Owning Indian roads

That we are rather inconsiderate of people perceived as outsiders is, I think, the fallout of the social allegiances adhered to in India’s collectivism. These relationships of ‘us’ and ‘them’ groups are high-maintenance. In attempts to preserve their intra-group integrity, and areas of control, they are unkind to those perceived parayas (outsiders) despite the traditional culture of hospitality to all. Gender segregation is at work too. In the minds of the majority of Indian men, the external world is their preserve. They own the roads, and they may be sexist about it. It is surprising how much resentment is generated against women drivers, the outsiders. Common jibes are that these sisters-in-law should stay home and cook!

Pedestrians, however, are relieved to see women drivers coming along. They stick out an arm as a stop sign just about anywhere and begin to cross the road, confident that the women’s maternal instincts will take over, and they will stop to let them through. This happens even when the traffic signal has turned green. Men are far less accommodating; many actually speed up seeing their movement, and pedestrians, the elderly, women and children, are forced to scurry back. 
 

The common assumption is that men are born better drivers, although the evidence for it may not be particularly strong. I was in Delhi recently, and happened to be a passenger in a large sedan. I expressed the wish to drive this more powerful vehicle sometime, since my car in Kolkata is amongst the smallest on the road. The driver I shall call Prem, smiled patronizing, and I could almost see his ego inflate. Benevolently, he said he would teach me how to drive. Women, you see, just cannot drive! 

On Indian roads, size seems to matter in road hierarchy. Men at the wheels of bigger, more expensive cars, expect right of way over everybody else. As we went along, I noticed Prem didn’t much bother to watch his rear-view and wing mirrors. His trajectory seemed premeditated - he would go as he wished, and others could (or should!) drive around him. At one point, he took a turn too sharply, and sideswiped another car parked on the side of the road. Lucky for him nobody seemed to notice, and he quickly drove off in another direction.

A safe distance away, he began to boast about the long distances he drives every day without mishap. So what happened back there, I enquired. Immediately he faulted the other car for blocking the passage. We got off easy, he chortled. I was irked at his suddenly drafting me as the co-conspirator of his error. You didn’t get off easy, I emphasized, you just ran, but my disgust was lost on him. It was clear that he learned nothing from the experience, because sometime later, he left the car idling on the road and dashed into a shop nearby for supplies. Wanting to save on parking fees, he was oblivious to the fact that the car was now an impediment for other vehicles, not to mention the wastage of fuel and environmental pollution happening at the same time!

Bad driving is common and so are incidents of hit-and-run. Driving licences may be purchased under the table - without knowledge either of cars, or the traffic rules. Bystanders get het up if there is injury to people or loss of life, otherwise they gather around just to watch the drama of altercations unfold. Sometime ago, one such a rookie driver, showing off to his mates whilst his boss was away, rammed a roadside stall. He tried to flee, of course, and in his hurry, rear-ended my stationary small car. Alert locals nabbed one of the boys out that car before it sped away. The terrified youth quickly spilled the beans; the group was rounded up and hauled into the police station. Their families showed up as well. Mothers especially, wept buckets, beating their chests, begging the police and anybody else who might listen, for mercy. Because they were poor, it would naturally be cruel to book their sons. The poverty card is easily played in this country, and no compensation is ever forthcoming for the damage these ‘poor’ inflicted on others’ property! 

 

In majority, male drivers let loose on Indian roads, drive to get there first. However, they have no real answer to the question “and where to exactly?” As it is the roads rarely have lane-markings, and even if they do, few bother to keep to them. Driving is taken to mean to constantly overtake somebody else, although more often, they cause or intensify traffic jams. Sudden maneuvers are usual, and without sound or signal, an adjoining vehicle noses out diagonally, intending to force another to give way.  This when there is traffic at standstill ahead, behind and on every other side! Other vehicles, magnetically attracted by movement, invariably follow the leader to jam up the roads even more.

It sometimes feels a violation of personal space, but it makes “road sense” here to creep close to the vehicle ahead, almost bumper-to-bumper, to plug any ‘openings’! One has to be on guard against lateral encroachments, because some ambitious overtaker will soon insert his vehicle, and unceremoniously sideline the giver of space. I’ve learnt that being polite does not pay, and hoot insistently and gesticulate wildly to draw attention to the infractions that might happen relating to me. That seems to back them down. Men in India don’t want their misdeeds held up to public scrutiny, especially by brazen outsider women!

Social: 3. The use of advantage

Ever since I had gained a moderate amount of fame, I’d had women offering themselves to me. I’m not special; the same thing happens to every man who makes his living in sports, music, television or movies.

