Author: Andre Coleman

The feminist perspective is the political stance of someone committed to changing the social position of women to bring about gender equality (Pilcher and Whelehan, 2004), whilst gender is described as the characteristics taken on by males and females in social life and culture through socialisation. Gender is a process and not a permanent state, implying that gender is being produced and reproduced, whereas inequality refers to the unequal rewards or opportunities for different individuals or groups within a society (Wharton, 2005). This essay will define how the feminist perspective has influenced the sociological study of gender inequality. It will summarise how the three founding fathers of sociology viewed men’s oppression and women’s subordination and discuss how earlier feminists viewed their counterpart’s attitudes.

In the late 19th and early 20th century sociology remained a male dominated discipline with the classical theorists Marx, Durkheim and Weber. This was surprising due to the fact that the pre-existing patterns of gender inequality brought about modernisation. Women’s labour contributed vastly to industrial capitalism. Although the classical theorists had literature and theories of contemporary feminist movements they never addressed the gendered process of modernisation, they saw women in more traditional roles within the family (Bilton et al, 2002).

According to Giddens (2009) Marx viewed gender differences in power and status between men and women in the divisions of class. Gender inequality only appeared when industrial capitalism was formed; men went out to work and controlled the family income and the women stayed at home doing the housework whilst looking after the children. Fulcher and Scott (2003) noted that Marx viewed women’s oppression as serving the capitalists society.

Durkheim (1897 cited in Simpson 1952) viewed gender inequality as entrenched in society. In his discussion of suicide, Durkheim stated that men are a product of society while women are a product of nature. Durkheim suggested that women and men have different identities because women are less socialised then men. Likewise, Giddens (2009:91) stated “Women’s social position and identity are mainly shaped by their involvement in reproduction and childrearing.” Durkheim (1897 cited in Simpson 1952) argued that women bear and rare children whereas men are active in the public spheres of politics and work. Yet, today feminists would argue that women are shaped as much as men through socialisation.

Waters (1994) pointed out that Weber’s theory on gender inequality is confined to a system of organisational domination rather than power. Weber used the word patriarchalism rather than patriarchy to describe his category of traditional domination, where a person in authority inherits a particular status at birth. Weber indicated that the power of the man in the household is unimpeded and that women and children are his property. Women, Weber (cited in Roth, G. & Wittich, C. 1968:1007) argued, are dependent because “of the normal superiority of the physical and intellectual energies of the male.” According to Waters (1994) Weber viewed the status of women and children under patriarchalism as similar to slaves in that they are capable of being bought, sold and rented.

The first wave of feminism coincided with the classical theorists Marx, Durkheim and Weber. Giddens (2009) highlighted the fact that from 1800 to 2000 there had only been five feminist sociologists: Harriet Martineau 1802-76, Simone de Beauvoir 1908-86, Betty Friedan 1921-2006, Judith Butler 1956 and Vandana Shiva 1952. Martineau, the earliest sociologist and feminist was famous for introducing sociology to Britain through her transcript of Comte’s thesis of sociology. In Giddens (2009) Martineau argued that if a society is to be studied, sociologists must focus on political, religious and social institutions. Secondly, that a society must include an understanding of women’s lives. Thirdly, issues of marriage, children and domestic life should be left unchallenged and that sociologists must do more than view but act in ways to benefit society.

Erstwhile influential figures of first wave feminism were Mary Wollstonecraft, Harriet Taylor Mill and her husband John Stuart Mill. Wollstonecraft (1792 cited in Abbott and Wallace, 1990:191) emphasised that “inequalities between men and women were not the outcome of natural (biological) differences but due to the influence of the environment, and especially the fact that women were excluded from education”. Wollstonecraft argued that it was essential to educate women and change society so women and men were seen as equal (Abbott et al, 2005).

In Harriet’s essay, ‘The Enfranchisement of Women’ 1851, published under her husband’s name she campaigned that women should be given equal rights to the same jobs as men and that women should not live in separate spheres. Harriet’s views were seen as more radical than that of John’s however, they both argued in their book ‘The Subjection of Women’ 1869 that women should have the same rights as men under law (Mill 1851, 1869 cited in Abbott, Wallace, 1990).

The suffragettes and other campaigners of the 19th and 20th century campaigned for change. In 1839 women won the right to custody of an infant child, in 1882 the right to own their own property, in 1918 the right to vote and in 1934 they won the right to divorce on the same grounds as men. The 19th and 20th century feminism was all on the subject of change and having the same legal rights as men. Although women did not achieve equality with men in the 19th or early 20th century, most rights had been won. This first wave of feminism saw social change and therefore sociologists could no longer ignore gender inequality (Abbott, Wallace, 1990).

Whilst the feminist theories had developed independently to sociology, the study of gender in sociology came from the second wave of the women’s movement. Academic subjects like sociology appeared to ignore women. Women were rarely the subjects of research, and activities dominated by women such as house work and childcare received little interest. Oakley (1972) criticised sociology for generating knowledge more to do with men’s lives rather than women’s. At the time sociology was expressed in a quote by sociologist Jessie Bernard (1973 cited in Wharton, 2005:4) “Can sociology become a science of society rather than a science of a male society?”

