Gendered
Socialisation by jimmy c. dabhi
Published: Dabhi,
Jimmy. 2005, ‘Gendered Socialisation’ in Women’s Link, Vol.11, No.1,
January – March, 2005:24-31, New Delhi: A social Action Trust Publication.
|
1/11
|
Gender discrimination is fostered and perpetuated through
socialisation, formal and nonformal education, work and work environment. The
bottom-line is power and domination over women.
Gender discrimination is intrinsic to our society. Denial
does not help remedy the situation. Acknowledging it is the first step towards
combating the evil. It is neither god given, nor human made; it is simply MAN
made, in spite of the argument that women are the worst enemies of women
themselves.
This paper in its limited scope will briefly examine the
processes of socialisation that take place in one’s environment, within family,
at educational organisations/institutions, at work place etc. with respect to
gender discrimination. It is argued here that beliefs, assumptions, symbols
used, attitudes fostered and behaviour encouraged in the socialization
processes become instrumental in perpetuating gender discrimination. The paper
hints at some guidelines to a broad strategy to address these issues.
Gendered Socialisation - Bias towards Women
We live and work in a mutli-cultural and diverse
society with multiple interests. There are interwoven groups, communities which
are constantly interacting, exchanging, competing and collaborating for
collective and communitarian interests. Women and men may be considered as one
of the important categories of people sharing close intimate relationships,
collaborating in many ways and competing most violently for some interests (at
present women being victims of violence). There are biases and prejudices that
various categories of communities and people have towards each other; and so is
the case between women and men - some of the prejudices are manifested in
stereotypes. These prejudices and stereotypes are passed on through
socialization process, a process of learning your culture; and learning your
identity and the roles you are expected to play in society.
The prejudices are rooted in religious beliefs and
ideologies [1]; and they tell you who/what is superior and who/what is inferior
- “Any discrimination is based on the assumed superiority (along with
privileges) of the one against the inferiority of the other. On this is built
the edifice of inequality, injustice, oppression. This is of course
rationalised on the basis of a nature given (sex, birth, colour, race etc.) and
further authenticated, approved, affirmed and asserted through religion and
institutional assent” (Ginwalla and Dabhi, 2003:79). Ideologies are
discriminating, falsely defining who is and who is not a person (a white man, a
high caste is person; others are not), what is good and what is not good (what
men, so called high caste do is good); what is possible and what is not (you
must imitate their behaviour - so sanskritistion and women behaving like machos
but one can never be fully like them, it is not possible so others must remain
in their boundary).
Religious ideologies and religion have played havoc in India
Gender stereotypes occur when you apply generic
attributes, opinions or roles towards either gender. Gender stereotypes are
apparent everywhere in our society, reinforced by film media (see Mukherjee,
2004). Companies display ads and commercials using gender stereotypes. They
portray women in house cleaning and child rearing roles to sell household and
baby products. They sell beer and cars to men by showing women in revealing
outfits, or a sweating man out in the yard working hard on his lawn. These
gender stereotypes are used to sell the products to the people they believe
would use them most, showing them in “situations” they would most likely be in
(see Women’s Issues).
The process of socialization is learning values, norms,
language, and behaviour needed to function in a group or society; socialization
agents often include mass media, parents, peers, and the school, places of
worship, festivals. It is also learning with time how to function in a group or
society by assimilating a set of paradigms, rules, procedures, and principles
that govern perception, attention, choices, learning, and development. One of
these processes promotes bias against women in form of amply using symbols
(words and action) and constantly creates new ones to perpetual male
domination. Bourdieu the French sociologist, argues that capital underpinning
of all forms of power, whether they are material, cultural, social, or
symbolic. He suggests, “Individuals and groups draw upon a variety of cultural,
social, and symbolic resources in order to maintain and enhance their positions
in the social order” (Swartz, 1997:73).
Are Women and Men Different or is it a Myth?
What is obvious cannot be denied. Physically and
biologically women and men are different. These biological differences are then
stretched to assume difference in other aspects of human life and eventually
people believe that women and men are different far beyond their physical and
biological differences.
