Gender and Sexual Studies - Essay Example

Gender and Sexual Studies Summary Interracial rape has always been a taboo subject among proponents of self management and self determination. It paints radical feminists as anti social feminists and against the broad left (Bell & Nelson, 1989:404). In addition, it creates accusations of prioritising sexism over racism by black lobbyists, of opportunistic Caucasians sparking new hostilities among aborigines – a very fraught topic however, who represents the pain, risk and shame faced by the aboriginal female victims? Aboriginal women have always been left to pick up the pieces when they suffer violence from their spouses and their communities (Bell and Nelson, 1989:403). In addition, they are exposed to violent acts because of a lack of protection by their indigenous societies. For example, there are certain roles that are specific to aboriginal women which they must always perform unless they are incapable of doing so due to sickness or other serious handicaps. However, they can suffer violent and sexual attacks because of failure to perform their duties when they are viewed as perfectly capable. On the other hand, men are rarely subjected to any form of violence even when they repeatedly fail to perform their traditional duties (Bell and Nelson, 1989:411). They should always be treated with respect at all times, a luxury that women are rarely accorded. Academic literature on indigenous family violence complicate everyday understandings of the gender issues involved because they provide contrasting perspectives of the issues involved (Pal, 2012:17). For example, indigenous family violence was somehow justified by those who practised it while modern understanding of the subject is that all forms of gender violence are wrong. In addition, the academic literature complicates the roles in the household because it provides for little debate on the society-assigned roles that trigger gender and sexual violence (Bell and Nelson, 1989:413). Academic literature should be viewed as an opinion and not taken factually because the subject of gender violence is too complex to define. In some indigenous communities, the message conveyed by academic literature is that gender violence is allowed so long as it is done with “good intentions.” However, who defines good intentions? Academic literature shows that men can ‘discipline” their wives if they fail to provide for them as expected (by the society). However, who defines this ‘discipline?” Aboriginal communities and other indigenous communities have always viewed women as inferior to men and undeserving of any prominent roles in the society (Bell and Nelson, 1989:414). Such notions have been created and advanced by so many generations of indigenous communities that they have evolved into traditions that they must protect in order to “survive.” Current status of gender and sexual debates reveals that such notions are the product of fear and insecurity faced by men and used to oppress womenfolk (Bell and Nelson, 1989:415). Indigenous communities like aborigines are patriarchal in nature, meaning women have little or no voice with which they can challenge the interventions created by men to serve their vested interests. There is a reason why violent actions like rape are prevalent in some societies and rare in others (Vheim, 2013:31). The difference between the two societies is that one encourages them while the other creates unfavourable conditions for violence, whether it is by perpetrated by one gender on another or perpetrated by one gender on the same gender. Discussion The academic literature on indigenous family violence complicate everyday understandings of the gender issues involved because they provide many counters that not only oppose but also create confusion in the common understandings of the gender matters involved (Khanum, 2012:24). For example, academic literature shows that indigenous family violence was justified in cases where it was done for the good of the community. In such cases, violence meted out by a husband on a woman or child was viewed as a preventive measure to curb the spread of “bad” habits. A wife who failed to cook or take care of the household in her husband’s absence was punishable by violence in some indigenous communities, but contemporary understandings show that there can never be enough justification for violence (Khanum, 2012:28). It also shows that violence is wrong regardless of who is perpetrating it. Academic literature on indigenous family violence indicates that men were permitted to hit their wives and children. On the other hand, it was rare for a woman to hit a man, no matter how much wrong a man commits. Any form of punishment meted out on men was determined and exercised by community “elders” who mediated most family issues (Vheim, 2013:39). The question as to why men were allowed to judge and prosecute women so quickly while their transgressions were judged by “high courts” is another grey area that creates confusion in everyday understanding of gender violence issues (Otto, 2013:26). In retrospect, it is important to consider that societies have always been patriarchal in nature; there are little or no documented examples of matriarchal societies. Modern thinking, although it accepts that society is still patriarchal, has been geared towards creating balance between genders or a sense of balance that insinuates equality. For example, contemporary everyday understanding holds that all children, regardless of their genders, must be given equal opportunities to access education and other basic services (Otto, 2013:29). However, academic literature on indigenous family violence postulate that men and women are unequal from childhood, with young girls being inferior to boys and therefore second-class citizens when it comes to access to any privileges. The evolution of mentalities has created two perspectives on gender issues that oppose each other (Vheim, 2013:37). The first world is that informed by academic literature on indigenous gender issues, and the second is that informed by modern views on gender issues. Conclusion Academic literature on indigenous family issues and violence create a topsy-turvy approach to gender issues that puts it at loggerheads with modern common understandings of such matters. The objective should be developing a middle ground so that both worlds can be comprehended and used to drive progress in humanity (Khanum, 2012:32). It is important to note that academic literature on indigenous gender issues were documented based on perspectives at that time, and therefore cannot be entirely faulted for their stances. In addition, contemporary literature on the same issues has been documented based on current perspectives (Mcintosh, 2014:23). The solution is to accept that there is a difference between the two views and to work on bridging them instead of viewing one (indigenous literature) as an obstacle to another (modern understandings). References Bell, D. & Nelson, T. (1989) Speaking about rape is everyone's business, Women's Studies International Forum, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 403-416. Khanum, R. (2012) Contemporary gender issues, Dhaka, A.H. Development Pub. House. Mcintosh, K. (2014) Gender issues, S.l., Mason Crest. Otto, D. (2013) Gender issues and human rights, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar. Pal, M. (2012) Gender issues and empowerment of women, New York, Nova Science. Vheim, M. (2013) Media, religion, and gender: Key issues and new challenges, London, Routledge. Read More