So says a love rat – although the term used to derogate an unfaithful husband actually insults the rodent. (The real rat merely follows the inherited code of its species, while cheating is definitely a human characteristic.) Upturns in economic and socio-cultural status appear to bring deceit and dysfunction into relationship equations.

With revelations continually appearing on global social networks, it assumes proportions of an emerging trend in celebrity marriages, especially in the West. Elsewhere, women are yet to be empowered to fight for gender equality.

In truth, the “fame” that biker James (quoted above) basked in was not quite his own achievement, but rather glory reflected off his famous wife. His illicit liaisons made a mockery of their marital union. He writes further:

After all, when you take money out of the equation, what’s the point of being famous besides having your pick of attractive partners? 

 

James is not alone in his proclivities. The Gropegate allegations, and the bombshell of wife and mistress both pregnant at the same time under the same roof reveal the "dark truth" behind the success saga of America's most famous Austrian immigrant. Leigh writes:

… the real Schwarzenegger —  an immoral, arrogantly reckless man with a monstrous  attitude to women and a propensity for having unprotected sex. Schwarzenegger’s rampant womanising has been known to me since 1988, as have his sleazy beginnings in the world of body building, his fondness for sadistic practical jokes, his delight in humiliating women … he often targeted unattractive women because they were more likely to worship him and his muscular physique.

Driven to sexual gratification to prove their own worth, the love rats have few qualms in breaking matrimonial vows, and family values. Men that attain the power of resources tend to assume that being famous puts them beyond the constraints of common social norms. It provides them the licence to unbridled willfulness, reducing the women around them to commodities to be used and abused.

Although gender equality is claimed in the post-feminist era, patriarchal attitudes remain embedded in the social structure. Men count on this organized bias for the tacit understanding that boys will be boys. In France, the cultural view is that affairs of sex are the man’s personal business.  Chrisafis reports:

Nicholas Demorand, editor of the daily Liberation, said his paper would continue to respect politicians' privacy. "It's a democratic principle – hypocritical in some people's eyes, but fundamental ... Ditching this principle would lead to encouraging short-term buzz and trash over quality news."

Despite the faint acknowledgement that “trash” does abound socially, the media defers to power, afraid of being denied access to crucial information. They prefer to focus reporting on more important matters, thus deliberately overlooking the predatory nature of privileged men. 

The French are accused of showing more compassion for Strauss-Kahn than for the alleged victim in the rape case that caused his arrest in New York and also cost him his job as the IMF chief. Some women activists say that had the incident occurred in France, the story may not have surfaced at all.

Politicians strive to grasp the helm of a nation’s leadership and governance. In their speeches, they profess the very highest standards of integrity and ethics, and soundness of judgement. Yet in any country, political heavyweights flouting the same ideals are legion. Their public pronouncements appear to encourage self-control less, and more the assiduous maintenance of a false front.

The wealth and clout of their wives are often pressed into service to defend these public images.  These women, already victims of humiliation, demean themselves further denouncing the charges, perhaps only to preserve the appearance of family in the public spotlight.

The tenacity of investigative journalism has brought to light many of the transgressions over the years. In USA, in the 1980s, Senator Hart had declared his presidential candidature.   Then rumours began to circulate about his philandering on the campaign trail, which he robustly denied.

“Follow me around, I don't care, ” Hart was quoted as saying. “I'm serious. If anybody wants to put a tail on me, go ahead. They'd be very bored. ”

Journalists McGee et al initially had no leads and gave the senator the benefit of doubt. Later they acted on a tip from a woman who said she didn’t want to see another liar elected. Piecing together bits of information about his whereabouts, they discovered his secret hideaway. The journalists conducted round-the-clock surveillance to gather evidence of his feet of clay. In the middle of 1987, they published their scoop. The scandal that broke permanently sank Hart’s presidential aspirations.

A decade after Hart, and, Clinton perjured himself during the trial conducted while he was President.  The crucial evidence of “the dress” eventually demolished his defences, bringing him to the brink of impeachment. One of Clinton’s then harshest critics was Senator Gingrich, a member of the political opposition. The thrice-married Gingrich himself formed relationships with subsequent wives while still married to their predecessor. As a presidential hopeful in 2012 he now admits to have indulged in other flings also.

The men put the most effort into preventing their being outed.  Their advantage of resources and position in the organized hierarchy are used to the hilt to lie, bribe, intimidate, and in the new millennium, to invest in super injunctions to gag their socially unequal mistresses.  

