Participation

Several years back, I participated in a youth development seminar that focused on how to better develop and implement educational programing that gave “voice” to the fundamental needs of students, along with best practices that promised to increase student participation in programming. The speaker stated that all humans need three basic things: autonomy, power, and recognition. Some individuals may need greater amounts of recognition while others may need more autonomy to be fulfilled. The thesis of the seminar was that students who were provided these principles, constructively in the classroom, would participate in greater numbers, and have equal power behind their voices because their fundamental need would be met.

Consequentially, if students were not provided power, autonomy, or recognition they would go searching for that fulfillment elsewhere in a manner that could be less constructive or healthy. For example, students may look to gain power elsewhere, such as bulling other students, if they are not provided constructive pathways to obtain power in a healthy and productive framework in the classroom setting. This would then ultimately lead to unequal participation and social inequalities within the classroom.

I thought about that this seminar while we read, discussed and analyzed development initiatives. I especially connected it to Belen’s presentation last week. Belen, I loved your presentation! Do you think this classroom context transfer to the development context when analyzing the power or agency behind voices and participation? I see some connections based upon the fact that so much of what we talked about was directly connected situations where basic human principles were/are denied, voices are marginalized and many are ultimately deemed worthless, and an imbalance in who participates in development projects occurs. 

The social construction of power and social status that lies behind voice, and how the lack of voice influences planning decisions by limiting participation and alienating people in the community. Developmental agencies should be who participates in what are already established local development initiatives. Specifically, that development agencies should be made to participate in a community’s own project. Community practice could be a starting point for development interventions.

Esteem and freedom are all common human values that every human society and individual seek to obtain, and development can and should serve as a mechanism to enhance and encourage the growth of these principles. Within the context of development power and control at all levels need to be deconstructed when looking at who and why people participate because power and control can influence the construction around life substance, esteem, and freedom.

Say Her Name and the Lived Experience

The #SayHerName Campaign is intended to attract attention to the police brutality black women have faced as it is often overshadowed in mass media by the highly covered police brutality cases involving black men. This campaign became a movement following the release of a traffic stop video from a police car dashcam in the Sandra Bland case. It is important to note that SHN is about creating a complete narrative about race-based policing. Say Her Name aims to ensure that women and girls are not left out of the larger movement of Black Lives Matter. It is to be noted that SHN isn’t meant to be a distraction to main discussion, but a more comprehensive look at these complex issues.

SHN has also worked to include black trans women within its movement, calling attention to the ways in which state violence is carried out in the US. At his time, it is important not only to discuss profiling and policing, but also examine how gender and sexuality are impacted by the latter. It seems to open up a discussion (which we are familiar with) about the lived experiences of women and the multitude of factors that influence those experiences. Gender based violence that is also correlated to ‘race’ used in policing seems to be something inherent within the law enforcement system. The question is: how can we utilize these experiences and provide a platform for black women to voice their concerns/ share their stories to inform a solution? The experiences of these women are essential and must be understood and taken into account when pursuing a solution.

Thus far, SHN (and other campaigns, movements, and groups) have organized protests, rallies, and meetings with public officials. However, the work that needs to be done has to not only come from government policy, but from a clear understanding of the institutionalization of racialized state violence in this country. SHN calls for acknowledgment of black women who have died as a result of police brutality. Nevertheless, it is important to go beyond that and beyond policy reform. Discussion at local levels have to be facilitated to meet the needs of potential change. It occurred to me, as a future development practitioner, how would I approach this situation? What interventions could be made? What discussions would have to be had for progress to be made (as a one-size-fits-all solution won’t work)? These questions are difficult and I don’t have the answers. However, given what I’ve learned from this class I have a better understanding of how to think innovatively to strive to address these kinds of issues. 

Resource: http://www.aapf.org/sayhername/

A Lack of Research and Literature of Childfree Women in the Developing World

For my entire life, I have never wanted children. I love children, I work with children, but I would hate to have children of my own. I recently learned that there is a significant population of people who feel the same as me who go by the term "childfree". Childfree people are different from childless people, as they choose to voluntarily never have children. The reasons for this differ from person to person, from having an abusive childhood, to disliking children, to not wanting to contribute to overpopulation, to feeling repulsed by the idea of pregnancy and childbirth, to not feeling financially secure, or simply just not having any maternal or paternal instincts.

