Gender Relations Differ for Different Nations - Essay Example

?Reaction 9: Gender and Nationalism From cursory knowledge of different cultures, it is generally accepted that gender relations differ for differentnations, although Yuval-Davis (1998) notices that they are ignored or considered non-existent. The different perspectives in the study of nations and nationalism were identified as pertaining to territory or state, to culture, and to race. The author perceptively observes that the definition of women’s roles by the state is largely nondescript as citizens’ rights are originally conceived to apply to men and not women. I find this particularly true because in almost all major states, women have had to fight for the right of suffrage and the right to own property, as if it were unnatural that these basic entitlements should apply to women. However, in the social sphere (i.e., in civil society), women are accorded an important status which is not ordinarily contemplated for them in the political sphere. The piece insightfully notes that there is a dualistic nature to women’s citizenship, that aside from women’s inclusion in the application of general legal precepts, there are likewise special statutes which pertain in particular to women, alluding to a specific ideological gender construct, whether favourable or discriminatory to women. While this differentiates women’s legal rights, provisions for benefits such as maternity leaves and similar privileges in labour legislation are not so much the state’s imposition on women, as the result of women’s initiative to fight for considerations that would enable them to exercise the same rights as men (e.g. the opportunity to have a career) as well as continue to perform their biological and social functions (such as bearing and raising children). Radhakrishnan (1992) has a slightly different concept of the interface between nationalism and sexuality. The author regards separately the politics of nationalism and the politics of women, and that an emphasis on one will normally overwhelm the impact of the other. A duality similar to that of Yuval-Davis is conceived by Radhakrishnan; the duality this time is not in regard to women in the legal system, but rather the polarities existing in state politics. These insights were drawn in the context of the Indian state which itself is caught in the duality of East and West, modern and traditional, the mystical and the progressive. While the author discusses this duality in relation to India specifically, it is undeniable that the constructs created may easily apply to nearly any developing country with a colonial past and on the threshold of accelerated growth. The discussion by Radhakrishnan began strongly with the premise of gender relations in the state; however, somewhere in the course of the discussion the topic veered exclusively into the realm of Indian politics and relegated the issue of sexuality and gender relations to the background. What one may deduce from this is that gender is but one of the details subsumed into the greater issue of nationality and statehood. Towards the end, the author concentrated on insights by Nehru and Gandhi, which, while valuable to the discussion on India, does not quite square with the discussion of nationalism and gender. It seems as if the treatment of gender is but incidental to the broader issue of the duality of a post-colonial state. Exploring the topic of duality and taking it further, the article by Kandiyoti (1991) comments on the outright contradictions that exist in former colonial societies. In this case, society’s control over women becomes the manifestation of a nation’s identity and cultural distinctiveness. In the emergent nation, as the people gain their status as individual citizens endowed with rights, their traditional regard for women will have to evolve in order to accommodate the extension of the benefits of citizenship to women. Women’s emergence as citizens is “predicated upon the transformation of institutions and customs” (Kandiyoti, 1991, 429) that had formerly bound the social actors to particular ethnic and religious traditions that discriminate against women. To effect this change, state intervention plays a major role in redefining these institutions and customs. Unfortunately, the same interventionist measures are perceived as a farce by pundits who note that women are recognized by the state and allowed to engage in activities (i.e. employment) traditionally reserved for men only when the situation calls for it, and then relegate them again to the domestic life when the dire situation has resolved itself. This occurs to me to be particularly true in times of war, when majority of the male work force are drafted into the military and sent to the front, while women fill in on the vacated positions. This is the nature of the contradiction elaborated on by the author, that the state relegates women “to the margins of polity,” (Kandiyoti, 1991, p. 429) denying women political equality and the centrality with which their role is regarded in the social context. Thus, the transformation towards post-colonial society is usually accompanied by a re-thinking of political and cultural conventions that legitimised women’s subordination. References Kandiyoti, D 1991 “Identity and its Discontents: Women and the Nation,” American Journal of Political Science, vol 35 pp. 428-442 Radhakrishnan, R 1992 “Nationalism, Gender, and the Narrative of Identity,” in Parker, A; Russo, M; Sommer, D; and Yaeger, P (eds.) Nationalism and Sexualities, Routledge, London Yuval-Davis, N 1998 “Gender and nation.” In Wilford, R & Miller, R L (eds.) 1998 Women, ethnicity and nationalism: The politics of transition. Routledge, London Reaction 10: Gender, Armed Conflict and Political Violence The series of readings on the role of gender in armed conflict and police work are generally