For centuries it was believed that the different
characteristics women and men exhibited were natural and immutably determined
by biological (sex based) differences or divinely ordained. In addition, sex
trait stereotypes determined ideas and beliefs about what was masculine and
feminine behaviour - women were considered gentle, emotional and patient while
men were rational, aggressive and physically stronger (O’Neill, 1992). O’Neill
goes on to suggest that sex role stereotypes were based on assumptions about
appropriate aptitudes or practices for both the sexes: women were seen as being
better at “social work” as nurses or teachers, while men took up technical
jobs, such as plumbing, carpentry and engineering. The understanding of the differences has
evolved over the years.
Gender today is understood as a social category which
refers to lived relationships between women and men; gender relations are those
by means of which sexual divisions as definitions of masculinity and femininity
are constructed, organised and maintained (Bradley, 1996:19). Gender defines
the social relationship between women and men and the way in which this
relationship has been socially constructed and institutionalized, through the
different roles that women and men play in society (see Thorbek, 1994). These
roles are dynamic and are shaped by historical, ideological, economic,
religious and cultural determinants.
Putting it differently the distinction between gender and
sex is the distinction between socially and culturally created and perceived
roles on the one side called gender; and the biological categories of
female/male on the other side called sex. Gender [2] then refers to the
attributes, behaviours, personality characteristics, and expectancies
associated with a person’s biological sex in a given culture; may be based on
biology, may be learned, or may represent a combination of biological and
cultural determinant. Gender relations and identities [3], unlike sex
(anatomical) differences are not universal, but vary from culture to culture
and sometimes from community to community.
It seems to be a human endeavour of some to grade
hieratically what is different - in social status and economic remuneration.
Gender discrimination is not about differences but about devaluing human
differences - biological and physical.
Gendered Socialisation Begins at Home
“It is a well-established fact that even though more boys
are born than girls, the latter are sturdier and should survive infancy better
than boys. But not in India
Agencies of socialization are structured groups or
contexts within which significant processes of socialization occur. These
agencies also influence gender socialization, the learning of male versus
female roles. Socialisation begins at birth and continues throughout life.
Socialisation is deliberate when individuals are told what to do or how to act.
Much socialisation is indirect and simply learned by being with other people.
The family is a principal agent in socialising a child. It is from their
family, that children learn speech, basic health and hygiene, eating habits,
beliefs, and a prescribed set of values.
What happens in a family is a reflection of what society
expects of its primary unit - the family. Since infants and children are
dependent on elders they learn their language, behaviour and attitude. What a family does is to cater to the
societal role expectation of female and male formation into woman-man gender
roles - “in Indian society, a woman’s place has been primarily confined to the
home, and her role is limited to procreation, rearing of children and catering
to the needs of menfolk (Tewari, 2004:50). Ideologies play an important
function in socialisation, role formation, role relation and role stereotype.
Our families are based on patriarchy which literally means ‘rule of the
father’. Radical feminists broadened the use of the term to refer to a general
structure of male domination in society, as defined by Kate Millet in Sexual
Politics: “Our society, like all other historical civilisations, is a
patriarchy . The military, industry, technology, universities, science,
political office, finances - in short every avenue of power within the society,
including the coercive force of the police, is entirely in male hands” (quoted
in Bradley, 1996:88).
Besides patriarchy, religion and varna
Formation and socialisation of children at home and in the
neighbourhood takes place by imitation, observation, internalization of values,
attitudes, behaviour of parents, elders and neighbours through social
interaction (also see Chaudhuri, 2004). Let me cite a few commonly occurring
events and situations in the context of a family. Relatives and friends visit
families and often bring along gifts for children often with gender bias tag of
course - a doll for the female child and a cricket bat (thanks to highly paid
media propaganda for this expensive sport at the cost of other sports in India
The mother or the grown up female child is expected to
bring water and tea when friends and relatives come over to visit. A boy is not
expected to do these functions unless female member in the house is not around.
