these jobs fuel the wealth of the rich, widening global gaps. These perspectives call for a reevaluation of societal norms and economic structures to address the inequalities faced by women in the workforce and on a global scale.

Marxist perspective:

Economic oppression and class struggle: Analyze the water pollution depicted in the film and explore whether there is an economic system that oppresses ordinary people. Focus on the conflict between corporate profit pursuit and workers' rights, and how capitalist economic structures can lead to environmental damage.

Environmental justice: Thinking about environmental issues from a Marxist perspective and taking into account that vulnerable groups in society are disproportionately affected by environmental issues. Water pollution cases in movies can be used to explore the concept of environmental justice, that is, whether there is an unfair distribution of resources and the environment in society.

Social Change: Erin Brockovich represents in the film how one individual can promote social change by exposing injustices. This can lead to a discussion about Marxist theories of social change and revolution, and the role of the individual in this process.

Feminist perspective:

Gender Roles and Workplace Challenges: A feminist perspective on how Erin Brockovich confronts gender discrimination and challenges in the workplace. Focus on how she coped with these difficulties as a female single mother and succeeded in her career.

Women's Liberation and Autonomy: Erin Brockovich's story can be seen as an illustration of women's quest for liberation and autonomy in society. Explore how she challenged traditional gender roles and societal expectations, and how she succeeded by standing up for her beliefs.

Collective action: Consider the role of women in collective action in the exposure of water pollution portrayed in the film. This can spark a conversation about how women can drive social change through solidarity and collaboration.

The core idea of feminism is a social movement and theoretical system of gender rights. Their core goal is equality between men and women, which includes many aspects such as work, salary, social status, etc. They seek equality and enjoy the same power and treatment as men. And emphasized that women should have autonomy in all aspects and not be assigned or taken advantage of. The pursuit is to be equal with men in all aspects. And Ehrenreich's 2003 co-edited collection Global Woman points out a Vietnamese bride who sends orders, a Mexican nanny in California, a Sri Lankan care worker in Greece, a Filipino cleaner in Hong Kong, Dominican sex workers in Germany - these women do very demanding work for very little pay. Or women who need to take care of their families and work at the same time, they tend to be paid less than their male counterparts and work more demanding and do not enjoy the same pay and benefits

What feminism and Marxism have in common is the struggle against unfair treatment in society. While Marxism is mainly reflected in the proletariat and capitalism about money, while feminism is mainly reflected in the unfair treatment between men and women, but their essence is all about the unfair things in society

Marxist focuses on the oppression of a large majority, the working class, by a small ruling capitalist class. It explores how economic structures shape societies, emphasises the conflict between classes, critiques exploitation in capitalism, and envisions a revolutionary transition to socialism and, ultimately, communism. Marxists would criticise the exploitation of women from poorer countries by women from the first world. These women work in very demanding jobs for very little money. They serve first world women and allow first world women to maintain a quality lifestyle. As Marxism argues, the working class must sell their labour for less than its worth.

Feminism concentrates on gender inequality and domination, where men occupy more positions of power and other privileges. Feminists will criticise gender inequality in the division of labour, highlighting the detailed experiences of these women. Many of those working in minimum wage jobs such as cleaners, waiters and supermarket assistants are women. In many cases, women work and take care of their children at the same time, and men are not able to share such tasks as cooking or cleaning. This makes it necessary for women to suppress themselves. This reflects the gender pay gap and reinforces gender stereotypes. Women are still in traditional gender normative roles.

Overall, both feminism and Marxism focus on inequalities in society. The difference is that feminists place more emphasis on gender inequality, while Marxists would focus on the broader economic structures that drive such inequalities.

First, Marxism and Feminism are conflict theory. They are all forces on inequality and social structure, not individuals. Also, they are calling for change in society. According to Nickel, Dimed, and  Barbara Ehrenreich’s ethnographic work, she went undercover. She worked in various minimum wage jobs, like a cleaner, waitress, and supermarket assistant, without any of her savings. Many workers in these jobs are women, and many women also have to support children. This shows how inequality appears in the society. For example, people in the lower class have fewer opportunities to choose jobs, and they have to do demanding, exploitative and dangerous jobs, all while coping with poor managers. Females also have no opportunity to do the job that they want to apply.

On the other hand, Marxism and Feminism are focusing on the things differently. Marxism always focuses foremost on class, and feminism always prioritises gender. Marxism focuses on the oppression of a large majority, the working class, by a small ruling capitalist class. Nickel, Dimed, and  Barbara Ehrenreich’s ethnographic work described how demanding, exploitative and dangerous these jobs are, all while coping with poor managers. That means the people in the lower class have to do some hazardous jobs. Feminism focuses on gender inequality. For example, Vietnamese brides ordered by post, Mexican nannies in California, Sri Lankan nurse-carers in Greece, Filipino cleaners in Hong Kong, and Dominican sex workers in Germany -- these women, who work in very demanding jobs for extremely little pay, allow first world women to maintain their lifestyles. Women would be required to be patient, nurturing and suppressing their needs, while the men would not know how to cook or clean. It is not forced on the wealthy people in society. It now focuses on why females always have fewer opportunities to choose what they want to do than men. The power that women have may be more potent than that of men. Women should have the same opportunity or chance as men.

In conclusion, Marxism and Feminism focus on the inequality that appears in society in a macro way. However, they have some differences. Marxism focuses on the foremost class, while Feminism focuses on the inequality of gender.