Childfree individuals, and particularly women as they are stereotyped to have a biological need to bear children, have a difficult time explaining to others why they have no desire to reproduce. When I have told people that I would never want to have children, the reactions vary from a slight laugh and a promise that I would change my mind, to being accused of being a selfish person. I told a friend who comes from a country in West Africa about my desire to remain childfree and she laughed at me and said "You would never find a husband in my country".

In my research in childfree people, all studies, interviews, and articles come from developed, Western countries. I have found no information on childfree individuals in developing countries. Are there childfree people in developing countries? Yes. I'm sure there are. However, without any real research to examine, my guess would be that they face even more harassment and scrutiny because of their choices than a Westerner would. As we have seen in Playing with Fire, women are very pressured to have children. In many areas, including some here in the United States, women are expected to fulfill their social and gendered roles as mothers. But what if they don't want to? Do women, and men, get to say no and make their own reproductive choices?

I wish, and perhaps I could do this in the future, there was more research about childfree-ness in a non-Western context. Are there communities like there are here in the United States for those who often feel discriminated against because of their reproductive choices? Are women and men "in the closet", so to speak, and feel forced to bear children? These are all questions I wish could be answered. But for now, we will simply have to wait for research to emerge.

Women empowerment and initiatives in Brazil

Economic opportunities are one factor that help women to empower themselves. There are many different types of programs that aim to empower women economically. Institutions may invest in different areas, such as, entrepreneurship, employment, farming, youth empowerment, and more. The Roadmap for promoting women’s economic empowerment assists in evaluating program and policy action for women's economic empowerment. Roadmaps such as these are useful for understanding how empowerment programs have been effective.

Programs, such as 10,000 Women: Business Growth through Capital help women to achieve their empowerment through entrepreneurship. The project was designed by Goldman Sachs and aims to extend the business training to 10,000 women around the world. It provides women with knowledge in business management and development of managerial skills. Different institutions around the world are helping Goldman Sachs to put the program into practice. In Brazil, Fundação Dom Cabral is the third part provider. Fundação Dom Cabral is a business school that helps individuals develop skills and abilities in order to have their businesses grow and prosper. In the country, over the last five years 800 women from 84 municipalities of Minas Gerais and Rio de Janeiro were trained in management, by the professors at Fundação Dom Cabral. The youtube video below has more information about the program 10,000 Women: Business Growth through Capital:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ql73pxd5Gg

As Chant (2012) argue, gender equality is characterized as smart economics, which enables women to contribute their utmost skills and energies to a project for world economic development. Therefore, world economic development receives impulses from programs such as these. As Chant (2012) explains, investing in women speeds economic development by raising productivity and promoting the more efficient use of resources. Social returns are produced with women in the economy, such as, improving child survival and reducing fertility, and intergenerational pay-offs. Equality in access to opportunities, rights and voice can lead to more efficient economic functioning and better institutions, with dynamic benefits for investment and growth (Chant, 2012).

                In Brazil, institutions and organizations are making attempts to start conversations about gender and women empowerment. For example, the consulting firm 65/10 created a trend report with the objective of improving inequality of gender though entrepreneurship and making more people conscious of how living life as a woman and a man can be different. The initiative is called The revolution is hers (A revolução é delas - 65/10, 2015). Starting these conversations is one of the first steps to getting women and men conscious of their biases so that they can change and create a more inclusive environment for women.

References:

65/10. A revolução é delas. 2015. Available on:  http://revolucaodelas.meiacincodez.com.br/

Chant, Sylvia. 2012. “Fixing women or fixing the world? ‘Smart economics’, efficiency approaches, and gender equality in development.” Gender and Development 20(3): 517-529.

Fundação Dom Cabral. 2015. Available on: https://www.fdc.org.br/10000women/Paginas/default.aspx

The Aftermath of Ebola

On November 7^th of this year, Sierra Leone was officially declared Ebola free.  While this is cause for celebration, it is important to look at who is still suffering from the disease’s impacts.  Unbeknownst to me, women and girls are suffering greatly from the aftermath of Ebola in Sierra Leone. Broadly (which has quickly become one of my favorite websites) recently wrote an article on how women and girls are coping from social and economic exclusion after Ebola here.

