"The pursuit of human rights in foreign policy and the pursuit of commercial interests are inherently contradictory." Do you agree?”
Introduction:
The aim of this essay is to disprove the hypothesis in the question. I do not agree with the statement, and believe that the pursuit of commercial interests and the pursuit of human rights are far from contradictory and are in fact complementary. However, I do admit that in the context of world politics and international relations today, the manner in which human rights is being pursued, has resulted in it being contradictory to the pursuit of commercial interests. This essay aims to show the futility of keeping the two as contradictory and instead extols the virtues of trade as a means of furthering human rights pursuits and simultaneously furthering the states’ commercial interests.
Human Rights:
“Your right to swing your arm ends where the other person’s nose begins ”. This is a rather simple manner in which to describe our rights and their limitations. It is also often said, “one person’s right is another person’s duty ”. Bearing these in mind, for purposes of this essay, we define human rights as entitlements that we have by virtue of being human – against the state; and these rights are meant to “make life fulfilling… and are essential for keeping us alive” . In layman’s terms, these ‘human rights’ are certain claims that all human beings are entitled to, which cannot be taken away from us and are in fact something that the individual can stand up to the state for; if not awarded them.
There are many nations which do not practice human rights as set out in the International Bill of Human Rights; some examples would include Nazi Germany, Saddam’s Iraq, current day North Korea, Africa and arguably, even the United States .
One of the most common ways for other countries to urge these ‘rouge’ countries to toe human rights law is to impose economic sanctions on them, essentially restricting trade and withdrawing aid. However this results in economic losses for both nations and may in fact end up worsening the human rights situation in the sanctioned nation. Blocking free trade hurts consumers and the most economically vulnerable citizens and does little to improve general humanitarian conditions . Simple examples to prove this would be the current sanctions imposed by the European Union upon Nepal. In order to restrict the atrocities committed by the Nepali police upon protestors, the European Union has imposed sanctions upon the sale of arms to Nepal. However King Gyanendra of Nepal has showed no inclination to treat the protestors in a manner other than the one he has been using so far .
Another prime example of the failure of economic sanctions to further human rights can be seen in the case of Iraq. The United Nations imposed sanctions upon Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait and imposed a “blanket ban on all imports and exports except for "supplies intended strictly for medical purposes, and, in humanitarian circumstances, foodstuffs. ” This severe sanction resulted in little more than the severe malnutrition in Iraq and great suffering among the people of the nation. This example just goes to show that imposing sanctions is usually a futile exercise and does little to stop human rights violations, instead worsening the situation for innocent citizens, already under a rule that does not respect human rights.
Trade furthering human rights:
China is a case in point of how trade can further human rights development. This goes to prove the thesis of this essay that the pursuit of human rights and the pursuit of commercial interests are not contradictory.
China has enjoyed Most Favoured Nation status with the United States, as have most other nations, even nations facing US sanctions at the same time. The US however, regularly threatens to withdraw this status. MFN is merely a misnomer for normal trade relations. MFN over the years can be one reason for increased economic growth in China. “Economic reforms in China have transformed daily life for hundreds of millions of people who now enjoy greater opportunity, freedom of movement, material abundance, and access to western ideas. ” Imposing trade sanctions upon China will do little to improve the human rights situation in China and as the failed embargo against Cuba went to prove, it will serve to only isolate the victims and under privileged which strengthening their persecutors by giving them another weapon to damn the West and its ideals. As Pope John Paul II said in relation to imposing economic sanctions, “It is always imperative to foresee the humanitarian consequences of sanctions, without failing to respect the just proportion that such measures should have in relation to the very evil which they are meant to remedy ”.
American – Chinese trade has ensured that American consumers have ready and affordable access to items, which it does not have a comparative advantage in producing itself. This allows America to focus on producing those items, which it is comparatively better at, such as financial services, computers and peripherals, vehicles, furniture and building supplies, to name some. These items are then available for export to China and supply Chinese people with items they would not have such easy access to otherwise .
Imposing trade sanctions on any one country serves to push up the prices of the goods that that country exports; thus punishing the sanctioning country as well as the sanctioned country. Further, article 25 of the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights states that every human “has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social service”. By imposing sanctions on China, the United States would be violating both China’s and its own rights to free trade. Sanctions on China will drive up the price of nearly all goods required to maintain an adequate standard of living for Americans, cosmetics, shoes, toys and clothes, all are made in China, and increasing the cost of living for Americans is not a desirable consequence, especially if it has no impact on improving the human rights situation anyway.
In the words of Lee Teng Hui, “vigorous economic development leads to independent thinking. People hope to be able to fully satisfy their free will and see their rights fully protected. And then demand ensues for political reform… The model of our quiet revolution will eventually take hold of the Chinese mainland ”. In the manner of Taiwan, continued free trade and exchange of ideas with China will most probably result in an increasingly well-to-do society who will then demand their rights, as the Taiwanese did. As markets spread, people acquire greater wealth and thus have a much stronger interest in then participating in the political process of their nation in order to protect their property. As Michael Novak writes, “the capitalist preference for law and due process leads naturally enough to the… basic institutions of democracy: the rule of law, limited government, separated powers, and the protection of the rights of individuals and minorities ”. Maintaining free trade will put pressure on governments and policy makers to protect private property rights and to pursuer prudent monetary, fiscal and regulatory policies to avoid massive capital outflows. “Global market competition helps good government crowd out bad government ”.