England footballer Giggs had the image of a devoted family man at the time when the sleazy relationships of other players were exposed in the media. His paramour was discreet, and the affair might have remained so too, because she thought they were in love and he genuinely wanted to marry her.

However, his intentions being different, the fear of exposure got to him. He obtained a Court ruling, as he claimed, to forestall possible blackmail.  But in reality, his priority was  self-preservation, as writes Allen:

…to protect his reputation and privacy both personally and professionally. His teammates certainly would not have appreciated the press hovering around the team during workouts. While the legal mandate was in effect it could have helped his team focus and perform well, which gave them a shot at winning the championship. … He was probably also concerned about protecting his sponsorship deal with Reebok and DVD sales for his workout videos.

She was slapped with the order to prevent her ever mentioning him, while no such consideration was accorded her. She could be named and vilified – and indeed it so happened. 

Twitter users, however, refused to be muzzled. On the global platform, many of them were outside the purview of the local Courts.  They took up the challenge to assert rights to freedom of speech in virtual reality. Giggs’ identity was soon splashed across social networks on the Internet.  Hemming, a British parliamentarian then named the player in the House using parliamentary privilege to also bypass the injunction.  He promises that celebrities who have such injunctions face ‘death by a thousand cuts’. 

The drama has sparked power struggles within and between the organized and unorganized social units in UK – the judiciary, the parliament and the global social networks. The social networks have "made the law an ass" and the intrepid tweeters have been threatened legal recourse. Twitter service providers are being pressured to reveal their identities. Parliamentarians insist on their legislative privileges.  Judges, on the other hand, expect laws passed by Parliament to be binding also on its members. 

The question that arises is why, somewhere on their upwardly mobile pathways, men appear to catch the common malady. James gives his reasons for his actions:

Mentally at a loss, desperate for something to make me feel as if I had some freedom, I ran through the list of things I could do to assert my independence. Infidelity, unfortunately, was at the top of the list.

Gringrich explains why in an interview:

There's no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate…

Excuses for the lack of self-control seek to blame environmental pressures, rather than the individuals concerned. The point is fame and fortune brings into sharp focus the inherent character flaws of the men who so avidly pursue wealth and power. They are motivated by private logic that leads them to believe that thereby - one, they are entitled, and two, they are untouchable.  Perhaps by repeating cheating behaviours they hope to gain a sense of worth, and raise self-esteem enough to convince themselves more than others that they have indeed arrived. 

 References for this post:

1. Allen, Amber. “Imogen Thomas’s Married Lover Finally Exposed – Footballer Ryan Giggs” wakeywakeynews.com.  Wakey Wakey News. com. 12 May 2011.  
2. Bowcott, Owen, and Halliday, Josh. “Twitter users and the courts go to war over footballer’s injunction” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 20 May 2011. 
3. Chrisafis, Angelique.“Strauss-Kahn case sparks debate about French media's deference to power” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 19 May 2011. 
4. Devlin, Kate. “Giggs sets courts at war with Parliament” heraldscotland.com The Herald. 24 May 2011. 
5. “Gingrich: Working 'too hard' led to affair” upi.com. Newsreport. US News. UPI.com. March. 9, 2011. 
6. James, Jesse. “Tattooed biker Jesse James reveals how fame and his weakness ruined their unlikely love” Newsreport. dailymail.co.uk. Daily Mail. 22nd May 2011. 
7. Leigh, Wendy. “How many more love children are there, Arnie? Schwarzenegger's biographer says the dark truth about the star is still to emerge...” dailymail.co.uk. The Daily Mail. 23rd May 2011. 
8. Linder, Douglas “The Stained Blue Dress that Almost Lost a Presidency” umkc.edu. Famous Trials. Clinton  Trial 1999. Dated 2005. 
9. McGee, Jim; Fiedler, Tom; Savage, James. “THE GARY HART STORY: HOW IT HAPPENED” unc.edu. First published The Miami Herald May 10, 1987.  Reprint undated. 

Social: 2. Consequences of organization

Nations with organized social structures boast of being developed. The organization throws a ring of safety around all its members, assuring freedom and security without discriminations. It is meant to ensure that people know their functions and respect boundaries in society.  The success of the system lies in the strict maintenance of the structure. But in the process, the contexts of gender often fall through the cracks. 

The assumption is that people living in the developed nations lead other regions in being far more enlightened about the meanings of freedom and equality. Less developed nations have more orthodox societies, where women generally swathe in traditional attire in deference to dominant attitudes. Their social choices are few, even of dress.