Even if females (mother/sister) in the household are engaged in outside paid
work like other male members of the family, certain responsibilities invariably
cleaning (sweeping, dusting, mopping and washing), caretaking (taking care of
the sick, feeding, bathing, cleaning children) fall on the female members of
the family. If this is not possible then a maid may be hired but the ‘pati
dev’, ‘papa’ and ‘bhaiya’ of the family cannot be expected to do things, which
are below man’s (mard) dignity. It does not take long for observant children to
learn; if they don’t parents ensure that they do. If children do not fall in
line with expected role behaviours the mother is blamed - she does not know how
to raise children and train them.
The code of conduct, decorum and safety measures for girls
and boys begin to be learnt at home. Little girls cry as often as little boys
but as they grow up the behaviour tag changes - the girl is considered very
sensitive because she cries and the boy for the same behaviour is called
girlish, a step further ‘sissy’. Boys learn not to cry, at least not in public,
and also learn that crying is inferior behaviour. Girls cry because they are
inferior and not as strong and enduring as men. They learn that being like boys
is superior behaviour and aggressive behaviour is something to be imitated to
be considered strong.
Boys can be out of the house till late at night - it is
okay and often expected. The same behaviour by girls and young women becomes
dangerous because there are boys and men out there and may harm these girls and
women. The anxiety and fear of the family about their female members is not
unreal or unwarranted from what one hears and reads in newspapers but why cage
girls and women and not the rogues? Why blame women when men cannot behave
themselves. How well behaved are our own family boys and men when they are out
of the house may be worth inquiring from other women. Women are discriminated,
the discrimination is justified and perpetuated – of course for their safety
and for their good.
Bourdieu emphasises the role of symbolic forms and process
in the reproduction of social inequality, it holds true of gender
discrimination within the family. He argues that the symbolic system
simultaneously performs three interrelated but distinct functions: cognitive,
communication and social differentiation (Swartz, 1997:83). Children learn
through symbolic systems of society such as gestures, role models, symbols used
and behaviour observed; and as suggested by the sociologist such systems of
symbols do not only provide cognitive and interactive functions but also serve
as formative instrument of domination.
Given the kind of socialisation we have been subjected to
gender discrimination is not easy to fight because beside other reasons
women-men relationships have emotional ties, which are not easy to ignore in
the struggle for justice. At the micro
level gender discrimination operates at two levels, in the family and in the
caste group. In the rural area caste groupings are strong and binding, and
therefore, often taking a stand against gender discrimination implies taking a
stand against the family and the caste group, which is far from easy (also see
Franco and Sarvar, 1989). Unless men at various levels begin to participate in
the process the movement becomes difficult and makes for frustration, anger and
hopelessness. We have, in practice, overlooked this aspect to a great extent,
at a cost.
Education is not Value Free - it Promotes Gender Biases
Education is not value free, on the contrary it is motive
and value induced. Our history is witness to such a manipulated use of
education to serve vested interests of some in society - religious, economic
and political. Its content, processes,
the milieu, facilitators (educators/teachers) and receivers (educated/students)
are products of a society and its socialisation, and they carry this
socialisation baggage while giving and receiving education - formal or
otherwise. Thus education influences socialisation and the socialised
components of education influence education. The socio-cultural, economic and
political milieu influences the education system and those who are involved in
it. It is argued, “Discrimination impacts the cognitive, emotive and
behavioural aspects of a person. The cognitive factor refers to the frame of
mind of a person, a society, what that person/society thinks, assumes, believes
and expects of oneself, others and the world at large. For example, the belief
that women are inferior or the assumption that the presence of some people is
‘polluting’” (Ginwalla and Dabhi, 2003:78).