According to Waters (1994) feminist sociologists used the expression malestream to illustrate the mainstream discipline of sociology. Feminists implied that sociology was blind to gender and that it viewed gender difference and male oppression as symbolic, thus, sociological explanation was not needed. Giddens (2001) pointed to the fact that feminism and the women’s movements had forced fundamental changes in sociology. Feminists argued that men and women had different experiences and viewed the world differently they did not build their understandings in equal ways. According to Waters (1994) women’s experiences are intentionally ignored and the ways in which men dominate women is seen as natural. Additionally, when women were included in research, they were presented from a male perspective.

Oakley (1972) suggested sociology had been biased from the beginning. Sociology was predominately a male profession and the principles of gender resulted in assumptions about differences between males and females. She argued that despite the criticism of the discipline for its malestream views little has changed over the years. Although women are studying the subject, the majority of lecturers are male. According to Abbott & Wallace (1990) there has been some change in that sociologists can no longer afford to ignore the feminist perspective and there has been converse about the changes needed for male bias in sociology to be overcome.

It has been noted that gender is a generally formed perception which contributes differing social roles and identities to males and females. According to Giddens (2009) gender differences are rarely neutral and that gender is a significant form of social stratification. Giddens (2009: 614) emphasised that “gender is a critical factor in structuring types of opportunity and life chances faced by individuals and groups, and strongly influences the roles they play within social institutions from the household to the state.” Fulcher and Scott (2003) stated that for many feminists, social stratification has been seen as entrenched in relations of sexual power that are built around natural differences of sex. Similarly, Giddens (2009) stressed that even though men and women’s roles vary from society to society, there is no known society in which women are more dominant than men. Men’s roles are usually highly rewarded and valued more than women’s. Firestone (1971) argued that societies are separated into opposed sex classes and that all men oppress all women, thus the struggle between men and women is the driving force in human history.

Although women have made a number of advances around the globe, gender differences serve the foundation for gender inequality. There are many academic perspectives relating to gender inequality and how men dominate women in the public and private sphere (Giddens, 2009). The functionalist theory searches to show that gender differentiation contribute to social stability and integration. According to Waters (1994) Parsons and Murdoch studied the family in industrial societies and how children were socialised. They noted that the stability of the family contributed to successful socialisation. Parsons argued that the family operated more efficiently were women acted in an expressive role, caring for the children and offering them emotional support. Whereas the men performed better in an active role by going out and earning money for the family, Murdoch added that males and females are best suited to the roles they are biologically determined to perform. According to Giddens (2009) Feminists argued that women are not prevented from occupations on the basis of biological features, they suggested humans are socialised into roles that are culturally expected of them and there is nothing natural about the distribution of tasks in society.

Liberal feminists looked for explanations of gender inequality in social and cultural attitudes. They also fought for the equal rights of women through democratic means (Waters, 1994). The Liberal theory came to light with the suffragist movement in the early 20th century and fought against laws that gave rights to men and not women. They campaigned to pass laws to outlaw discrimination against women and to give women rights in the workplace, educational institutes and the media. Abbott et al (2005) criticised liberal feminists of not dealing with core issues of gender inequality, they do not acknowledge the nature of women’s oppression.

According to Bilton et al (2002) radical feminists alleged that men had an interest in controlling women through various tactics, including rape, genital mutilation, domestic violence and sexual harassment. The violence that women were exploited to showed a source of male supremacy. Giddens (2009) noted that radical feminists concentrated on the family home as one of the primary areas of women’s oppression. Radical feminists argued that men exploited women by relying on unpaid domestic labour. Firestone (1971 cited in Giddens, 2009:617) expressed that “…..because women are biologically able to give birth to children, they become dependent materially on men for protection and livelihood.” Radical feminists argued that men see women as sexual objects whose main purpose is to entertain and please them. Additionally, radical feminists see patriarchy as a phenomenon. They suggest gender equality can only be gained by overthrowing the Patriarchal order.

Marxist and socialist feminists argued that women’s oppression was a symptom of capitalism rather than patriarchy. Like radical feminists, Marx feminists argued that the household was the location of women’s oppression arising from the fact that women took part in unpaid work in the private sphere, that is, caring for the labour force and raising the next generation of workers to benefit the capitalists at no cost to them (Bilton et al, 2002). However, Marx had little to do with gender inequality, according to Giddens (2009) it was Engel’s who did more than Marx’s in relation to gender inequality. Engel’s did so through the Marxist perspective. Engel’s (in Giddens, 2009) argued capitalism strengthens patriarchy by putting wealth in the hands of capitalists which underpins women’s subordination to men. Both Marxist and radical feminists saw how capitalism effected gender relations in both the public and private spheres. They wanted to see a restructuring of the family and an end to domestic slavery, however Marx argued this would only be achieved through a revolutionary change.

hooks (1981 cited in Haralambos & Holborn, 2008) criticised white feminists of failing to acknowledge how race and racism impacts on women’s experiences. She argued that white feminist theories of oppression applied to all women; therefore this institutionalised racism. Giddens (2009) pointed out that although black feminists stood next to their suffragette counterparts for women’s rights they realised race could not be ignored. Black women were at a disadvantage on the basis of their colour, race, gender and class position. Black feminists concluded that if gender equality is to prevail then racism needed to be addressed in mainstream feminism.

