IT was more than a century ago, in 1870, that Queen Victoria wrote to
Sir Theodore Martin complaining about "this mad, wicked folly of
'Woman's Rights'." The formidable empress certainly did not herself need
any protection that the acknowledgment of
women's rights might offer. Even at the age of eighty, in 1899, she
could write to A.J. Balfour, "We are not interested in the possibilities
of defeat; they do not exist." That, however, is not the way most
people's lives go - reduced and defeated as
they frequently are by adversities. And within each community,
nationality and class, the burden of hardship often falls
disproportionately on women.
The afflicted world in which we live is characterised by deeply unequal
sharing of the burden of adversities between women and men. Gender
inequality exists in most parts of the world, from Japan to Morocco,
from Uzbekistan to the United States of
America. However, inequality between women and men can take very many
different forms. Indeed, gender inequality is not one homogeneous
phenomenon, but a collection of disparate and interlinked problems. Let
me illustrate with examples of different
kinds of disparity.
(1) Mortality inequality: In some regions in the world,
inequality between women and men directly involves matters of life and
death, and takes the brutal form of unusually high mortality rates of
women and a consequent preponderance of men in
the total population, as opposed to the preponderance of women found in
societies with little or no gender bias in health care and nutrition.
Mortality inequality has been observed extensively in North Africa and
in Asia, including China and South Asia.
(2) Natality inequality: Given a preference for boys over girls
that many male-dominated societies have, gender inequality can manifest
itself in the form of the parents wanting the newborn to be a boy rather
than a girl. There was a time when
this could be no more than a wish (a daydream or a nightmare, depending
on one's perspective), but with the availability of modern techniques to
determine the gender of the foetus, sex-selective abortion has become
common in many countries. It is
particularly prevalent in East Asia, in China and South Korea in
particular, but also in Singapore and Taiwan, and it is beginning to
emerge as a statistically significant phenomenon in India and South Asia
as well. This is high-tech sexism.
(3) Basic facility inequality: Even when demographic
characteristics do not show much or any anti-female bias, there are
other ways in which women can have less than a square deal. Afghanistan
may be the only country in the world the government
of which is keen on actively excluding girls from schooling (it combines
this with other features of massive gender inequality), but there are
many countries in Asia and Africa, and also in Latin America, where
girls have far less opportunity of
schooling than boys do. There are other deficiencies in basic facilities
available to women, varying from encouragement to cultivate one's
natural talents to fair participation in rewarding social functions of
the community.
(4) Special opportunity inequality: Even when there is relatively
little difference in basic facilities including schooling, the
opportunities of higher education may be far fewer for young women than
for young men. Indeed, gender bias in higher
education and professional training can be observed even in some of the
richest countries in the world, in Europe and North America.
Sometimes this type of division has been based on the superficially
innocuous idea that the respective "provinces" of men and women are just
different. This thesis has been championed in different forms over the
centuries, and has had much implicit as
well as explicit following. It was presented with particular directness
more than a hundred years before Queen Victoria's complaint about
"woman's rights" by the Revd James Fordyce in his Sermons to Young Women
(1766), a book which, as Mary
Wollstonecraft noted in her A Vindication of the Rights of Women (1792),
had been "long made a part of woman's library." Fordyce warned the
young women, to whom his sermons were addressed, against "those
masculine women that would plead for your sharing
any part of their province with us," identifying the province of men as
including not only "war," but also "commerce, politics, exercises of
strength and dexterity, abstract philosophy and all the abstruser
sciences."1 Even though such
clear-cut beliefs about the provinces of men and women are now rather
rare, nevertheless the presence of extensive gender asymmetry can be
seen in many areas of education, training and professional work even in
Europe and North America.
(5) Professional inequality: In terms of employment as well as
promotion in work and occupation, women often face greater handicap than
men. A country like Japan may be quite egalitarian in matters of
demography or basic facilities, and even, to
a great extent, in higher education, and yet progress to elevated levels
of employment and occupation seems to be much more problematic for
women than for men.
In the English television series called "Yes, Minister," there is an
episode where the Minister, full of reforming zeal, is trying to find
out from the immovable permanent secretary, Sir Humphrey, how many women
are in really senior positions in the
British civil service. Sir Humphrey says that it is very difficult to
give an exact number; it would require a lot of investigation. The
Minister is still insistent, and wants to know approximately how many
women are there in these senior positions. To
which Sir Humphrey finally replies, "Approximately, none."
(6) Ownership inequality: In many societies the ownership of
property can also be very unequal. Even basic assets such as homes and
land may be very asymmetrically shared. The absence of claims to
property can not only reduce the voice of women,
but also make it harder for women to enter and flourish in commercial,
economic and even some social activities.2 This type of
inequality has existed in most parts of the world, though there are also
local variations. For example, even though
traditional property rights have favoured men in the bulk of India, in
what is now the State of Kerala, there has been, for a long time,
matrilineal inheritance for an influential part of the community, namely
the Nairs.
(7) Household inequality: There are, often enough, basic
inequalities in gender relations within the family or the household,
which can take many different forms. Even in cases in which there are no
overt signs of anti-female bias in, say,
survival or son-preference or education, or even in promotion to higher
executive positions, the family arrangements can be quite unequal in
terms of sharing the burden of housework and child care. It is, for
example, quite common in many societies to
take it for granted that while men will naturally work outside the home,
women could do it if and only if they could combine it with various
inescapable and unequally shared household duties. This is sometimes
called "division of labour," though women
could be forgiven for seeing it as "accumulation of labour." The reach
of this inequality includes not only unequal relations within the
family, but also derivative inequalities in employment and recognition
in the outside world. Also, the established
fixity of this type of "division" or "accumulation" of labour can also
have far-reaching effects on the knowledge and understanding of
different types of work in professional circles. When I first started
working on gender inequality, in the 1970s, I
remember being struck by the fact that the Handbook of Human Nutrition
Requirement of the World Health Organisation (WHO), in presenting
"calorie requirements" for different categories of people, chose to
classify household work as "sedentary activity,"
requiring very little deployment of energy.3 I was, however,
not able to determine precisely how this remarkable bit of information
had been collected by the patrician leaders of society.
No comments:
Post a Comment