Observations based on the examination of content of a few
sample textbooks (of Standards I and III) used in some of the schools of
Ahmedabad reveal the biases of the writers themselves and thus society itself,
e.g., the exercise asking for an introduction of the student asks about the
name of the father. The mother has been obliterated from the exercise, and the
process of marginalisation of women has been subtly introduced (Ginwalla and
Dabhi, 2003:83). These authors have
further observed that the textbooks, without exception, are full of gender role
stereotypes - the text reads “This is our kitchen, mother cooks here”, “My
Daddy is big and strong. he sees to our needs. Mummy. looks after us. She does
all the work at home”, “some mothers go out to work. they earn money to help
the family”. Such images in these textbooks invariably portray teacher and
nurse as women, woman along with the girl child fetching water, man sitting on
the cot while the woman is shown standing.
On the one hand studies and experiences suggest education
helps emancipation of women (Drèze, and Sen, 1998; HDR, 2003). However, the
data suggests exclusion of female from education, the literacy rate for women
worldwide is 71.4 per cent, compared with 83.7 per cent for men. Of the 960
million illiterate adults, two-thirds are women. Gender inequity continues to
remain a serious problem in India India
at 54% is much higher than female literacy in Afghanistan ,
Pakistan or Bangladesh , it trails male literacy in India
On the other hand some people are convinced that education
alone can bring about gender justice. As suggested change does not take place
mechanically, or in a vacuum, it requires appropriate climate. The teaching and
learning that occurs in school is of dual nature - the explicit, what is in the
curriculum and the other one what students learn, other than academic contents,
from what they do or are expected to do in school, both have gender overtone.
Education can be an option for change but for that we need to critically
examine, correct and keep a critical watch over the contents, context (milieu),
process and the agent of change. It is, therefore, suggested that culture and
social changes such as displacement, transfer of knowledge, conflict, have
implication for adolescent girl’s lives, the education they get and the work
they do (UNESCO, 2004).
Work – Divisive and Gendered
Most of the adults spend almost one-third of their working
lifetime in organised or unorganised sectors. Women often spend more time at
workplace than men because of their social (single, divorced, abandoned) and
economic status (economically poor, bonded labourer, she being the only source
of income as the husband/partner is alcoholic, sick) - the study suggests there
are 40 million bonded labourers of which many are children and women (National
Human Rights Commission, 2004). 96 per cent of children who work and sleep on
the streets are migrants about half of them are girls aged between 8 and 14
(WCAR). They do not only spend more time at work (in and outside house) but
their in-house work is not recognised and work out of the house is less paid
than men - even today agricultural labourers in many areas work for such a
small amount as Rs.15/- or 25/- or two to three kg of rice per day, well below
the minimum wage prescribed in their State and women are paid less than men
(Human Rights Watch, 1999), in spite of the State being directed to securing
for men and women equally the right to an adequate means of livelihood [Article
39 (a)]; and equal pay for equal work for both men and women [Article 39 (d)].
Work places are important social units where socialisation takes place through
human interaction, exchange of ideas, knowledge, feelings, and more so through
organisation and work culture.
In most low-income households, ‘women’s work’ includes not
only reproductive work (the childbearing and rearing responsibilities) required
to guarantee the maintenance and reproduction of the labour force but also
productive work, often as secondary income earners. In addition, women are involved in community
managing work undertaken at a local community level in both urban and rural
contexts. Because the triple role of women is not recognized the fact that
women, unlike men, are severely constrained by the burden of simultaneously
balancing these roles of reproductive, productive, and community managing work
is ignored (Moser, 1989), in addition, only productive work is recognized as
work.
Work place culture is influenced by people who dominate
and control the market economy of the place and this in return influences people
who work there, of course to the employer’s advantage. Thus the work place
culture and human interaction are results of socialisation as much as they are
instruments of socialisation of people who work within these places. Formal
work places such as local, national and international
organisations/institutions play a vital role in influencing people who work
there. As much as organisations fulfil individual needs (e.g. livelihood, need
for affiliation, achievement, need for power) they also exert influence on
individuals so that they behave in such a way to maximise goals of the
organisation. Often, there is a price to pay for meeting these needs - the
membership forms organisation and social identity of the individual beginning
with putting on behaviour and language the organisation requires. You might
never have worn a tie in your life but join some organisation and the next day
you will find yourself wearing a tie in the middle of Indian summer. Often
organizations dictate gendered roles as they chase their profit goals and
discrimination against women (for details see Ginwalla, 1991).