Post-modern feminism came about in the 1980’s and challenged the definition of modern feminism. Post-modern feminists argued that ‘woman’ is a debatable category, complicated by issues of class, ethnicity, sexuality and other facets of identity. They rejected the claim that there is a grand theory that can explain the position of women in a society because each society has complex social relations and women do not actually have a fixed identity. Post-modern feminists accept that there are many different points of view that are all equally valid (Marsh and Keating, 2006).

Characteristics of Masculinity and femininity differ from one society to another, not only do the characteristics differ but so do the sexual activities in which people engage. Connell (1995 cited in Macionis & Plummer, 2008: 366) described this as part of a gender order in which “societies shape notions of masculinity and femininity into power relationships.” Connell argued that femininity and masculinity were arranged around hegemonic masculinity and suggested that men produced and maintained gender inequality. According to Giddens (2001) Connell used pragmatic data on gender inequality to show how women were kept in subordinate positions to men. Connell categorised society’s gender order into three facets: labour that referred to the sexual divisions of labour in the home and place of work, power that referred to domestic violence within the home and cathexis which related to the mechanics within emotional sexual relationships.

According to the Office for National Statistics (2010) the pay gap for full-time employees in 2009 is down from 12.2% to 10.2%. For women, full-time earnings increased more across the bottom 10% of the distribution with a growth of 1.8% compared to 0.8% for their male counterparts. Similarly, the hourly earnings of the top 10% women went up by 2.1% compared to the 0.8% for men. In addition, the Office for National Statistics (2008) noted that in 2007/08 women were five times more likely to suffer from domestic violence than men, this accounted for 85% of women compared to 15% of men.

Up until 1970, crime and deviance like other areas of sociology had ignored women. Sociologist, Carol Smart (1979 cited in Haralambos & Horn 2008) criticised criminology for being male dominated and sexist. She argued that because women committed fewer and less insignificant crimes then men, women were undeserving of research. The Office for National Statistics (2008) reported that in 2006 males where more than likely to be found guilty of crime than women. In England and Wales between 82% and 94% of males were found guilty of a violent crime and 97% of males were found guilty of sexual offences.

Criminologist Otis Pollock (1950 cited in Haralambos & Horn 2008) claimed that women were more deviant then men. He argued that statistics on crime and gender were deceptive and that certain crimes women committed were likely to go unreported. Firstly, Pollock stated that the police and magistrates tended to be men and were chivalrous. Secondly, women were clever in hiding their crimes; Pollock linked this to female biology. Thirdly, Pollock saw women’s domestic role as an opportunity to commit crime in the private sphere and that this type of crime went undetected. Although, Pollock’s theories have been heavily criticised by other criminologist, his critics do give him creditability for being the first to say statistics did underrate female criminality.

In summary, it is evident that in the 19th century men dominated society, early sociological theories ignored gender issues in particular women. Feminists such as Martineau fought against these sexiest ideologies arguing that malestream research did not relate to the lives of women or indeed their concerns. Feminists stressed that society could not be fully understood without taking women into consideration. The first wave of feminism was all about how men viewed and marginalised women and equal rights.

As feminism developed in sociology, individual theories formed within feminism thinking. These theories highlighted and explained how women viewed gender inequality and how men oppressed women in the public and private sphere. Feminists believed that developing such theories would help them understand their subordination and help liberate themselves from men’s control. Feminism has also helped sociologists understand how masculinity and femininity is arranged around the dominance of men and how the power relations of gender order keep women in subordinate positions within the home and at work.

Whilst the feminist perspective has influenced the study of gender inequality by obtaining the same civil rights as men, acquiring rights in the workplace, the home and in politics. Some feminists still argue that there needs to be a total rethinking of sociological theory around the issues of women, although some progress has been made. It would appear that women still have a considerable way to go in closing the gendering gap and having the same equal opportunities as men. Yet, it remains to be seen if women will ever break through the glass ceiling and reach the top of the social mobility ladder or earn the same wage as men in high flying positions.

A Woman/s Place Was in the Home: Has Feminism Finished the Family?