Modern women especially in the West, flaunt their liberation from bondage.  They choose revealing clothing to emphasize their achieving control of their own bodies. In the post-feminist era, feminine fashion choices are statements of personal identity.

However, the men appear to not share the women’s perceptions of themselves. Gender equations tend to remain conservative, as they were in the past. The men may instead perceive the modern women’s fashions as signals of sexual depravity, inviting exploitation.

For example, at a law school in Canada, a visiting police officer reportedly declared to his youthful audience that, “women should avoid dressing like sluts to avoid being victimized”.  Clearly, the conditioning persists that the onus of responsible social behaviour rests with  women. 

The stereotypical thinking reinforces  the practice of victim blaming, especially if it should be a female. Media reports also carry the same, perhaps unconscious, gender bias regarding gang-rape of young girls. As Freeman points out:

• A newspaper in New Delhi reports the words of the mother of a perpetrator: "If these girls will roam around like this, then the boys will make mistakes."
• On another occasion, a newspaper in New York notes that "[The 11-year old girl] dressed older than her age, wearing makeup and fashions more appropriate to a woman in her 20s. She would hang out with teenage boys at a playground …"

In UK, gender equality is widely claimed by men, as well as women of substance. And yet, the already powerless fail to find compassion within systems accustomed to conventional ways of thinking. The plight of victims’ seeking redressal is akin to jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. Victims of marital rape discover to their cost that their perspectives are neither understood nor considered.

For example, news media reports:

Last autumn, a 28-year-old mother began an eight-month prison sentence for "falsely retracting" a rape allegation against her husband, despite the court accepting that she had suffered prolonged domestic abuse and had withdrawn the rape accusation under pressure from her husband.

In effect, the woman, a rape victim hostage in her own home, is accorded no mercy for being so.  The adjucators of crime are unmoved by the situational context. In the sentencing, the system evaluates her offence as the greater social evil. The moot point being overlooked is, as Gentleman writes:

The nature of rape as a crime that usually occurs in private, with only the victim as a witness, makes it challenging to prosecute. How to handle allegations of rape that are subsequently retracted by the victim is an equally fraught part of law. When is it in the public interest to prosecute the woman for perverting the course of justice?

The pillars of the social structure uphold the civilized tradition that ‘all men are equal’. But for women in any patriarchal system, the reality is very different, and it matters little which part of the world they are in. 

Gender issues take on stereotypical colouring even in the minds of the makers of law. UK’s Justice Secretary is keen to intoduce legislation to give suspected criminals a fifty percent discount should they plead guilty before trial. The move, meant to be an incentive to decrease the time people have to spend in Court over trials, may actually be a boon for repeat offenders.

A news report explains the concern of some judges:

The plans could lead to a defendant being sentenced to three years in jail, but having this reduced to 18 months and then only serving nine months - or even less if eligible for a home detention curfew … [it risks] becoming an inappropriate reflection of the original culpability…

The discounts would serve to put rapists back in circulation far quicker. All they would need to do is plead guilty to soon resume where they left off. The Secretary also makes a distinction between “serious rape” and “date rape” - i.e., 17-year-olds having intercourse with 15-year-olds.  In his wisdom, the latter seems rather more acceptable, and less necessary to punish. 

Similar attitudes exist across the pond in USA, where the Learned Courts have upheld organizational rulings against a schoolgirl raped by a fellow student. Smith relates:

HS was 16 at the time she complained she was raped in 2008. Her attacker was charged with sexual assault, but after a plea deal, admitted misdemeanour assault and got a princely sentence of no time served. She was told to keep a low profile at school to avoid attracting attention…in 2009 when she attended a basketball game as a member of the cheerleading squad and was ordered to cheer for her attacker…

When the girl refused to shake pom-poms for the basketball player at a school event, she was suspended from the team. She then challenged the suspension in the Courts. Smith reports on the legal outcome:

The initial court ruled against her, an appellate court upheld that decision, and the supreme court refused to hear the matter … The result? A student exercising her free-speech rights has been ordered to pay a penalty to the school district, on the grounds that her original suit was a "frivolous lawsuit".

Seccuro was drugged and raped repeatedly at a college party. The emotional trauma she suffered scarred her for life.  When she reported the crime to authorities, she was asked whether she had had sex but didn't want to admit that she wasn’t a ‘good girl’. Eventually her attacker was sentenced to ten years in prison, but was released in less than six months, perhaps because he was white and educated. Twenty years later, with "spiritual awakening" he wrote to apologize for the "collateral damage" his alcoholism had caused. 