regarded as a recent development in the evolution of women’s social roles. Traditionally, in Western civilization at least, women did not have any role in the front lines at war or in crime fighting, being relegated mostly to the tending of the wounded or the administrative jobs. Post- WWII saw a rise in the significance women began to play as fighting soldiers, and during peace time, as police officers imposing public order. This is the more sensational concept of women in relation to war. The more dire aspects – the effect of war on women and their families as victims of war, is often overlooked. US imperialist policies that have created war-states, particularly in the Middle East, has led to “the militarization of daily life for people around the world and within the USA,” most of whom are people of colour, refugees and immigrants, a greater proportion of whom are women and children (Mohanty, Pratt & Riley, 2008, p. 3). The treatises under the Feminism at War: confronting US imperialism series is an inquiry into the role of women “as motivation and justification” for the United States to involve itself in armed conflict, particularly in the case of Afghanistan and Iraq where war was commenced by the US (Mohanty et al., 2008, p. 1). The U.S. war on terrorism is a war declared practically against the whole world, leading its own citizens and those across its borders into a constant consciousness of impending siege (Davis, 2008, p. 19). In this, Davis construes two types of feminism: one is a feminism that fights for women’s rights to equality even in inflicting the ravages of war. In this I agree with Davis’ observation that feminism should not be merely circumscribed by the individualistic rights system that espouses women’s equal entitlements to participate in military conflicts, to inflict torture and kill, which goes hand in hand with the right to be tortured and killed in combat. The author poingnantly drives home the point that the interment of a female soldier, killed in combat in Iraq, was “a palpable expression of women’s equality, the dead woman’s right to a military funeral.” The other type of feminism is one that opposes the resort to military offensive action as another approach to the fight for “equality” between the genders. Rather than conceive of equality on the basis of standards of dominance created by men, the female position could be to advocate for the equal right for both men and women to refuse to participate in armed engagement, or even the equal right to be free from militarism as a nation. At one point, however, Davis begins to distinguish individual accomplishments as anathema to collective advancement. I disagree with the author’s statement that women of colour who rise to positions of responsibility and discretion in the military militates against racial and gender equality. Where their achievements were uncoerced and even personally aspired for, then there is every reason to believe that such presence would to some degree work to preserve the historically subjugated communities from particularly oppressive treatment, as far as their functions and actions are able to influence. Gender roles are not merely limited to male and female, as far as the military is concerned. Not too long ago, the repeal of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military signalled the full and open acceptance of homosexuals (or individuals with same-sex orientation) in the U.S. military service. This takes the discourse out of the male-female paradigm and into the broader scope of discrimination against “sexually exceptional” (whether heterosexual or otherwise) citizens (Pura, 2008, p. 47). Thus, the dialogue premised on the hetero-normative community is modified to incorporate the homosexual components. Increasingly the issues gravitate towards personal rights rather than class or gender struggle, as “sexually exceptional” individuals admit of an absence of distinguishing attributes, referring more to an aggregate of people with various orientations rather than possessing a single set of characteristics. Finally, the article by Cockburn (1999) is a World Bank commissioned report intended as a background paper on forced migrations. Its concern revolved around political violence that erupts into armed conflict. At the outset, the author verbalizes what may be viewed as the ambiguity of the premises of the discussion, that the idea of “armed conflict” or “political violence.” The situation presented to establish context was that of the Columbine High School shooting in Denver, Colorado, which involves only two gunmen, both teen agers, who advocate no political position, and who engage in a one-way killing spree. I would contend that this is not armed conflict in the political sense, but rather a criminal situation with an element of psychological perversion. The author, however, sees this as the “micro-conflict” that parallels the “macro-conflict” of systematic ethnic aggression by political regimes, that both instances are attributable to the implications of male-ness, of “being a boy.” For me, this is a rather big leap of logic, and is highly untenable. References Cockburn, C 1999 “Gender, Armed Conflict and Political Violence.” Section 2 Workbook/Readings/3 Gender, Armed Conflict and Political Violence. The World Bank. Accessed from http://repository.forcedmigration.org/show_metadata.jsp?pid=fmo:5013 Davis, A Y 2008 “A vocabulary for feminist praxis: on war and radical change.” Feminism and War: Confronting US Imperialism. Riley, R L; Mohanty, C T; & Pratt, M B (eds.). Zed Books, London Mohanty, C T; Pratt, M B; & Riley, R L 2008 ”Introduction: Feminism and US wars – mapping the ground.” Feminism and War: Confronting US Imperialism. Riley, R L; Mohanty, C T; & Pratt, M B (eds.). Zed Books, London Puar, J 2008 ”Feminists and queers in the service of empire.” Feminism and War: Confronting US