Government debates and some religious discourse harks back to what Finch (1989) has described as the myth of a golden age of the family. Various studies on the family tend to suggest that in Western societies family forms have differed depending on wider social events such as the Industrial Revolution and also demographically. In England for example, family patterns in rural areas and in poor areas differ from those in more affluent areas. In poorer areas families are more likely to involve wider relationships such as grandparents and aunts and uncles. During the nineteenth century the idea of the nuclear family became the most prevalent. This is what is often referred to as the traditional family and the source of what have been called traditional values. It is this family form that has attracted the most criticism, especially from feminists. Even without a feminist critique there have been widespread experiences of changes in the UK and other Western countries during the last forty years concerning marriage, household, and family forms. These are changes that would have been unimaginable before the Second World War (Giddens, 2001). People wait longer before getting married and more people are less likely to marry than used to be the case. What has been called second wave feminism began in the 1960s. Many of its opponents argue that it is feminism which has led to a drop in the number of marriages, greater divorce rates among those who do marry, and a consequent rise in the number of single parent families. Before the late 1960s having a child out of wedlock was still a source of great social shame but during the closing years of the twentieth century the number women who had children but were not married continued to rise. Figures available for 1997 indicate that at that time this group made up 42% of all lone parent households (Social Trends, 2000). Although feminism has been cited as the cause of such changes, this criticism is based on the view that the ‘traditional’ family was an eternal form until women challenged this view.

This paper will begin with a definition of key concepts. It will then look at the concept and history of the family. It will examine the notion that a woman’s place was in the home until the advent of feminism. It will look at different family forms and then assess whether feminism has brought about the end of traditional ideas of the family.

Family

Murdock 1949 describes a family in the following way:

The family is a social group characterized by common residence, economic co-operation and reproduction. It includes adults of both sexes, at least two of whom maintain a socially approved sexual relationship, and one or more children, own or adopted, of sexually cohabiting adults (Murdock, 1949).^[1]

Family forms vary across societies but theorists maintain that the most prevalent form is the nuclear family described below. Larger family units are referred to as extended families.

Feminism

Women have argued for equal rights with men since the 18^th Century when Mary Wollstonecraft (1792) wrote her Vindication of the Rights of Women. Other women followed in her stead, the most famous being the Pankhurst sisters and the suffragettes who fought for women’s right to vote (Abbott andWallace, 1997). Modern feminism began in the 1960s with the work of American writer Betty Frieden (1965) and this has come to be known as second wave feminism. Alister McGrath (1993) has written that,

Feminism has come to be a significant component of modern western culture. At its heart, feminism is a global movement working towards the emancipation of women. The older term for the movement-‘women’s liberation’- expressed the fact that it is at heart a liberation movement directing its efforts toward achieving equality for women in modern society, especially through the removal of obstacles-including beliefs, values, and attitudes- which hinder that process (McGrath, 1993:111).

The Concept and History of the Family

The family is the primary place of socialization and the place where children are introduced to the norms and values of a given society (Talcott Parsons,1951). Parsons work referred to what has come to be known as the nuclear family. Nuclear families consist of parents and children living together, family members ostensibly provide mutual love and support. It is this support that enables individual family members to contribute to society and lead productive lives (Giddens, 2001). In the nuclear family one of the adults is employed outside the home and there should be an unrestricted sharing of income (Cheal, 1991).Theorists such as Murdock (1949 cited in Giddens, 2001) have argued that traditional concepts of the family are to be found in all societies and that the family is a necessary and central institution in society.

Whether one regards traditional notions of the family as being pertinent to all societies depends largely on how the family is defined, certainly it might be argued that the nuclear model is no longer the norm in contemporary society. Willmott and Young (1957) undertook what has come to be regarded as one of the most important studies on the sociology of the family in Britain. The work investigated families and family life in East London during the 1950s. The study was undertaken at a time when housing policies and greater financial rewards meant that when a couple married they were able to set up home on their own. Increased geographical mobility also meant that many young couples lived a good distance from their families. As a consequence of this and the fact that more women were working outside the home it was argued that the division of labour in the home was changing, as more women went out to work so men would take on more domestic chores. Willmott and Young (1957) believed that the family would become a more democratic institution where work, finance, and family responsibilities were shared. Willmott and Young maintained that with the passing of time the family would become more symmetrical i.e. that the changing nature of men and women’s roles would mean that their family roles would become interchangeable (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Feminists challenge this view Walby (1990) maintains that the family is still a site of oppression for women and that this is the place where their roles are perpetuated. Furthermore, feminist writers such as Abbott and Wallace (1997) have argued that the nuclear model of the family is too narrow. They also claim that such a concept neglects the fact that not all family members experience life in the same way, or receive equal measures of support. Goode (1963)argues that social systems such as the family, are powerful agents of control because to some extent their existence is founded on force. Within social systems such as the family this is often unrecognized, because it is hidden it is effective. Gittens (1992) is of the opinion that in modern Britain:

Ideals of family relationships have become enshrined in our legal, social, religious and economic systems which, in turn, reinforce the ideology and penalise or ostracise those who transgress it (Gittens, 1992, p.74).