In their article, they quote women who survived the deadly disease only to find they are still suffering. One of the more troubling stories in this article details the survival of Isatu. Prior to becoming ill with Ebola, she worked as a fishmonger. Her sister, parents, and two children had died from the disease. After her hospitalization, she assumed she still had her business to carry her through. Unfortunately, she realized authorities burned her business and all of her possessions leaving her with nothing. With no money, no family, and no business to carry her through Isatu is an outcast in her society and her survival status creates negative perceptions and stigmas from her community.

"Many female survivors have no one. And no one wants them."

 

Isatu and her cousin holding their survivor certificates

The article is dotted with multiple stories and examples of stigmas that women have faced since becoming Ebola survivors. Husbands have left their wives because of the shame that the disease carries leaving women to survive alone. Girls have had to leave school and many have found it difficult to find work. I found myself thinking of the Body Politics book we read and how the policing of reproductive or “disabled” bodies helps certain institutions control people.

How are women’s bodies being controlled in Sierra Leone after they have survived Ebola? Their possessions are being burned, their husbands are leaving them, and society is fearful of them. These sorts of actions strip women of their power because they are seen as sick, weak, and unable to contribute to the community. Unable to seek economic assistance because of social exclusion, women who have survived are marked as different, ultimately affecting their bodily experiences.

It is entirely possible that I have stretched the connection too far (it is finals week after all). However, I would be interested in following this story to see if any development organizations are helping these women combat stigmas attached to their survival status. I would also be interested in seeing solutions that are not focused on empowering women with economic advancement strategies. 

Gender through the framework of Social reproduction

During our class discussions and while going through the readings, I made constant connections with the material we were seeing and the framework of the social reproduction theory. Social reproduction theory explains how structures of inequality reproduce themselves in the world. This occurs due to the structure of power relations and symbolic relationships between classes. The structures in place are normalized by the individuals in that environment, and these individuals in the future act in accordance with the norms set. Social reproduction, explains why social norms and customs are internalized. The theory also explains why it is difficult for a situation to move from its status quo.

Education taught in schools reproduce structures of inequality. The structure of the classroom creates an environment in which there are preconceived expectations of a student’s ability to succeed. Families from different social classes differ in the competences (cultural capital) and dispositions (habitus). This influences their children’s education, whether it is class differences in the knowledge and skills parents pass on to their children, or class differences in parents’ understanding of the complexities and nuances of the educational system. The youtube video below illustrates the theory well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShJqEBcyiBg

When applying this theory to gender, it is true that education contributes to the reproduction and legitimation of a cultural system that reinforces masculine privilege and shapes the gendered identities and perceptions of citizens. There is a gendered division of labor, for example with care-giving and service work being roles generally assumed by women, especially in the past. Traditionally, there is a gendered hierarchy of occupations and professions in the labor market. Gender segmentation is internalized and occurs culturally and is reproduced and structurally embedded. It is believed that there is a segregation dynamic, which is primarily grounded in two deeply entrenched logics of gender essentialism and male. Gender essentialism considers character traits as naturally or typically feminine, and other traits as masculine, while male primacy holds that males are more authoritative and status-worthy.

Just as class location can influence individuals’ perceptions of which pathways are more or less realistic, so too can gender. The gendered nature of habitus is a consequence of the different possibilities that women and men perceive are available to them. These gender disparities in the opportunity structure are reflected in the differing messages internalized by boys and girls and come to inform their habitus in important ways. 

                These are all traditional roles that are important for all individuals to be conscious of, so that we may tackle the problem of inequality at its root. By ignoring these ideas, we may be blinding ourselves of a point of view and possibly hindering communication.

                Smith, Candida and Maitrayee (1990) book, A guide to Gender Analysis, explains a number of frameworks that can assist development practitioners in developing a framework that to help them to be inclusive of different factors. Social reproduction is a framework that enables an individual to view the situation through a different lense.

References

Smith, Ines, Candida March, and Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay. 1999. A Guide to Gender Analysis Frameworks. Oxford: Oxfam.

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1998. "On male domination" Le Monde Diplomatique, Oct. 10, 1998

Dumais, Susan. 2002. Cultural capital, gender, and school success: The role of habitus. Avaliable on: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3090253?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

Edgerton, J. D., Peter, T., & Roberts, L. W. (2014). Gendered Habitus and Gender Differences in Academic Achievement. Alberta Journal Of Educational Research, 60(1), 182-212.