Notions of gender domination and objectifying women may have changed little despite the claims of the post-feminist era. Many men, outwardly liberal, harbour in mind implicit theories of gender inequality that guide their actions. Their latent prejudices diffuse into the social organization. It should be of little surprise then that despite the general fall in recorded crime in England, serious sexual crimes have risen by about six percent over the twelve months ending in December last. 

In the atmosphere of acceptance in the new millennium, the men may actually grow to expect decreasing social censure in their playing out dominant sexual fantasies. Freedom may come to mean the licence to exploit. In Ireland, women protestors taken into custody for demonstrating against oil pipelines were joked about by the arresting police officers, recorded as saying “Give me your name and address and I'll rape you.” 

Development largely refers to  advancements of technology, and thence economics, communication channels, weaponry, infrastructure and so on.  Although it is generally assumed that openness of mind arrives in the process, evolution of mind does not at all keep pace with the technology. In truth, the structure of organized society itself may be constraining change. 

Similar to elsewhere, the people of developed nations rely on conventional wisdom to guide their actions. The habit of not fixing what ain’t broke, tends to perpetrate change-resistant patriarchal attitudes within the organization just as before.  Women awaiting organized rescue, wait in vain.  

If they are to wrest equality inside the existing structures, they must innovate social confrontation of the organized discrimination. Seccuro motivated herself to seek the justice her attacker had so long eluded. And in Canada, a new women's movement sprouts across the country - SlutWalking!

References for this post:

1. Davis, Rowena. “Irish police chief apologises for officers who joked about raping protesters” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 8 April 2011. 
2. Freeman, Hadley. “Rape is not a compliment” guardian.co.uk. Comment. The Guardian. 30 March 2011. 
3. Gentleman, Amelia. “'Restoring confidence so victims report rape is key'” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 19 April 2011. 
4. Jones, Sam. “Recorded crime falls despite rise in sexual offences and knife-point robbery” News. guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 20 April 2011. 
5. Pilkington, Ed. “SlutWalking gets rolling after cop's loose talk about provocative clothing” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 6 May 2011.
6. Seccuro, Liz. “Dear Rapist…” News. guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 30 April 2011. 
7.  “Sentencing plans 'would not reflect severity of crimes'” News report. bbc.co.uk. News UK. BBC. 6 April 2011. 
8. Slack, James. “Tearful rape victim challenges Ken Clarke over 'disastrous' plans to halve sentences of attackers who plead guilty” dailymail.co.uk. The Daily Mail. 18th May 2011. 
9. Smith, SE. “Cheerleader's protest after assault was not 'frivolous'” guardian.co.uk. Article. The Guardian. 5 May 2011.  

Social: 1. The rape of the future

A friend writes that "Religion is the largest cause of problems throughout the world; if only people could respect others beliefs and not fight against it, the whole world would be a better place."  Multiculturalism demands unquestioned respect for others’ religious practices. But then entrenched beliefs carried forward in almost all religious practices, continue to hurt about half of humanity with the patriarchal legacy of gender inequality. 

I doubt that religion per se is the largest cause of strife. It appears so when invoked by politics and prejudice to legitimize usurping power and privilege. Beliefs arising from gender segregations of ages past are that women are born to serve.  To the change-resistant patriarchal mindset, society allows and traditions award that men may do with women just as they please.

The collective disregard for feminine rights enables abuse. Like rape.  In lawlessness associated with war and genocide, the violence on women is extreme. Conflicts in Congo and Rwanda have left innumerable numbers mutilated.  Even while they were getting water for their families, marauding gangs have brutally attacked women and girls with intent to dehumanize and destroy. 

Viner writes:

The particularly violent way of rape that has become current destroys the women's reproductive organs. They can no longer have children (especially terrible in a society in which motherhood so defines being female that the word for "woman" is "mama"). 

Even babies have not been spared.  Western politicians, moved to tears with the gruesome plight of victims in Congo and Rwanda have however, been unable to deliver them the help required for their rehabilitation. Many of the women have discovered the courage to stand up on their own, and shame the global inaction. Despite their horrific experiences, they themselves are making change in global awareness, giving voice to others that have lost it.

Jeanne, a Congolese survivor, is only twenty-seven years old, but in experience of violation, she is a veteran.  As Viner reports:

She finds walking difficult, ever since she was tied to a tree and gang raped for many weeks, had surgery to repair the damage, went home and was raped again. She became pregnant during one of the attacks and was forced to give birth in the company of the militias; the baby died. … She has had repeated operations on her desecrated lower body. She looks small, shy, defeated.