The Family and Ideology

In pre-industrial society most of the household chores were undertaken by children. There was little distinction between home and work, the private and public spheres, families generally worked the land and they did this together. The rise of industrialization and the growth of the towns brought massive changes to what had constituted the family and family life up until that time. Oakley (1981) maintains that the coming of the factories replaced the family as the unit of production. In 1819 the Factory Act was introduced and this resulted in the growing dependence of children, and also to women’s increased dependence on men and their restriction to the private sphere. During the 19^th and early 29^th Centuries there was a growing resistance to the employment of married women as wage earners. This was because working women were perceived as threatening to male employment and so there was pressure to keep them at home (Hacker, 1972). The nineteenth century witnessed the embedding of gender roles which were epitomized in men’s idealisation of the feminine. Women were seen to be both physically and emotionally weaker than men and therefore not suited to the same roles. The following is a rationalization for men’s idealistic views of women and why they were confined to the home.

No woman can or ought to know very much of the mass of meanness and wickedness and misery that is loose in the wide world. She could not learn it without losing the bloom and freshness which it is her mission in life to preserve (Quoted in Hudson, 1970:53-4).

Victorian ideology said that women were created to help men and this became the rationalization for their confinement to the home. To start with this primarily affected the middle classes, as the century progressed, however, the working classes were also subjected to this ideology. Oakley (1981) maintains that this had the effect of locking women into the housewife role, further cementing the growing ideology of gender roles. Murdock (1949 in Giddens, 2001) argued that gender roles are the natural result of the biological differences between men and women. Such differences, he maintained, made the sexual division of labour the most sensible way of organising society. This view became endemic in society and has affected much Government policy. When Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979 the Conservatives were calling themselves the party of the family. They maintained that people should be discouraged from cohabitation or from homosexuality and supported the patriarchal nuclear family where the father was the person to enforce behavioural standards. Even though single parent families, extended families and reconstituted families were becoming more prevalent at the time these were not regarded as the norm or as desirable (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Barrett and McIntosh (1980) have argued that ideas centred on a man being able to earn enough to support a family benefited the capitalist economy and the working man at the expense of women. They maintain that this idea of a family wage is still embedded in society and has been a major aspect of women’s inequality with men. The idea that a man was entitled to earn a family wage but women were not has meant that women have, (and still do in a number of areas) earn less than men. Furthermore, the low pay which accompanies what is often termed ‘women’s work’ means that women’s choices are restricted and their economic power within marriage has been reduced.

Changing Work Patterns

Even though there had been widespread resistance towards women working outside the home Oakley (1981) maintains that this began to change after the first World War, and between 1914 and 1950 the number of women working outside the home showed a steady increase. In spite of this their primary role was still seen in terms of being a housewife. Since the 1960s women have been struggling to achieve participation in paid employment which is equal to that of men. This has been the case for women from all walks of life (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). These struggles resulted in the introduction of the Equal Pay Act in 1970 which meant that women were entitled to the same pay as men if they were doing the same job. In 1975 it became illegal under the Sex Discrimination Act to discriminate against women in education, in employment, and in the provision of goods. The European Court demanded a strengthening of the Equal Pay Act in Britain in 1982. This was followed by a further amendment in 1984 which allowed that women were entitled to the same pay as men in their organisations providing they could prove that their work involved the same kinds of decision making and skills as their male counterparts. Women should have equal access and an equal chance for promotion. Some jobs were regarded as outside the confines of the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act e.g. only women could work in a women’s refuge (Haralambos et al 2000).

Feminist Criticisms of the Family

Since the 1970s and 80s the main sociological focus on families has been concerned with the experiences of women and children, furthermore, the highlighting of these experiences has generated a growth in awareness that the family is an ideological form that does not always work in everyone’s best interests. Feminists have highlighted the fact that for centuries women have been the subordinate sex in society and that this subordination is largely a result of their biology i.e. the fact that they have been born women rather than men. Feminists maintain that there is a disjuncture between women’s experiences of being in a family as wives and mothers and ideologies of domesticity. For a long time many women have felt extremely dissatisfied with the role ascribed to them once they are married and it was this dissatisfaction that Betty Friedan (1965) was seeking to express when she referred to the experience of American housewives in the 1960s as suffering from ‘the problem that has no name’. For some women the ideal of family life is seen as desirable, but their experiences within their own families, falls far short of that ideal (Stanley and Wise, 1983).