Theories and critique of Karl Marx and Max Webber still
hold relevance to our work place; labour and organisation as they alienate and
discriminate women (see Fincham and Rhodes, 1992). Labour and division of
labour in almost all sectors - agriculture, industry (machine, chemical,
knowledge, information, transport, navigation, aviation, etc), service,
defence, education, health, finance, etc is gendered. Barring a few, most
believe in and practice this gendered work division - there are many
academicians, intellectuals, rationalists, bureaucrats, union leaders and so
called civil society stalwarts who do not subscribe to gendered work division
and discrimination but their rhetoric is limited to seminars, workshops,
conferences they address and articles and books they write, beyond that they
are no different from the rest of us. Even advanced universalized technologies
meant for betterment of human society are used not to control the population,
but only one segment of the population (Sharma, 2004). There is a certain kind
of hard and laborious work done only by men while there is yet another kind of
work equally or more hard and laborious to be done by women because they are
women.
In addition, for many women factors relating to their
social identity such as caste, religion, colour, language, ethnicity and region
become “differences that make a difference”. These factors can create problems
that are unique to particular groups of women or they disproportionately affect
some women as compared to others in their movement, relation and choice of
employment.
There are assumptions, strong beliefs and stereotypes
attached to the kind of work designed, allocated and the way it is carried out.
The biological reality is that women bear children and may like to breastfeed
children initially; therefore, the conclusion is that women have god given
talent for child rearing and caring. Stretch the conclusion further, a myth is
created (of course to men’s advantage) that all nurturing and caring related
work is better done by women than men. All believe and behave accordingly
including women - some of them very happily- a result of strong internalisation
of gender ideology.
The kind of work women do is inferior compared to the work
men do because women are inferior human beings compared to men - people believe
it and act likewise. Therefore, you may find that if a child is sick they may
take her/him to a lady doctor (myth – women are good at nurturing and caring)
but if a surgery is required they may look for a male doctor (tough job).
Data (WCAR) suggests that the gender gap in earning
persists, with women employed in industry and services typically earning 78 per
cent of what men earn in the same sector. Remuneration is acknowledgement of
the value attached to the work and value of the person who does it. Neither
women nor their work is held in high esteem. Women’s share of decision-making
positions reached 30 per cent in only 28 countries in the 1990s. Additionally,
of 1.3 billion people living in poverty, 70 per cent are women. It is argued
that economic independence provides better opportunity to women to challenge
the dominant onslaught of men especially in the family relations and work relations.
Those who control money and power whether World Bank, a country, an employer,
or father/brother/husband are in dominating position to dictate thinking and
behaviour of their subordinates, dependents, whether country, employee or a
family member.
Data suggests that there was an increase in job seekers
(registered with Employment Exchange) among women between 1998 and 2002 (Sinha,
2004). In the absence of a job these
women job seekers do not have much choice and economic necessities compel them
to accept work condition and work culture which may not always be gender
sensitive and thus extracting silent consent and resignation to gender bias.
Year
|
Total Job Seekers
|
Women age group
|
Percentage
|
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
|
4,00,90,000
4,03,71,000
4,13,44,000
4,19,96,000
4,11,70,000
41,13,89,000
|
20s
30s
40s
50s
60s
|
5.6
18.0
27.0
28.5
66.0
|
(Source: Sinha,
2004)
Work place and work culture as much as they are gendered
are instruments of socialisation and promote social discrimination and gender
discrimination is one of them.
Challenges to Gender Justice
Gender injustice is not women’s problem as often thought;
it is a human made human problem, and therefore, must be addressed by human
beings. ‘Females’ are the worst victims of gender injustice; this victimization
becomes severe because victims have asserted their rights to equality and
dignity. Any assertion for rights by an individual, group or community is met
by violence. Violence is often the last resort that oppressors use to suppress
any protest, it is at this point that courage, collaboration and resilience are
required by victims and supporting groups.