The heart and spirit of this non-descript young woman commands attention. When Jeanne speaks, her audience is compelled to listen. Viner writes further:

"When you look at me, what do you see?" she asks, with the bold delivery of the born orator, the preacher, the leader. "Do you see me as an animal? Because you are letting animals treat me like one. You, the government, if it was your children, would you stop it? You, you white people: if this violence was happening in your country, would you end it?"

In ‘undeveloped’ regions beyond Africa, the laws appear to sustain the gender inequality carried forward through the ages.  Outsiders are warned off that they fail to grasp the distinct cultural traditions.  In Afghanistan, new marriage legislation was brought into effect in 2009.  The cleric author of the law says, reportedly:

 'It should not be compulsory for the wife to say yes all the time, because some men have more sexual desires than others' … husbands should never force themselves on their wives and the law does not sanction that. But women do have a duty to meet their husband's needs. 'If a woman says no, the man has the right not to feed her' … 

The law that claims not to condone marital rape also awards little to the feminine perspective. Perhaps not in letter but in practice, men get away with it within marital bonds. Outside of marriage, the payment of “blood money” is deemed adequate punishment. 

Theoretically the woman has the choice to refuse sex - if thereafter, she is economically self-sufficient. Where most are dependent on men because sectarian norms either ban altogether their education, work and unescorted travel, or require husband permissions to do so, women are effectively boxed in. 

In Libya, Obeidi made international news only when she rushed to the hotel housing foreign journalists to tell her story, rather than to the local police.  Because she lived in a rebel-held region, she had been raped by at least 15 men holding government allegiance. 

According to one report:

Tied naked and left on the floor, Obeidi said, the men took turns raping her, at least three at a time. They would strangle her, cover her head while raping her, and kick her when they were done she said. The men were drunk and would pour alcohol in her eyes, nose and mouth. Obeidi claimed that the ringleader was a cousin of Gaddafi and son of a government minister.

Security personnel swooped in and dragged her off from the hotel to prevent her narration becoming news. She was then charged with the crime of naming her attackers. When the foreign news channels telecast the encounter around the world, the oppressed misery of gender in the country was brought to global notice.

Yemeni women have been named the least empowered in the world.  But to the surprise of the men, they joined into the pro-democracy street protests. The conditions the women live in being abysmal already, they decided they have scant to lose in the campaign for freedom and social justice. 

Khalife writes:

The protests have given women a chance to express their own concerns about their day-to-day struggles … including their subordinate legal status as perpetual minors who require male guardians and the continued prevalence of harmful practices like child marriage.

 

The ruling regime attempted to subvert the movement declaring that the intermixing of men and women in the demonstrations is un-Islamic. But the women are not giving up. For them, accusations are nothing new. They know the prices they pay for any form of protests are threats, verbal assaults and physical attacks. Their courage is of desperation, against sustained violence even from their own families. 

Perhaps because they have become rampant, crimes committed against women in Asia, Middle East and Africa have decreased shock value. The global community merely mouths horror, as politics or cultural prejudices constrain proactive action. The rampage of rape has nothing to do with erotica, but is a masculine weapon potent with hostility and rage.  

The aim in some places is the extermination of differences - of tribe, community, nationality, religion, and race.  In others, it is used to stamp out social and even marital protests.  Women are soft targets of the masculine reactance to the loss of power and privilege.  The easiest process to domination is through debasing gender - instilling fear in victims to enforce obedience. 

Social ‘revolutions’ then are merely conflicts between groups of men seeking to replace one another politically in authoritarian rule.  Women are traditionally not considered independent citizens and hence are not part of the equation. Religion becomes an instrument to be used to justify masculine prejudice, and perpetrate the dominance. The collective consciousness needs to be aware of the dichotomy, and to temper respect for others’ religious beliefs and practices with reasoning. They need to realize that lack of inquiry about cultures and customs – one’s own and those of others - contribute to stagnation of both time and attitudes.

The point is democratic freedom without social rights for women, is a fallacy. Democracy is meant to improve social adaptability.  That would require the continual review of beliefs. Religious practices of past ages need to stay in the past.  To keep pace with change in knowledge and experience, new ideas to add or renovate practices are required.