The gender roles that women have been assigned are constructed on the basis of this biological difference rather than such roles being innate (Abbott and Wallace, 1997). Gender roles are socially constructed and reinforced through the family and the education system. This is done through the different ways that authority figures have of relating to boys and girls, and the fact that there is a tendency to give girls dolls and tea sets, and to give boys toy cars and construction sets (Firestone, 1971). However, Connell (1987) has argued that this view tends to ignore the capacity of individuals to accept or reject the social expectations that are embedded in gender roles. Thus Connell maintains that boys and girls may choose elements from each others roles e.g. the tendency of some girls to become involved in competitive sports, and boys dressing in drag when alone. Connell (1987) has said that this may result in males and females building themselves a fantasy life that is in contradiction to their public actions, thus gender roles can be interchangeable. Feminists have also pointed out that gender socialization is evident in a hidden curriculum in the education system where books that represent males and females in ‘traditional’ roles reinforce the view that men and women have different paths in life. Until the late 1980s girls were less likely than boys to achieve the requisite number of A levels to enter university. In recent years the focus has tended to be on the growing underachievement of boys because girls are matching or exceeding boys across the curriculum and thus there are more women entering higher education. This does not, however, give them much advantage in the job market where they are disadvantaged in comparison with males who have the same qualification levels

(Epstein, et al, 1998). Despite these things Moore (2002), maintains that things are changing, men are taking on more domestic responsibility than they were 20 years ago and often have a much greater involvement with their children than in the past. This has gained official recognition through the introduction of parental leave. In the past, although mothers were entitled to maternity leave, fathers did not have paternity leave. Parental leaves allows both parents to legitimate time off, however, unless men have sympathetic employers, this leave is unpaid and so often not taken. Changes within families has also meant (as mentioned earlier) that the structure of the family itself is changing.

As it has already been noted, women’s subordination increased with the rise of industrialisation and the separation between public and private spheres (Oakley 1981). The continuing erosion of this distinction over the latter half of the 20^th Century has been a significant factor in the changing nature of the family. There are a number of forces at work in the decline of what has been called the traditional family. Feminists have highlighted these changes while at the same time exposing the unequal power relationships that exist within society and within the family (Harding, 1987, Walby, 1986). They relate this inequality to the patriarchal nature of society. Rich (1976) has argued that patriarchy is a social and ideological system where men determine the roles that women should or should not play in society. Oakley (1981 and Pahl (1983)^[2] have cited the division of roles, both within the family, and in the wider society, as a major site of oppression for women. Traditionally the man has been seen as the breadwinner once children arrive and this puts the woman at a disadvantage as research has shown that there is a relationship between money, power and inequality (Vogler, C and Pahl, J.1999)^[3]. Because the family has been seen as the primary site of socialization (Parsons, 1951), it is also a useful place for social conditioning where obedience to authority lays the foundation for the submissive workforce that capitalism requires. Delphy (1977) has argued that gender differences are socially constructed and they tend to serve the interests of the dominant groups in society. Delphy further contends that women should be treated as a separate class because the categories of man and woman are not biological, but political and economic categories. Therefore women form a class who are exploited by men, and this is particularly evident in the nuclear family. Thus, Delphy writes:

While the wage-labourer sells his labour power, the marrie woman gives hers away; exclusivity and non-payment are intimately connected. To supply unpaid labour within the framework of a universal and personal relationship (marriage) constructs primarily a relationship of slavery (Delpy, 1977:15).

Marxist feminists argue that while Marxism may give an explanation of exploitation by the capitalist system it does not explain the inequalities between women and men, as Delphy (1977) maintains gender and sexual inequality should be the fundamental categories of feminist analysis. Marxism alone does not explain for example why women should be seen as responsible for household tasks and capitalism could just as easily still profit if men stayed at home The Community Care Act of 1990 has imposed further responsibilities on women in the role of informal carers, this places considerable stress on women’s health, particularly as nowadays many women who have a family also work outside the home. Dalley (1988) argues that much Government’s policy making, particularly the idea of community care is based on outmoded notions of the ideal family, where most married women do not go out to work, and b) it is the woman’s duty to assume the caring role. Under such circumstances it is widely assumed that the caring that women do in the home is a natural part of women’s role within the family even though many more women work than used to be the case.

Changing Family Structures

Since the Second World War there has been a dramatic rise in women’s participation in the workforce, although a lot of this has been part-time employment. The 1991 Census shows that the workforce was 47% women although there were regional and ethnic variations and single women are more likely to be employed than are married women. This is largely because women’s participation in the labour market is affected by their domestic responsibilities (Abbott and Tyler, 1995). Many women spend time out of the labour market when they have young children and then may work part time while children are at school only returning to full employment when their children are older. Few women have continuous careers as a result of their domestic responsibilities. Although child care arrangements do have an effect on women’s working patterns, lack of proper child care is not the only reason women do not participate more fully in the workplace. For example, while the number of women in work has continued to rise only a third of single mothers with young children are economically active (HMSO, 1999). This is due to the fact that, despite Government initiatives such as Sure Start Centres, most lone mothers do not have either sufficient extra support to return to the workplace, or can only take low paid work which may leave them worse off than they were on benefits. In addition to this the welfare system was formed on the basis that the traditional nuclear family, with a man at its head, should be the norm. It is not, therefore, set up to deal with the increasing number of single parent households (Moore, 2002). Government continued concentration on the notion of the traditional family, tends to make single parent families appear as deviant, when in fact this type of family has become more prevalent as have other family forms.