Stop Aid, Not Trade:
The Norwegian foreign policy can be summarized in the phrase “stop aid, not trade”. By first admitting that economic sanctions are little more than a blunt instrument in combating human rights violations. In their first four years in office, we have seen the Bush regime imposing 68 sanctions on various countries, most non-western. Human rights and commercial interests have become contradictory as both countries only stand to suffer from these sanctions; which just goes to prove that the sanctions and human rights are contradictory and it is in fact commercial interests and human rights of a state that go hand in hand. The Norwegian ministry of foreign affairs espouses to its citizens who conduct business in countries where human rights are not given the same respect as they are in Norway to demonstrate social responsibility by setting an example to the people of the nation .
Norway tries to continue trade as far as possible and in extreme cases, the most it does is to limit the amount of aid that it offers the nation, rather than stopping aid or trade altogether. It tries to ‘identify the most crucial challenges… and also to propose measures, tools and mechanisms ” to improve “awareness of and respect for human rights within the context of economic involvement abroad ”.
The Norwegian policy seems to be the most effective of the lot, the simplest way of gauging this would be the general perspective globally of Norway being seen as a fair and just nation. Stopping or limiting aid rather than curtailing trade serves to continue to exchange of ideas which trade brings with it; as well as sending a message to the concerned authorities on how seriously it takes the flouting of human rights norms.
Conclusion:
In the words of no less than Adam Smith himself, the development of trade and commercial activities in Europe “gradually introduced order and good government, and with them, the liberty and security of individuals ”. On a more contemporary note, Harvard Economist Robert Barro’s study on free society finds that “improvements in the standard of living… substantially raise the probability that political institutions will become more democratic over time ”. He concludes his study with the assertion that “if economic freedom can be established in a poor country, then growth would be encouraged, and the country would tend eventually to become more democratic on its own ”.
With the example of failed sanctions from a number of countries, we have seen the futility of imposing sanctions on any nation in order to influence it to improve its human rights situation. The pursuit of human rights in foreign policy ought to follow the ‘stop aid, not trade’ method instead of penalizing their own citizens by imposing sanctions. By pursuing this policy, the pursuit of commercial interests and human rights will not be at all contradictory and instead be inherently complementary, and much more efficient than the method of imposing sanctions.
Of course, this is not to say that sanctions are never justified. If to say, the US were to stop the sale of arms to a nation with which it was at war, this would be seen as justified, for to continue that would be suicidal. Another example would be if the goods concerned were being made with slave labour or prison labour, or even child labour, in this case, to limit the trade of such goods (like child-made Pakistani carpets), would be justified as the bulk of the money does not go to the carpet-making children anyway. However, even in these cases, there ought not be a blanket ban on trade with the country but instead a restriction on only certain goods.
No country has the right to interfere with free trade for the purposes of promoting its style of governance or because of what it sees as a human rights violation. The freedom to trade is an individual’s right, not a right derived from any government. Human rights violations should indeed be condemned, vehemently at that; but it does not warrant imposing greater suffering upon innocent civilians by imposing sanctions on them. In the words of American President Bush’s predecessor, Ronald Reagan, “the freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides of human progress and peace among nations ”.
Bibliography:
Barro, R.J. Getting It Right: Markets and Choices in a Free Society. Cambridge: Massachusetts: The MIT Press. 1996
Dorn, James A “Trade and Human Rights: The Case of China”, The CATO Journal, Vol. 16, no. 1 (Spring/Summer, 1996).
Duffy, Cristina Suarez and Harrold, Michael. FreedomWorks Issue Analysis 33A - Don't Break the China: “Why Continued MFN Status Helps Americans and Chinese”. June 13, 1997.
http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/issues_template.php?issue_id=140 (Accessed on 01/10/05)
English and Stapleton, The Human Rights Handbook, Chapter 1 “What are human rights”, 1997
International Nepal Solidarity Network, “The case for sanctions and extension of restrictive measures: ACHR”. 5/10/05.
http://insn.org/?p=2014 (accessed on 29/10/05)
Journalists for human rights http://www.jhr.ca/countryprofiles.html (Accessed on 10/10/05). ©Copyrights 2002-2003 JHR Journalists for Human Rights JDH Journalistes pour les Droits Humains
Novak, Michael “Introduction”, in Messick, R. E. World Survery of Economic Freedom, 1995-1996. New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions Publishers, for Freedom House.
Reagan, Ronald “Remarks at a White House Meeting With Business and Trade Leaders”, September 23, 1985.
