Since
the Dec 16th gang rape in New Delhi, there has been much commentary
about the status of women in India. Many have pointed out that we are all
witting and unwitting collaborators in perpetuating subtle and arrant practices
of discrimination against women. From cultural ‘lakshman rekhas’ or boundaries
that prevent or discourage women from participating actively in society, to social
customs that dictate appropriate behaviours for women, especially in the areas
of morality, sexuality, and dress code, there’s ample evidence that there are
dual and separate standards for the two sexes. When the problem is everywhere,
and all pervasive, as is the issue of women’s status in India, the solution
must also be one that can be applied everywhere and in a pervasive manner.
Top-down solutions are capable only of ‘trickle-down’ effects, and not capable of
larger brush-stroke changes. For a solution to bring about meaningful alterations within a single lifetime, it must begin with a broad base that is common to
women of all ages, socio-economic, educational and ethnic backgrounds.
So
how does one even begin to think about solutions to a problem that can be
described as: Changing the perception that women can be violently abused and
then discarded as trash – from a moving bus? While this description pertains to
the specifics of one recent and well-publicized incident, the gist of it applies
to a million more. The key elements are that women are abusable and then expendable.
In its extreme form, the dispensability of women is nowhere more evident than
in the practice of sex-selective abortions and female infanticide. This is a
crime in which women are equally culpable as men. When expendability is applied
to adults, we see dowry deaths and bride/wife-burning. We see suicides by
victims of rape, where the lack of recourse to justice and shame over the
violation contribute to sending the woman down the path of complete self-destruction.
Manifestations of abuse are too varied
in manner and severity to peg into a few categories, but the most prominent one,
high on the severity scale is rape. It has proved to be so successful as a tool
in acquiring control and power that it is now a much relied upon “weapon” of
warfare in some parts of the world. Questions that have no simple answers are:
Which type of rape is more dysfunctional – the one committed in isolation for
no apparent tangible gain, or the ones committed as a part of a larger strategy
to gain power? How are they different, and what do they have in common? On a
moral level, they are both equally vile. On a social level, rapes that are not
committed as a means to some larger end are perhaps more disturbing, and
indicative of greater social dysfunction than the ones committed for obvious
gain. What they both share in common, though, is the recognition by the
perpetrators that women can be easily manipulated to work against themselves. Why
else would victims of rape be subjected (by men and women) to so much shame and
self-recrimination?
A
paradigm shift in perception is required before any substantive changes can be
observed in the position of the beleaguered women. This paradigm shift is not
only about how men view women, but especially how women view themselves and
other women.
A
person’s identity is a complicated amalgam of associating oneself with many
social groups and social roles. Social Identity Theory describes identity as
the outcome of highlighting the similarities with members of the in-groups and
exaggerating the differences with members of the out-groups. In trying to
understand worldwide rape statistics, post-rape suicide, female
foeticide/infanticide and non-violent manifestations of female oppression in
the context of social identity, it is easy to see that women’s self-perception
should be the logical starting-point of remediating efforts. Gender-identity
should stem from meaningful differences between the sexes, and not be clouded
by a blind quest for “equality.” Gender-identity should celebrate the unique
characteristics, capabilities and limitations of the “weaker sex,” and not be
defensive about women’s obvious conflicts of interest when motherhood and
career overlap for her maximum attention. And lastly, gender-identity issues
should be framed in neutral language that avoids connotations of otherness and
exclusion.
An elaboration in the next segment….
I've been in India for over two years now and one thing that drives me crazy is constantly referring to women as the "fairer sex" in the media, especially in articles that are trying to pass as serious journalism. Small changes such as using the word "women" instead or not using cartoons to illustrate articles about rape are so easy to make and would be a start in changing people's attitudes. It's so depressing to read the news regularly here.
ReplyDelete