In the global apathy, the future of humanity is being raped along with the mother-race. Generations may be raised dysfunctional or tuned to a remote past out of sync with present advancements.  Nations a bit more developed watch world news unfold with idle curiosity. They may presume they are secure from the apparent gender backwardness perceived elsewhere.  But the social inequality continues there too like old wine in new bottles…

References for this post:

1. Khalife, Nadya “Yemen's women: out from the shadows” Comment. guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 7 May 2011. 
2. “New Afghan law does not allow marital rape... but lets men refuse to feed wives who deny them sex, says cleric” Newsreport. Mail Foreign Service. dailymail.co.uk. Daily Mail. 17th April 2009. 
3. Page, Jeremy. "Karzai’s approval of ‘marital rape’ law leads to international rift” timesonline.co.uk. The Times. The Sunday Times. August 17, 2009. 
4. Tran, Mark and AP. “Libya rape woman gives new details of ordeal” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 12 April 2011. 
5. Spencer, Richard. “Yemen: women lead protests against Ali Abdullah Saleh's regime” thetelegraph.co.uk. World News. The Telegraph. Tuesday, 17 May 2011. 
6. Viner, Katherine, “City of Joy: New hope for Congo's brutalised women” guardian.co.uk. The Guardian. 9 April 2011. 

Motive: 7. Violence and objectification

Human beings live and work in groups. Each group develops characteristic behaviour patterns based on implicit theories, which become in time, ‘traditions’ that future generations are exhorted to follow. Differences arise between groups based on race, ethnicity, religion and so on.

Still, on looking closely, one might find that people across the globe are more similar than different, because of similar operative concepts, especially on the gender question. These can transform with new reality, but the basic threads of the ideology, the gender-role belief systems “rooted in the structural relationship between the two sexes” resist change. 

The traditions grow out of a continuum of positive and negative behaviours. Traditional masculinity, for instance, is associated with: personal sacrifice for dependents and calmness in danger. But it is also associated with: coercive behaviour, date-rape attitudes, high-risk behaviour and unemotionality. Thence ‘maleness’ finds expression in a collection of behaviours adapted to the needs of the specific cultural group.

A study in USA on the differential patterns identifies 5 endorsements types of the masculine ideology:

·        traditional

·        high violence/moderately traditional

·        moderately traditional

·        high status /low violence

·        non-traditional

These five endorsements were then related to the men’s gender-role beliefs in terms of:

·        Status/rationality

·        Anti-femininity

·        Tough image

·        Violent toughness

·        Gender-role egalitarianism

In the study, the non-traditional group of men was found less overtly masculine. They scored lower in the four variables of status, image, violence, and anti-femininity and higher than the rest in gender-role egalitarianism.

Each of the other masculine clusters identified – traditional, moderately traditional, high violence/moderately traditional and high status/low violence - were found to be moderate to high on ‘tough image’, ‘status’, and ‘anti-femininity’. To these groups, the presentation of an appropriate public image was the point.

Fischer and Good write:

… being perceived by others as tough, self-sufficient, and confident was at least moderately important… as a “ritualized form of masculinity that entails behaviors, scripts, physical posturing, impression management, and carefully crafted performances that deliver a single, critical message: pride, strength, and control… 

However, a difference was perceived in the mix regarding “violent toughness”. As the researchers explain their findings:

… men in both the High Violence/Moderately Traditional and Traditional clusters reported relatively strong endorsement of Violent Toughness as part of their masculinity ideologies … men who endorsed rather traditional-to-moderate beliefs regarding Status/Rationality, Antifemininity, and Tough Image also held quite nontraditional beliefs regarding Violent Toughness as important to masculinity (i.e., those in the High Status/Low Violence cluster).

In other words, they are divided on the display of machismo. Some wear the badge of violence; others emulate the minority ‘non-traditional’ group. Why the change? Considering their strong ‘anti-femininity’ responses, that ‘low violence’ men could be distancing altogether from gender domination and control is in doubt. Perhaps this group of status-seekers make tactical changes in the gender interface for impression management!

In many modern dual-income families, men may be uncomfortable with their wives choosing career development over part time jobs. Despite education and economics, the masculine devaluation and distrust of women is universally ingrained. At home and at work, women’s advancement may pose threats to their individual high status. In India, for instance, divorce rates and single-mother-households are both on the rise. 

Now, the high status/low violence group may be eschewing physical violence only to project in public the egalitarian image. To keep the progressives from unsettling the status quo, the subtle mode of gender discriminations may be applied instead, like objectification. Men of all cultures may ensure this feminine preoccupation with body issues with constant social reinforcements of the ‘standards’ to be achieved for their acceptance. 

What about the feminine ideology? In the patriarchal social structure, gender inequality is built in. “Female domesticity “ has been idealized throughout its history. Following the social learning in “subordination”, women eventually collaborate with men to carry forward the inequality. 