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1985/92385a.htm (Accessed on 01/10/05)
Sirico, Robert - Trade Policy briefing paper no. 2“Free trade and human rights : the moral case for engagement”, 17/7/05. Paper based on remarks delivered at CATO Institute Policy Forum, 27/5/1998
Smith, Adam The Wealth of Nations, Edited by Edwin Cannan. New York: The Modern Library (Random House). ([1997] 1937)
Utenriksdepartementet: Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs: “Commercial Aspects of Human Rights Endeavours”
http://odin.dep.no/ud/english/doc/handbooks/032111-120003/hov003-bu.html (Accessed on 01/10/05)
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
Going beyond “Chick Lit”.
Title: Going beyond “Chick Lit”
A study of women being women’s worst oppressors in a South Asian context, through the juxtaposition of fictional and non-fictional literary works.
Sections:
1. Introduction
2. Education
3. Working Prospects
4. Marriage
5. Conclusion
Introduction:
‘Chick Lit.’ has become a very popular genre of modern literature; and this is apparent throughout the world as more women are becoming educated and willing to spend money on these ‘frivolous’ books.
“What makes these books popular? A more realistic portrayal of the present day working women - the frustrations and insecurities that are very much a part of the independent lives they are leading. But it is all done in good humour without a hint of pathos.” (Deccan Herald, Sunday, April 25, 2004)
In a South Asian context, this is also apparent. Often in these books, we see an increasing amount of text dedicated to female oppression. While this is a good thing in that it allows a larger mass of people to know what is happening in this region, the case often is one of exaggeration and misinterpretation.
Women are always the ‘victims’ in the situations, often being physically and verbally abused. However, these women are not willing to drag themselves out of their ‘situations’. While they are discontent, they are content to remain so and go so far as to impose the same strictures they grew up with, on the next generation of females. Thus, more and more of these female writers, often having grown up outside of South Asia, are trying to analyse the oppression faced by the foremothers. In this process, a clear strain of oppression has come through, it seems that women are women’s worse oppressors in a South Asian context.
This essay aims to explore the theme of ‘women being women’s oppressors’ in modern South Asian literary works. It chooses to conduct this exploration through a study of some fictional works because fiction, in this case at least, seems to personify reality, and very importantly, it also spreads a message to the masses, in and out of South Asia. These fictional works will be juxtaposed with non-fictional works to gauge their relevance to society and prove the depth of their ‘reality’. Familial relations, such as those between mother and daughter, sisters, mother-in-law and daughter-in law will be examined as well as those outside the family, such as doctor-patient relations or teacher-student relations as well as those between female friends.
These fictional works will be compared to autobiographies of certain women in similar environments as the protagonists in the works of fiction are. This will allow a benchmark to be set for the forms of oppression that will be uncovered. This comparison will also allow the reader to judge the extent to which fiction relates the truth of the matter; this especially being the case in post-feminist literature, otherwise known as ‘chick-lit’ (Deccan Herald, Sunday, April 25, 2004)
In conjunction with the above theme, the efforts of men (fathers, brothers, husbands, family doctors, teachers, etc), to lift the women of their familial and social circles out of the quagmire they often choose to fall into due to a greater sense of comfort of the known, even if it is oppression, will be examined.
Education, household work and chores, commercial work and marriage will all be examined, as these are the main ‘worries’ of the modern South Asian woman. These women often want to ‘modernise’ themselves and improve themselves in terms of education and work experience, early and arranged marriage being a trade off. However, as seen in these books, fiction and non-fiction, the females often pressure them into sticking to ‘the norm’ whereas their male family members and friends often urge them to improve themselves.
This essay chooses to move away from the ‘norm’ of women seen as being oppressed by the other gender and chooses to study this theme through a juxtaposition of non-fiction in the form of autobiographies and fiction in the genre of ‘chick lit.’
Education:
Taslima Nasrin in her autobiography, ‘My Girlhood’, repeatedly depicts how her father insists upon her being sent to the best schools and her mother’s vehement objections. It is her mother who would rather she attend religious classes than go to a secular school, rather she be properly covered in a Burkha than wear dresses. Nasrin’s mother goes so far as to bring her daughter home from boarding school under the guise of a death in the family. It is her father who repeatedly forces her to attend school and pay attention to her lessons so as to make something of herself. This is radically different from the ‘norm’ that springs to mind when we think of women and education in India. A similar situation is seen in Nalinaksha Bhattacharya’s novel “Hem and football”. While Hem wants to continue with school and her hobbies, her mother insists that she leave all this and get married at the tender age of 14. In Uma Vasudev’s ‘Shreya of Sonagrah’, we see Father, Husband and Father-in-law, encouraging the protagonist in the novel, Shreya, to continue her education, but she refuses on the account that married life is not about continuing education. Before marriage, her excuse was that her role in life was to get married. We do not see any empathetic disputes between her and her mother on this issue. The mother seems quite content, if not proud, of her daughter’s views on Indian womanhood.
As such, it is apparent, that the male figures in the lives of these protagonists, in both fiction and non-fiction works of literature, would like ‘their women’ to improve themselves; it is the women who are content with their lot as it seems too ‘difficult’ (Nasrin, 2001).