Imperialism. Riley, R L; Mohanty, C T; & Pratt, M B (eds.). Zed Books, London Reaction 16 For most people, Islamist precepts do not seem to fit foursquare with the concepts associated with “feminism.” The feminist movement is thought of as outspoken, sometimes militant, and revolutionary in so far as it seeks to establish a redefinition of the role of women in society and in the state. It is therefore interesting to note that a consciousness of the inequality between the genders predates the earliest contact of Islamic societies with the concept of secular feminism, branding Islamic feminism as an indigenous movement unique from that of its Western counterpart. Feminism in Islamic societies where society is oppressively patriarchal is said to be more appropriately described as “feminine” rather than “feministic,” in contrast to the more militant form of this movement in other countries. Mojab (2001) presents Islamic feminism as an indigenous alternative to Western-style feminism. Since Islamic countries, though united by a common belief, have a wide range of practices in their faith that range from the nearly liberal to the extremely rigid, it helps to know that Mojab’s discussion is situated within the context of Iranian theocracy. In this regard, the Islamisation of the relationship between the genders is perceived to have created an oppressive patriarchal order that legal reforms could not adequately address. The rule of religion in the Iranian state has given not only legitimacy but divine mandate to the subjugation of women under the male-dominated theocracy. Women of a feminist persuasion as well as scholars and academics call for the separation of state and religion, the article claims. While this is true, it however tends to create a dilemma on the part of devout Muslim women who dwell in the belief that the state is endowed by Allah with the mandate to enforce their interpretation of the Quran. The more outspoken feminists would tend to advocate a break with the dominant religious tradition, without espousing a break with the faith. This is evident enough in many pre-modern literary creations of women writers, dated sometime in the late 19th to early 20th century who decried the gender discrimination while remaining steadfast to the ideals expressed in the Quran. The fundamental differences between Islamic feminism and conventional feminism is likewise perceived by Kandiyoti (1991), which she terms as the parochialisms of each to its own contexts. The confusion is enhanced by the words and terminologies commonly used in both, though applying them to their respective contexts. Despite the perceived variations, there has been little attempt or motivation to reconcile the two movements. To me, this is only to be expected, as the Islamic version of the movement has distinctly religious overtones and implications which any segment of Western society would be reluctant to engage, for fear of being interpreted as being overly judgmental of another faith. Kandiyoti identified three phases in the development of “women’s studies” by Islamic academics. Each phase represented a different outlook in terms of feminist theorizing, and does not appear to be chronological. The first phase has to do with “combating androcentric bias,” highlighting the apparent absence of women as social actors, resulting in the writing of history and social theory as embodying the purely male perspective. The second phase of feminist discourse dealt with the search for an explanation in events and traditions of the past for what seems to be the universal subordination of women across several cultures. Much of this argumentation rested on customary and legal obstacles that prevented women from fully participating in society, on prejudices and stereotypes based on their physical attributes, or rather how they are generally perceived to be. The third phase transcends feminism and moves on to gender roles and their significance. This links with the earlier treatise on gender and nationality and that of gender and war, where the arguments encompassed the role of individuals of different sexual preferences than heterosexual. Kandiyoti’s insights in this matter is quite persuasive, because it traces the progression of gender studies and their reflection on the evolving social regard and tolerance for the different genders. Finally, Badran (2005) discusses opinions that appear to agree with Mojab, i.e., that for women to be accorded their desired equality, there must be a fresh interpretation of the Quran, in the reconsideration of fiqh and the construction of a new jurisprudence. One of the stereotypes of the old Muslim traditions concerning women that has contributed to their oppression is the concept of women and their sexual purity being linked with the honour attributed to men and their families, though sexual purity is defined in different ways. This linkage may be seen in most other non-Islamic cultures and societies, although in not as severe a manner, but nevertheless its acceptance provides an excuse for men to exercise control over women purportedly in defense of their honour. Such deep-seated reform will come sooner with education and debate, but until then, women and their bodies will continue to serve as symbols that would tend to relegate them to subordinate positions to that of men. References: Kandiyoti, D 1996 “Contemporary Feminist Scholarship and Middle East Studies.” Gendering the Middle East: Emerging Perspectives. I.B. Tauris & Co., Ltd., London. Mojab, S 2001 “Theorizing the Politics of ‘Islamic Feminism’.” Feminist Review. http://www/tandf.co.uk/journals Sikand, Y 2005 ”Islamic Feminism is a Universal Discourse: An Interview with Margot Bedran,” Qantara.de: Dialogue with the Islamic World. Accessed 4 October 2009 from http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_article.php/_c-307/_nr-26/_p-1/i.html Read More