The scariest "F" word: Feminism

This post connects slightly to Ashley’s earlier post about how women’s rights are currently placed in the human rights framework. What she said reminds me about how I often run across people (my students, people in the news, or people in everyday conversation), who take up issue with the word “feminism." Sometimes individuals claim that renaming feminism or reframing to something more “gender neutral” and less politicized (such as human rights, humanism) will help us avoid some of these problems.

As we have discussed, feminisms and feminists have often focused on issues that are faced by predominantly white, Global North, middle/upper class women. In our class, Chant (2012) explained how in development work, our constant focus on girls and women leave out a lot of people (older women, men, and boys). Furthermore, within feminism there is often a systematic lack of attention to race (see White, 2006). Therefore, I agree that feminists must work (and are working) to be more inclusive of the many ways that people are marginalized and oppressed (such as race, class, sexuality, nationality, etc.), and that if we ignore these inersectionalities, we are failing.

However, it seems to me that some of the problems many people have with the word “feminist” go back to the some of the very reasons that we need feminism. In classes I have taught in the past, I have had students watch short videos in which men speak about feminism, and among other questions, I always ask my students what it is like to hear a man talking about feminism. What do they think of this? One example of this is Joss Whedon’s speech about what he things is wrong with the word feminism (his reasons are not the traditional reasons cited). Time and time again, students talk about how a man is more credible when he talks about feminism or that he is more “unbiased” and because of this, they appreciate hearing a man speak about feminism (yikes!). I agree that it is good to hear people of all genders advocate for feminism, but not for these reasons.

Emma Watson was told not to use the word “feminism” at her UN speech last year because it alienated and separated people. Although in this speech Watson too was reinforcing this gender binary and a focus solely on women, her convicted use that word has influenced many of my undergraduate students to feel comfortable and confident in calling themselves feminists. They have said this in their own speeches during a public speaking class I taught in the past. However, part of the reason I am writing this blog post is that many (most) of my students admit that they are uncomfortable applying the word to themselves and have negative connotations with it.

Now, I’m not lauding either of these speeches as ideal examples of feminism, but I am using them to point out the ways in which there is still widespread fear of feminism. The history that we read and that is taught early on in school paints over issues of gender injustice, racism, and colonialism with a romanticized, selective brush. The way we learn history seems to say these things existed kind of—let’s not talk about it. Unless people elect into it (and usually not to college), we do not learn much about histories that are not white male centric (at least in the U.S.). I feel that part of the word people fear the word feminist is that they are not taught about how bad many of our historical injustices were. I am also not sure that a textbook could even get us there (maybe stories, films, poetry, art?). To abandon/change the word feminist (as some people have suggested) is also to ignore the work that many people did historically (even though this work was too not inclusive of all women/genders) to bring about some important changes in gender justice throughout history. It ignores why we needed the word in the first place, and it ignores the exclusive history that the word has. We need to talk about this history and problems with the word feminism, and seek a feminism that takes other oppressions into account, instead of finding a “new word.”

A recent NPR article discussed how Sweden distributed Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s essay “We Should All be Feminists” to every 16-year-old student in the country (see http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/04/458514464/sweden-gives-we-should-all-be-feminists-to-every-16-year-old-student).  Now, I have not read this essay (because I just came across this article this morning), but I intend to. The NPR article ended with this quote from Adichie’s essay which speaks to this very question about why the word feminism. She writes:

"Some people ask: 'Why the word feminist? Why not just say you are a believer in human rights, or something like that?' Because that would be dishonest. Feminism is, of course, part of human rights in general - but to choose to use the vague expression human rights is to deny the specific and particular problem of gender. It would be a way of pretending that it was not women who have, for centuries, been excluded. It would be a way of denying that the problem of gender targets women. That the problem was not about being human, but specifically about being a female human. For centuries, the world divided human beings into two groups and then proceeded to exclude and oppress one group. It is only fair that the solution to the problem acknowledge that."

Not only might abandoning the word feminism gloss over the inequality that women have experienced for centuries, but it seems to be an act of forgetting the feminisms and the feminists of the past. I think we need to remember, learn about, and understand these feminisms and stay connected to them. There are valid critiques of feminisms, and feminists should attend to these critiques. However, it seems that people, in general, often fear and avoid this word because of the very reason we need this word. Challenging patriarchy and pointing out gender injustices is still very radical. And when people who are not men challenge patriarchy, this is even more radical.