The only difference is seen in times of conflict and strife, as during the period of the Indian freedom struggle. During this period, the seemingly ‘normal’ societal rules were relaxed and the first woman to attain a Masters’ degree did so during this time. Her relation to the “Father of Modern India” – Jawaharlal Nehru, meant that the rules were relaxed in terms of university entry to men’s’ colleges and courses (Sahgal, 1994). During the period of India’s freedom struggle and soon after the Partition of India, feminism in India reached its peak, as many women were part of the independence movement. Numerous women created ‘firsts’ by joining strikes and rioting, as well as being jailed. The fact that the police force treated men and women with equal brutality, gave the women a new respect in the eyes of the other sex. However, once South Asia settled down, the women were expected to cast away thoughts of equality and revert to customary social norms.
The question then would be, why is it women who impose these social norms on their progeny. Women are in a South Asian context the more ‘social’ of a traditional male-female couple, and as such, feel that they have something to ‘live up to’ in society’s views. To avoid gossip and awkward questions from members of their community as well as to maintain their standing in the community, they have to get their daughters married early and to reputable families, with no mention of falling in love or further education (Mazumdar, 1989).
Women have always been seen as the honour of their family (Adnan, 2005). As such, they feel it their duty to cast aside modern beliefs and live their lives, as well as dictate those of their daughters and nieces, in a way whereby society will be satisfied with them and there will not be any inflammatory gossip. Much the same rules apply for working prospects of these women,
Working prospects:
Without education it is near impossible to find any form of work anywhere in the world. However, in South Asia, gender discrimination in the work place aside, there is prevalent gender discrimination in the home with relation to work and being out of the house in general.
In “Hem and Football”, we see the protagonist’s mother not only trying to prevent Hem from playing football altogether but even when she does allow Hem to do so, imposes ridiculous restrictions upon her, which include lengthening the length of her shorts, even if they then get in the way of her playing, making sure she gets no bruises that may ruin her ‘marriage ability’, and imposes a number more restrictions along those lines. It seems to the casual reader here that the mother, another woman, instead of easing the stigma of being a woman in a patriarchal society is instead reinforcing it in her daughter. From the western-educated perspective of the casual reader, it seems preposterous for a mother to want to marry off her daughter at any cost to avoid her enjoying her life and playing football, as in Bhattacharya’s book.
A similar scene is available in Nasrin’s autobiography whereby we see that the only women who have jobs, in the village where Nasrin grew up, are either outcast women or mere servant-class women. No respectable woman has any form of income. When Nasrin’s father tries to encourage her to study hard in order to succeed him as a doctor, the mother demands of her husband whether he intends to make his own daughter a loose woman! Her ambitions for her daughter extend toward an early marriage for her, numerous children, preferably sons, and end there.
Nasrin’s experiences match that of the protagonist in Bhattacharya’s novel; thus again reinforcing the thesis of this essay, that at least in the context of South Asian ‘chick-lit”, reality does indeed mirror fiction. Mindsets towards an independent life and education are similar in both reality as seen in autobiographies and in fictional accounts.
Again, the exceptions come in during times of crisis. From Vasudev’s depiction of Shreya in her novel, we can see that upon the death of the protagonist’s mother in law, she was called upon to fill her shoes as a post-partition politician, and was thus thrown into politics with the same staff her mother in law had, with no thought for her personal comfort with these staff members. To protect the honour of the family, Shreya has to forgo her personal choices and preferences. We see in the novel, as in all the others, that female characters are not only restricted from making choices by other older female characters, but they are also called upon to replace these characters in times of death and loss, thus forcing them to fit themselves into the mould of these other women. This is one of the main reasons for women becoming women’s worst oppressors. In order to maintain the honour of the family name and to maintain discipline as it has been maintained for generations past, this ‘oppression’ in necessary. In fact, it is seen as oppression only in westernised viewpoints, in South Asia, this ‘oppression’ is merely a part of everyday existence.
As leading authors on human rights are finally beginning to realise, cultures differ from region to region; Asia has its own beliefs, many of which centre around the concept of “family before self”. Thus to many women in South Asia, if oppression of future generations means protecting family honour, then oppression is not a bad thing. This could also be why the male members of the family are sometimes more liberal. Usually being the breadwinners of the family, they are exposed to the outside world and its strictures; thus they see things in a different way. To these generally educated men, independence is essential for both sexes in this highly unstable world. While mothers would see love as being able to find the best man to take care of their daughter, love for a father in the modern South Asian world would be making sure his daughter can support herself, if the need arises; as we can see in Nasrin’s autobiography as well as Vasudev’s Shreya and even in “Daughters of the House” by Indrani Aikath-Gyaltsen, where we see the uncle trying to convince his orphan niece to put her education to some use by working and getting a taste of the real world outside her sheltered existence. To these educated men, there is more to a woman’s life than mere marriage and child rearing.