Gittins (1993) maintains that there are a wide variety of domestic relationships and that although relationships may be universal, the can take an infinite variety of forms. Besides the nuclear family there is the extended family, often a feature of minority ethnic groups. There are also many single parent families, whether through death, divorce or choice. Second marriages that often result in what is known as reconstituted families, e.g. where one or both partners have children from other relationships, are also becoming more prevalent. The last twenty years have also seen a rise in the number of people living together, or cohabiting, without the bonds of marriage. Different family relationships are also more evident due to the different ethnic groupings that now make up the UK (Giddens, 2001). Different attitudes towards those people who are not heterosexual has meant that an increasing number of gay and lesbian men and women now choose to live together as couples, and may or may not have children.^[4] According to Hartley-Brewer (1999) contends that the family (as we have known it) is evolving, rather than the emphasis being on mother and father it should be on nurturing parents of whatever sex. It might therefore be argued that the home may soon cease to be the specific place for women and could become the place for dependent children and caregiver, who may not necessarily be a biological parent.

Conclusion

This assignment has looked at the concept and history of the family and at feminist criticisms. As noted earlier an increasing number of families are matriarchal or matrifocal, this is often the case in Caribbean families. This has generated debates about whether fatherless families are the source of an increasing number of social problems. Dennis and Erdos (1992) maintain that without adult examples of the proper conduct in relationships the children from families with absent fathers will not have the ability to become effective members of a social group. It is further argued that if a boy grows up without a father present then he will struggle to be a successful parent himself. Blankenhorn (1995) has argued that the high divorce rates of Western nations does not mean simply the absence of fathers from the home but the erosion of the idea of fatherhood, and that this will have lethal consequences. Fukuyama (1997) maintains that the roots of the disruption of society and of the traditional family can be attributed to the rising numbers of female employment. This, he argues, changes men’s perceptions of women, they now perceive women a being more capble and independent and thus able to care for a child without a man’s help. It is Fukuyama’s (1997) contention that the emancipation of women can lead to the further abdication of responsibility by men. Clearly a number of social and historical forces have contributed to the changing nature of the family. Many of these forces have been highlighted in feminist work, whether or not feminism has brought about the death of the family is a matter of opinion. On the evidence presented above it might be argued that feminism itself was the result of social, historical, and economic processes and it is these processes, rather than feminism, that is changing our view of what constitutes a family.

Bibliography

Abbott and Wallace, 1997 An Introduction to Sociology: Feminist Perspectives. London, Routledge

Abbott and Tyler 1995 Ethnic variation in the female labour force: a research note”in British Journal of Sociology 46 pp 330-353

Allan, Graham and Crow, Graham 2001 Families, Households and Society: Basingstoke: Palgrove

Barrett and Mcintosh 1980 “The family wage: Some problems for socialists and Feminists” Capitlalism and Class 11 pp51-72

Blankenhorn, D 1995 Fatherless America New York, Basic Books

Cheal,m D 1991 The Family and the State of Theory Hemel Hempstead, Harvester, Wheatsheaf

Connell, R. 1987 Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics Cambridge, Polity

Coontz, S, and Henderson, P. eds. 1986. Women’s Work, Men’s Prosperity. London, Verso.

Crow, G. and Hardey, M. 1992 “Diversity and ambiguity among lone-parent households in Modern Britain” in Marsh, C. and Arber, S. eds 1992 Families and Households: Divisions and Change. London, Macmillan.

Dalley, G. 1988 Ideologies of caring: Rethinking Community and Collectivism London, Macmillan

Delphy, C 1977 The Main Enemy London, Women’s Research and Resource Centre

Dennis, N and Erdos, G 1992 Families without Fatherhood London, IEA Health and Welfare Unit

Epstein et al 1998 Failing boys: Issues in Gender and Achievement Buckingham, OUP

Finch, J 1989 Family Obligartions and Social Change Cambridge, Polity Press

Firestone, S. 1971 The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution London, Cape

Friedan, B 1965 The Feminist Mystique, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth

Fukuyama F. 1997 The End of Order London, Social Market Foundation

Giddens, A. 2001 4^th edition. Sociology. Cambridge, Polity Press.

Gittens, D. 1993 The Family in Question: Changing households and familial ideologies London, Macmillan

Goode w. 1963 World Revolution and Family Patterns New York, Free Press

Graham, H. 1993 Hardship and Health in Women’s Lives Hemel Hempstead, Harvester/Wheatsheaf

Hacker, H. 1972 “Women as a Minority Group” in Glazer-Malbin and Waehrer eds. 1972. Woman in a Man-Made World. Chicago, Rand-Mcnally

Haralambos,M. Holborn, M. and Heald, R.2000. 5^th ed. Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London, Harper Collins.

Hartley-Brewer, J. 1999”Gay couple will be legal parents” Guardian 28^th October 1999

Hartmann, H. 1981. “The unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism: toward a more progressive union” in Sargent, L. ed. 1981 The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: A Debate on Class and Patriarchy. London, Pluto Press

HMSO 1999 Social Trends 29 London, HMSO

Hudson, K., 1970. The Place of Women in Society. London, Ginn.