The human development and human rights perspectives have
brought women in the public domain more effectively than before. The civil society
has become more vigilant about gender justice in public as well as in the
family domain. This is not to argue that the civil society is unified and all
actors in it are gender insensitive. There is a paradigm shift in understanding
of gender and development; from ‘development for women’ to ‘women in
development’, to ‘development and women’ and then to ‘gender and development
[4]; realising that women and men are equal partners in development of society
in private and public domain.
Change facilitators on the one hand must keep in mind that
women are not a homogenous social group and their needs will differ according
to their relative ages as well as their different activities, resources and
responsibilities. On the other hand, the argument that women’s interests are
different from men is not all that valid as it is well observed that “Women’s
specific interests are a reflection of their living conditions (such as intense
cohabitation with young children). Men would have the same interests if they
shared the same living conditions (Public Service International).” A need
assessment should therefore take into account this social and personal
heterogeneity.
The challenges, therefore, are: first, women and men must
jointly accept responsibility and work towards change in gender relations. The
need, therefore, to sensitise both men and women. Second, is to understand and
realise that no one sensitises no one; people chose to be sensitised. Third,
therefore creating an environment and culture - in the family and
neighbourhood, in places where education takes place including schools,
colleges, institutions; and places of work.
Sensitisation is incomplete if it does not address the
whole person and all human faculties. The process of sensitisation therefore
requires that the cognitive, the emotive and the motor faculties; and senses
are put to use. Gender sensitisation for that matter any programme on
addressing social injustices requires awareness building leading to change in
mind-set. The awareness programme, therefore, needs to aim at people’s belief
system and rationality. There is some truth in the saying that people behave as
they think and what they believe. Genocide led by Hitler and his followers, the
recent attempt in Gujarat by Sangh Parivar (Hindu fascists) and the oppressive
regime of Taliban seemed to have had mastered the skills but for wrong ends.
Civil society can put to use the same skills for right ends.
Emotive is yet another faculty to be put to use for the
purpose. People who are convinced but not do not feel strongly about what they
are convinced about do not easily act. Therefore, along with the change of mind
set it is important that people also begin to feel differently as emotional
intensity influences behaviour. For example, a brother or a husband may like to
share household work with his sister or wife, which is considered only women’s
work. The man may experience two intense feelings - that of love and
embarrassment. He may want to share the work because there is a strong feeling
of love on one hand and on the other hand he may shy away because there is an
intense feeling of embarrassment for what others may say. Therefore, it may
help to facilitate processes whereby human emotions are examined, their causes
analysed and these emotions get channelled for more gender just behaviour and
actions.
Finally to promote and create environment where people are
motivated to behave and act gender sensitively is important. It is said that
all behaviour is goal oriented and a person’s needs, working in conjunction
with emotions and other psychological functions, acts as motives that dictate
actions or behaviour (Hicks and Gullet, 1976). It is argued that clarity of
goal motivates people to act. Working for and creating a just and human family,
neighbourhood and society becomes a goal of families, educational institutions
and work place; people therein will most likely be motivated to behave and act
accordingly. Therefore, providing motivation, opportunities to act differently
and acknowledging and rewarding gender just behaviour may go a long way in
arresting gender discrimination.
Such comprehensive and multifaceted efforts inclusive of
socio-psychological, educational and economic well-being at home and outside
especially at the place of education and work may expedite social processes
leading to more gender just society. We have stated briefly the influence of
religion and religious ideologies in the family, education and work place. If
not guarded they can do more harm than good to women and men. One can debate
that religion can be liberating and a motivating force for ‘good action’, there
is no reason to refute this theory but human experience in the world including
India must teach us some hard truths and see for ourselves what we have done in
the name of religion. In the given circumstance respecting the secular fabric
of our country is one of the noble acts we can perform. Women in particular
must guard against gender stereotypes found in religious institutions and in
religious teaching because these are the areas where women have been kept out
of decision-making for centuries and these bodies and systems are strongly
guarded and dominated by men - in the name of god.