Marriage:
In all the books examined, one common thread runs through them, and this is in relation to marriage. All women in books concerned seem to want their wards and younger women of their acquaintance to get married early. There are myriad reasons for this; including the same concept of honour mentioned above, if one were to delay marriage, it is entirely possible that the girl in question may have a romantic dalliance and ruin her own chances of making a good match. The concept of love before marriage does not feature in these novels, and love after marriage is merely a bonus, not something to be expected.
In Nasrin’s autobiography we expect her mother to pressure her into getting married, given the mother’s very conservative nature. However, even in Nehru’s family we see that the girls who were the first in India to achieve Masters’ degrees also have to settle down and succumb to arranged marriages at the insistence of their mothers. In Mazumdar’s memoirs, we have the most blatant example whereby the extended family and friends all began gossiping when Mazumdar is not yet married at age 10.
Once again mirroring reality, we see Hem’s mother pressuring her to get married and going so far as to marry her off to a mad boy simply because there was no one else around and it was imperative to marry Hem off to avoid gossip. Arranged marriages are often set up with no need for any form of consent from either side, especially the girl. In Vasudev’s Shreya, we again see how her father agreed to her marriage to his best-friend’s son and when he cursorily asked her if she agreed, she was not given the chance to answer before the two men had already started planning the wedding. This is a clear indication of the extent of men wanting to limit female oppression in South Asia, although they are willing to allow education and even some exposure to work and the outside world, marriage seems to be something where the girl has no say at all.
When this marriage does not work out, it is the fault of the woman, obviously. In “Shreya of Sonagarh”, when Shreya ultimately mentions to her mother the problems she is having in her marriage, her mother advises her to just bear with things, violence included. Similarly, when Hem leaves her mentally challenged husband and returns home, she is ostracized, mostly by her own mother. These women are seen to be unlucky as they have failed to maintain their marriage and society has no place for them, being neither single nor respectable widows.
In a South Asian context, it is the job of a mother to get her daughter married and the duty of close relatives and friends to not only help in looking for a groom but also to ensure that if the mother falters in her role, they are there to ensure the marriage goes through. This also applies in all other areas of upbringing. It is precisely to maintain the status quo of society that women end up oppressing other women.
Conclusion:
If the status quo was relaxed and women were allowed free reign to education and work, it would make the women who did not have these opportunities much more limited, in relation; their power would then be limited. Unlike the world of men, where each proves his worth economically, women have traditionally proved their worth through their family honour, and to change this, a change of mindset is required, for all of society.
However, as the thesis of this essay goes, women are women’s worst oppressors in a South Asian context; it is indeed clear from the examination of a number of literary works, that this thesis is indeed true. It is also clear that in the case of South Asian chick lit, reality does indeed play a very significant role in this genre of literature. Be it in terms of education, work or marriage, male and female roles are very similar across fiction and non-fiction.
As Jean de La Bruyère said in 1668, “It is because of men that women dislike one another”. It is precisely for this reason that women gossip and play a perpetual game of one-upmanship with other women. In order to prove themselves to be the spitting image of Sita , they undermine women around them and try to prove their worth in that manner. Women try to mould themselves and their daughters to be like Sita, all the while condemning the other women of their acquaintance. The tool of gossip is very powerful in a woman’s domain as once again it is linked to not only her honour but that of both her natal and marital families.
Evelyn Cunnigham once mentioned that “women are the only oppressed group in our society that lives in intimate association with their oppressors”. This is indeed true. Whether or not one sees women to be the worst oppressors of other women, it must nonetheless be admitted that they do play the most important part in the mindsets that other women form. Teachers, mothers, sisters and doctors, as well as women of the marital family are the most important people in a woman’s life and it is these people, these women, who cause her to think and act as she does, to avoid dishonouring her family.
Thus, the thesis of this essay still stands as, ‘women are women’s worst oppressors’ in a South Asian context as seen through the examination of literary sources, the only possible exception being in time of crisis.
Bibliography:
Adnan, Shapan. Lectures delivered for SN 2234 – Gender and Society in South Asia, LT 12, National University of Singapore; Semester I, AY 2005/6.
Aikath-Gyaltsen, Indrani, 1993. Daughters of the House. New York: Ballantine Books.
Ali, Monica, 2004. Brick Lane: a novel. New York: Scribner, 2004
Bhattacharya, Nalinaksha, 1995. Hem and Maxine. London: Jonathan Cape.
Bhattacharya, Nalinaksha, 1992. Hem and Football. London: Secker & Warburg.
Jean de La Bruyère, 1668. Caractères. Publisher not available. Published in France.
Mazumdar, Shudha, 1989. Memoirs of an Indian Woman. Edited with an introduction by Geraldine Forbes. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe
Nasrin, Taslima, 2001. My Girlhood. New Delhi: Kali for Women.
Sahgal, Manmohini Zutshi, 1994. An Indian Freedom Fighter Recalls Her Life. Edited by Geraldine Forbes; with a foreword by B.K. Nehru. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
Vani, Mahesh, 2004. “Post-feminist, or more fondly, Chick-lit!” Bangalore: Deccan Herald (Sunday Herald). April 25, 2004: Articulations, Book Day Special.