Jackson opinions that:

…women accepted male power outside the household in return for "rule in their own place."… they received "secondary gains" of social status, leisure, freedom from responsibility to earn an income, and the freedom "to devote a major portion of her time to personal adornment and attention to herself" through marriage.

In the last two centuries of organized social life, any change in women’s status has revolved around the basic tenet. More recent economic, political and legislative changes attempt to counter women’s subordination and gender inequality. But the outlook that arose from implicit beliefs and practices of male supremacy is yet to be eradicated worldwide.

Social norms targeting women cut across the divides of culture and race. For instance, women in Asia and Africa have over centuries, suffered torture to meet ‘standards’ of traditional beauty and sexuality. In the Asian Far East, the feet of female children were bound from birth to keep them small. On the African continent, young girls were forced to undergo genital mutilations to be acceptable for marriage.

Impett et al write:

Girls experience immense pressures to behave in feminine ways, both in their relationships with other people (i.e., by suppressing their own authentic thoughts and feelings) and in their relationships with their own bodies (i.e., by suppressing bodily hungers and desires to conform to prevailing images of beauty and attractiveness).

The objectification theory Fredrickson & Roberts formulated in 1997, suggests that women tend to internalize the socio-cultural values and “become their own first surveyors”. Researchers say:

… women learn to view themselves primarily through an observer’s perspective. According to objectification theory, society places more emphasis on attractiveness for women than men, such that women are constantly subject to appraisal of their appearance. Sexual objectification occurs when a person is treated as a body valued for its use by others.

Women have been taught over the ages that their personal sense of self and value in personhood rests almost entirely on others, especially the male gender, responding positively to their appearance – size, shape, colour, dress and what-have-you.

African American women may be more concerned about being judged on “skin tone, hair texture, and facial features”. Research has also found a strong link between skin tone and hypertension among this cultural group. Buchanan et al report:

…educational level, occupational level, and family income each were stratified by skin tone; higher mean educational attainment, greater participation in professional and technical careers, and higher income were associated with lighter skin tone.

In India, fairness of skin, a legacy of cultural invasions, has long been an index of beauty in the country. Fairness creams are the fastest moving consumer goods for women and men. Product advertisements suggesting associations between skin colour and upward mobility thus blatantly fill corporate coffers.

Celebrity endorsements are revered in this country, which the manufacturers utilizes to push their products. Film and TV stars gain fame leading the pack in fashion sense, and with globalization, the hot pursuit of the Western-influenced size zero dress measure. The obsession with body weight amongst the ‘white’ European and American women’s groups has often pointed to. Another emerging new trend noticed among young girls in UK is the following of porn stars. 

Buchanan et al write that:

Theoretically, this continual evaluation of the self in terms of internalized societal ideals may result in negative psychological consequences such as increased shame and anxiety. These psychological consequences of self-objectification may lead, in turn, to increased risks for mental health concerns such as depression, eating disorders, and sexual dysfunction.

Women in India and elsewhere, of the educated and employed circles as well, do little to improve their objectified status, and their debased self-esteem. The social learning has been to avoid conflict; hence the idea of confrontation is itself too stressful to contemplate. 

They would prefer to tune out of their present unequal circumstances, immerse in serialized soap operas suspending judgement and reflection on their subtle sexist messaging, or even fantasize that in individual suffering they contribute to the greater good. Implicit theories of gender inequality continue to flourish because women are yet to unite voices against second-class citizenship.

References for this post:

1. Bidisha “Pubic hair removal: The naked truth” Article guardian.co.uk The Guardian, Friday 11 February 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/11/womens-pubic-hair-removal-porn

2.      Buchanan, Taneisha S. Fischer, Ann R. Tokar, David M. and Yoder, Janice D. “Testing a Culture-Specific Extension of Objectification Theory Regarding African American Women's Body Image” The Counseling Psychologist Volume 36 Number 5, September 2008 697-718 originally published online 8 July 2008.

3. Fischer, Ann R. and Glenn, E. Good. “New Directions for the Study of Gender Role Attitudes: A Cluster Analytic Investigation of Masculinity Ideologies”. Psychology of Women Quarterly 22 (1998), 371-384
4. Impett, Emily A, Schooler, Deborah, Tolman, Deborah L. “To Be Seen and Not Heard: Femininity Ideology and Adolescent Girls’ Sexual Health”. ARCHIVES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR, Volume 35, Number 2, 129-142. 
5. Jackson, Robert Max “Chapter 8. Disputed Ideals: Ideologies of Domesticity and Feminist Rebellion” nyu.edu Working Draft of DOWN SO LONG . . . Undated.