References
Bradley, Harriet (1996), “Fractured Identities - Changing
Patterns of Inequality”, Polity Press, Cambridge
Chaudhuri, Rashmi (2004), “Role of Family in Value Based
Education in Transitional Society, in New Frontiers in Education”,
International Journal of Education, Vol. XXXIV, No. 3, July-September, (2004):
185-190, New Delhi
Drèze, Jean and Sen, Amartya (1998), “India Economic Development and Social
Opportunity”, Delhi : Oxford University
Dabhi, Jimmy (2004), “Dalit Human Rights: Issues and
Perspective” in Social Action, Vol. 54, No.1, 2004, 33-46, New Delhi
Franco F. and Sarvar, V. Sherry Chand (1989), “Ideology as
Social Practice: The Functioning of Varna
Ginwalla, Persis and Dabhi, Jimmy (2003), “Education: An
Option for Social Change”, VIKALP, Vol.XI/No: 4 - 2003:77-89, Mumbai: Vikas
Adhyayan Kendra.
Ginwalla, Persis (1991), “Economic Aspects of the
Exploitation of Women”, A Concept Paper for Training, Behavioural Science
Centre, Ahmedabad , India
Human Development Report, (2003).
Human Rights Watch (1999), “Broken People: Caste Violence
against India
Moser, Caroline O. (1989), “Gender Planning in the Third World : Meeting Practical and Strategic Gender
Needs”, World Development, 17:11.
Mukherjee, Sujata (2004), “The female character in Indian
moving images” Social Change - Issues and Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 1, March
2004: 1-10, New Delhi: Journal of the Council for Social Development.
National Human Rights Commission (2004), “Report on
Prevention of Atrocities Against Scheduled Castes - policy and performance”, New Delhi
O’Neill, Chris (1992), “Gender and Development: Concepts
and Analytical Tools”, a Concept Paper, Behavioural Science Centre, Ahmedabad.
Public Service International (2002), “PSI Policy on Gender Mainstreaming”,
France
Sharma, Kalpana (2001), “Counting women”, online edition
of India
Sinha,
Vivek (2004), “There’re More Out on the Streets Looking for jobs”, The Economic
Times, New Delhi, 25th October 2004:14
Swartz, David. (1997), “Culture and Power - The Sociology
of Pierre Bourdieu”, Chicago : The University of Chicago
Tewari, Suruchi (2004), “Status of Women in the Naai
Community of Uttar Pradesh”, Social Change, Vol. 34, No. 1, March 2004,49-56, New Delhi
Thorbek, Susanne (1994), “Gender and Slum Culture in Urban
Asia”, New Delhi
UNESCO – United Nations Educational Scientific and
Cultural Organisation, (2004), “Quality Education for all Young People:
Challenges, Trends and Priorities”, Reference Document. Geneva
Women’s Issues:
http://womensissues.about.com/cs/genderstereotypes/a/aagenderstereo.htm
[1] Ideologies are a creation of human minds and
these ideologies in return govern human minds and societies. Caste, gender and
religion are some of these ideologies. These ideologies operate on the basic
assumption that there are some who because of their birth (caste ideology), sex
(gender ideology) and ‘faith’ (religious ideology) are superior while others
are lesser human beings they are polluting and are the secondary class citizens
(also see Dabhi, 2004)
[2] See Richard Alumbaugh, Professor of Psychology
at Central Washington University
[3] Gender Identity refers to the sex with which
individuals associate themselves and they vary from country to country and
culture to culture.
[4] Gender and Development stresses on the need for
women to organize themselves for a more effective political voice. It
recognizes that patriarchy operates within and across classes to oppress women.
Focus on strengthening women’s legal rights, including the reform of
inheritance and land laws. It talks in terms of upsetting the existing power
relations in society between men and women. GAD rejects the public/private
dichotomy.
No comments:
Post a Comment