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/apr252004/artic2.asp
(Accessed 6th October, 2005)
Vasudev, Uma, 1993. Shreya of Sonagarh. New Delhi: UBS Publishers' Distributors.
A study of women being women’s worst oppressors in a South Asian context, through the juxtaposition of fictional and non-fictional literary works.
Sections:
1. Introduction
2. Education
3. Working Prospects
4. Marriage
5. Conclusion
Introduction:
‘Chick Lit.’ has become a very popular genre of modern literature; and this is apparent throughout the world as more women are becoming educated and willing to spend money on these ‘frivolous’ books.
“What makes these books popular? A more realistic portrayal of the present day working women - the frustrations and insecurities that are very much a part of the independent lives they are leading. But it is all done in good humour without a hint of pathos.” (Deccan Herald, Sunday, April 25, 2004)
In a South Asian context, this is also apparent. Often in these books, we see an increasing amount of text dedicated to female oppression. While this is a good thing in that it allows a larger mass of people to know what is happening in this region, the case often is one of exaggeration and misinterpretation.
Women are always the ‘victims’ in the situations, often being physically and verbally abused. However, these women are not willing to drag themselves out of their ‘situations’. While they are discontent, they are content to remain so and go so far as to impose the same strictures they grew up with, on the next generation of females. Thus, more and more of these female writers, often having grown up outside of South Asia, are trying to analyse the oppression faced by the foremothers. In this process, a clear strain of oppression has come through, it seems that women are women’s worse oppressors in a South Asian context.
This essay aims to explore the theme of ‘women being women’s oppressors’ in modern South Asian literary works. It chooses to conduct this exploration through a study of some fictional works because fiction, in this case at least, seems to personify reality, and very importantly, it also spreads a message to the masses, in and out of South Asia. These fictional works will be juxtaposed with non-fictional works to gauge their relevance to society and prove the depth of their ‘reality’. Familial relations, such as those between mother and daughter, sisters, mother-in-law and daughter-in law will be examined as well as those outside the family, such as doctor-patient relations or teacher-student relations as well as those between female friends.
These fictional works will be compared to autobiographies of certain women in similar environments as the protagonists in the works of fiction are. This will allow a benchmark to be set for the forms of oppression that will be uncovered. This comparison will also allow the reader to judge the extent to which fiction relates the truth of the matter; this especially being the case in post-feminist literature, otherwise known as ‘chick-lit’ (Deccan Herald, Sunday, April 25, 2004)
In conjunction with the above theme, the efforts of men (fathers, brothers, husbands, family doctors, teachers, etc), to lift the women of their familial and social circles out of the quagmire they often choose to fall into due to a greater sense of comfort of the known, even if it is oppression, will be examined.
Education, household work and chores, commercial work and marriage will all be examined, as these are the main ‘worries’ of the modern South Asian woman. These women often want to ‘modernise’ themselves and improve themselves in terms of education and work experience, early and arranged marriage being a trade off. However, as seen in these books, fiction and non-fiction, the females often pressure them into sticking to ‘the norm’ whereas their male family members and friends often urge them to improve themselves.
This essay chooses to move away from the ‘norm’ of women seen as being oppressed by the other gender and chooses to study this theme through a juxtaposition of non-fiction in the form of autobiographies and fiction in the genre of ‘chick lit.’
Education:
Taslima Nasrin in her autobiography, ‘My Girlhood’, repeatedly depicts how her father insists upon her being sent to the best schools and her mother’s vehement objections. It is her mother who would rather she attend religious classes than go to a secular school, rather she be properly covered in a Burkha than wear dresses. Nasrin’s mother goes so far as to bring her daughter home from boarding school under the guise of a death in the family. It is her father who repeatedly forces her to attend school and pay attention to her lessons so as to make something of herself. This is radically different from the ‘norm’ that springs to mind when we think of women and education in India. A similar situation is seen in Nalinaksha Bhattacharya’s novel “Hem and football”. While Hem wants to continue with school and her hobbies, her mother insists that she leave all this and get married at the tender age of 14. In Uma Vasudev’s ‘Shreya of Sonagrah’, we see Father, Husband and Father-in-law, encouraging the protagonist in the novel, Shreya, to continue her education, but she refuses on the account that married life is not about continuing education. Before marriage, her excuse was that her role in life was to get married. We do not see any empathetic disputes between her and her mother on this issue. The mother seems quite content, if not proud, of her daughter’s views on Indian womanhood.
As such, it is apparent, that the male figures in the lives of these protagonists, in both fiction and non-fiction works of literature, would like ‘their women’ to improve themselves; it is the women who are content with their lot as it seems too ‘difficult’ (Nasrin, 2001).
The only difference is seen in times of conflict and strife, as during the period of the Indian freedom struggle. During this period, the seemingly ‘normal’ societal rules were relaxed and the first woman to attain a Masters’ degree did so during this time. Her relation to the “Father of Modern India” – Jawaharlal Nehru, meant that the rules were relaxed in terms of university entry to men’s’ colleges and courses (Sahgal, 1994). During the period of India’s freedom struggle and soon after the Partition of India, feminism in India reached its peak, as many women were part of the independence movement. Numerous women created ‘firsts’ by joining strikes and rioting, as well as being jailed. The fact that the police force treated men and women with equal brutality, gave the women a new respect in the eyes of the other sex. However, once South Asia settled down, the women were expected to cast away thoughts of equality and revert to customary social norms.
The question then would be, why is it women who impose these social norms on their progeny. Women are in a South Asian context the more ‘social’ of a traditional male-female couple, and as such, feel that they have something to ‘live up to’ in society’s views. To avoid gossip and awkward questions from members of their community as well as to maintain their standing in the community, they have to get their daughters married early and to reputable families, with no mention of falling in love or further education (Mazumdar, 1989).
Women have always been seen as the honour of their family (Adnan, 2005). As such, they feel it their duty to cast aside modern beliefs and live their lives, as well as dictate those of their daughters and nieces, in a way whereby society will be satisfied with them and there will not be any inflammatory gossip. Much the same rules apply for working prospects of these women,
Working prospects:
Without education it is near impossible to find any form of work anywhere in the world. However, in South Asia, gender discrimination in the work place aside, there is prevalent gender discrimination in the home with relation to work and being out of the house in general.
In “Hem and Football”, we see the protagonist’s mother not only trying to prevent Hem from playing football altogether but even when she does allow Hem to do so, imposes ridiculous restrictions upon her, which include lengthening the length of her shorts, even if they then get in the way of her playing, making sure she gets no bruises that may ruin her ‘marriage ability’, and imposes a number more restrictions along those lines. It seems to the casual reader here that the mother, another woman, instead of easing the stigma of being a woman in a patriarchal society is instead reinforcing it in her daughter. From the western-educated perspective of the casual reader, it seems preposterous for a mother to want to marry off her daughter at any cost to avoid her enjoying her life and playing football, as in Bhattacharya’s book.
A similar scene is available in Nasrin’s autobiography whereby we see that the only women who have jobs, in the village where Nasrin grew up, are either outcast women or mere servant-class women. No respectable woman has any form of income. When Nasrin’s father tries to encourage her to study hard in order to succeed him as a doctor, the mother demands of her husband whether he intends to make his own daughter a loose woman! Her ambitions for her daughter extend toward an early marriage for her, numerous children, preferably sons, and end there.
Nasrin’s experiences match that of the protagonist in Bhattacharya’s novel; thus again reinforcing the thesis of this essay, that at least in the context of South Asian ‘chick-lit”, reality does indeed mirror fiction. Mindsets towards an independent life and education are similar in both reality as seen in autobiographies and in fictional accounts.
Again, the exceptions come in during times of crisis. From Vasudev’s depiction of Shreya in her novel, we can see that upon the death of the protagonist’s mother in law, she was called upon to fill her shoes as a post-partition politician, and was thus thrown into politics with the same staff her mother in law had, with no thought for her personal comfort with these staff members. To protect the honour of the family, Shreya has to forgo her personal choices and preferences. We see in the novel, as in all the others, that female characters are not only restricted from making choices by other older female characters, but they are also called upon to replace these characters in times of death and loss, thus forcing them to fit themselves into the mould of these other women. This is one of the main reasons for women becoming women’s worst oppressors. In order to maintain the honour of the family name and to maintain discipline as it has been maintained for generations past, this ‘oppression’ in necessary. In fact, it is seen as oppression only in westernised viewpoints, in South Asia, this ‘oppression’ is merely a part of everyday existence.
As leading authors on human rights are finally beginning to realise, cultures differ from region to region; Asia has its own beliefs, many of which centre around the concept of “family before self”. Thus to many women in South Asia, if oppression of future generations means protecting family honour, then oppression is not a bad thing. This could also be why the male members of the family are sometimes more liberal. Usually being the breadwinners of the family, they are exposed to the outside world and its strictures; thus they see things in a different way. To these generally educated men, independence is essential for both sexes in this highly unstable world. While mothers would see love as being able to find the best man to take care of their daughter, love for a father in the modern South Asian world would be making sure his daughter can support herself, if the need arises; as we can see in Nasrin’s autobiography as well as Vasudev’s Shreya and even in “Daughters of the House” by Indrani Aikath-Gyaltsen, where we see the uncle trying to convince his orphan niece to put her education to some use by working and getting a taste of the real world outside her sheltered existence. To these educated men, there is more to a woman’s life than mere marriage and child rearing.
Marriage:
In all the books examined, one common thread runs through them, and this is in relation to marriage. All women in books concerned seem to want their wards and younger women of their acquaintance to get married early. There are myriad reasons for this; including the same concept of honour mentioned above, if one were to delay marriage, it is entirely possible that the girl in question may have a romantic dalliance and ruin her own chances of making a good match. The concept of love before marriage does not feature in these novels, and love after marriage is merely a bonus, not something to be expected.
In Nasrin’s autobiography we expect her mother to pressure her into getting married, given the mother’s very conservative nature. However, even in Nehru’s family we see that the girls who were the first in India to achieve Masters’ degrees also have to settle down and succumb to arranged marriages at the insistence of their mothers. In Mazumdar’s memoirs, we have the most blatant example whereby the extended family and friends all began gossiping when Mazumdar is not yet married at age 10.
Once again mirroring reality, we see Hem’s mother pressuring her to get married and going so far as to marry her off to a mad boy simply because there was no one else around and it was imperative to marry Hem off to avoid gossip. Arranged marriages are often set up with no need for any form of consent from either side, especially the girl. In Vasudev’s Shreya, we again see how her father agreed to her marriage to his best-friend’s son and when he cursorily asked her if she agreed, she was not given the chance to answer before the two men had already started planning the wedding. This is a clear indication of the extent of men wanting to limit female oppression in South Asia, although they are willing to allow education and even some exposure to work and the outside world, marriage seems to be something where the girl has no say at all.
When this marriage does not work out, it is the fault of the woman, obviously. In “Shreya of Sonagarh”, when Shreya ultimately mentions to her mother the problems she is having in her marriage, her mother advises her to just bear with things, violence included. Similarly, when Hem leaves her mentally challenged husband and returns home, she is ostracized, mostly by her own mother. These women are seen to be unlucky as they have failed to maintain their marriage and society has no place for them, being neither single nor respectable widows.
In a South Asian context, it is the job of a mother to get her daughter married and the duty of close relatives and friends to not only help in looking for a groom but also to ensure that if the mother falters in her role, they are there to ensure the marriage goes through. This also applies in all other areas of upbringing. It is precisely to maintain the status quo of society that women end up oppressing other women.
Conclusion:
If the status quo was relaxed and women were allowed free reign to education and work, it would make the women who did not have these opportunities much more limited, in relation; their power would then be limited. Unlike the world of men, where each proves his worth economically, women have traditionally proved their worth through their family honour, and to change this, a change of mindset is required, for all of society.
However, as the thesis of this essay goes, women are women’s worst oppressors in a South Asian context; it is indeed clear from the examination of a number of literary works, that this thesis is indeed true. It is also clear that in the case of South Asian chick lit, reality does indeed play a very significant role in this genre of literature. Be it in terms of education, work or marriage, male and female roles are very similar across fiction and non-fiction.
As Jean de La Bruyère said in 1668, “It is because of men that women dislike one another”. It is precisely for this reason that women gossip and play a perpetual game of one-upmanship with other women. In order to prove themselves to be the spitting image of Sita , they undermine women around them and try to prove their worth in that manner. Women try to mould themselves and their daughters to be like Sita, all the while condemning the other women of their acquaintance. The tool of gossip is very powerful in a woman’s domain as once again it is linked to not only her honour but that of both her natal and marital families.
Evelyn Cunnigham once mentioned that “women are the only oppressed group in our society that lives in intimate association with their oppressors”. This is indeed true. Whether or not one sees women to be the worst oppressors of other women, it must nonetheless be admitted that they do play the most important part in the mindsets that other women form. Teachers, mothers, sisters and doctors, as well as women of the marital family are the most important people in a woman’s life and it is these people, these women, who cause her to think and act as she does, to avoid dishonouring her family.
Thus, the thesis of this essay still stands as, ‘women are women’s worst oppressors’ in a South Asian context as seen through the examination of literary sources, the only possible exception being in time of crisis.
Bibliography:
Adnan, Shapan. Lectures delivered for SN 2234 – Gender and Society in South Asia, LT 12, National University of Singapore; Semester I, AY 2005/6.
Aikath-Gyaltsen, Indrani, 1993. Daughters of the House. New York: Ballantine Books.
Ali, Monica, 2004. Brick Lane: a novel. New York: Scribner, 2004
Bhattacharya, Nalinaksha, 1995. Hem and Maxine. London: Jonathan Cape.
Bhattacharya, Nalinaksha, 1992. Hem and Football. London: Secker & Warburg.
Jean de La Bruyère, 1668. Caractères. Publisher not available. Published in France.
Mazumdar, Shudha, 1989. Memoirs of an Indian Woman. Edited with an introduction by Geraldine Forbes. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe
Nasrin, Taslima, 2001. My Girlhood. New Delhi: Kali for Women.
Sahgal, Manmohini Zutshi, 1994. An Indian Freedom Fighter Recalls Her Life. Edited by Geraldine Forbes; with a foreword by B.K. Nehru. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
Vani, Mahesh, 2004. “Post-feminist, or more fondly, Chick-lit!” Bangalore: Deccan Herald (Sunday Herald). April 25, 2004: Articulations, Book Day Special.
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/apr252004/artic2.asp
(Accessed 6th October, 2005)
Vasudev, Uma, 1993. Shreya of Sonagarh. New Delhi: UBS Publishers' Distributors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