McGrath, A 1993 Modern Christian Thought, Blackwell, Oxford

Moore, S 2002 Social Welfare Alive (3^rd ed) Cheltenham, Nelson Thorne

Murdock, G. 1949. Social Structure. New York, Macmillan.

Oakley, A. 1981. Subject Women. Oxford, Martin Robinson

Parsons, T. and Bales, R. 1955. Family, Socialisation, and Interaction Process. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press

Parsons, T. 1951 The Social System New York, The Free Press

Stanley and Wise 1983 Breaking Out London, Routledge

Walby, S 1986 Patriarchy at Work, Cambridge, Polity.

Walby,S. 1990. Theorising Patriarchy. Blackwell, Oxford.

Walby,S. 1997. Gender Transformations. London, Routledge

Willmott and Young 1957 Family and Kinship in East London London, Harmondsworth

Wollstonecraft, M 1792 The Disenfranchisement of Women, in Schneir, M (ed.) 1996 The Vintage Book of Historical Feminism, Vintage, London

1

This paper examines the distinctive contribution of a feminist methodology in social science research. The Introduction outlines both the historical and future perspectives. The paper is then divided into two distinct parts (1) Feminist Research – What this means in terms of social science research, the methods used together with the challenges and choices involved. Concluding with the epistemological issues raised by doing feminist research (2) considers the different perspectives and critique of conventional research. This illustrated by appropriate case study examples. Most researchers in sociology tend to agree that there is no single distinct feminist methodology. There is more a collective consciousness that was born from feminist movements in the 1960’s and 1970’s where a group of women talked openly, developing a mode of inquiry that challenged the conventional norms of research. These women collectively became known as feminists and enlightened individuals that formed a new basis for knowledge. Although the original works were conducted outside of an academic setting, it soon became apparent that there was a lack of feminine representation in mainstream sociology or social science. (Devault 1996). Over the last 25 years female sociologists have made significant advances in pushing back the prejudices against women and in general interpreting the workings of society. Feminism was essentially born from a movement and a belief in resolving gender inequalities.

Within the general claims to male dominance in social theory, three challenges have emerged (i) the criticism against that of female knowledge and its’ inability to demonstrate adequate work that illustrates scientific or unbiased knowledge. This resulted in feminists coming under scrutiny in order to demonstrate abilities to rationalise knowledge, perform verification, subjectivity and freedom from political bias. Secondly, how different influences shaped women’s lives. Examples cited included that of “cultural divisions, social divisions and power relations” (Caroline RamazanoClu 2004). The danger here is one of stereotyping and simply branding women as one gender that provides a uniform result. The third challenge intertwines that of knowledge and gender whereby in essence women are taken for granted.

In 1987 Sandra Harding (Harding 1987) provided insight into the difference between that of Method, Methodology and Epistemology. She equated Epistemology to that of a theory of knowledge with the objective of answering specific questions. Further, that there are two distinct epistemologies namely that of a ‘Feminist empiricism’ and a ‘Feminist Standpoint’. The empirical part is that where a response is provided to bias and traditional responses (Harding 1987). Whereas, standpoint refers to a specific feminist opinion founded upon an explanation of knowledge. In order to understand and complete a feminist standpoint the reader needs to become more involved with the “intellectual and political struggles that a women’s experience is built upon Sandra Harding’s views on Standpoint Epistemology focused more on the concepts of objectivity. Harding advocated a new concept of ‘strong objectivity’, as opposed to that of the weak concept which she referred to as ‘objectivism’. She stated that objectivity must contain all social values and interests from the research that is carried out. She was aware that certain social values could adversely impact the research and cause potential distortions. As such Harding viewed traditional research concepts and objectivity as the denial of cultures best beliefs (knowledge), whereas the new version fully embraces both political and historical origins.

Harding believed that her new theory holds validity, particularly from the feminist standpoint i.e. women are part of an oppressed group and as such they approach research problems in a less arbitrary way. They are more likely to evaluate theories that might otherwise be overlooked or denied by more traditional concepts or viewpoints. Harding states that that the standpoint has a substantial foundation in the empirical experiences of women and although this may not constitute a foundation of knowledge, nevertheless it does create a more diverse contribution leading towards increased objectivity.” (Stanley 1990).

Historically the most common expression of female action has been associated with that of liberation and the emancipation of women. This has ranged from the concept of radical insistence, to clarifying the purpose of research and ultimately to transformation in terms of political action. It was Maria Mies that proposed feminist research should be consistent with the overall political goals and aspirations of women. Hence, there needs to be a full integration of social and political; action appropriate to the emancipation of women. (Mary Margaret Fonow, Beyond methodology: feminist scholarship as lived research 1991).

FEMINIST RESEARCH

Feminist research can essentially be defined as research conducted by what has become known as ‘feminists’, essentially drawing upon experiences of women in what is perceived as a male dominated world. The objective of research is based the creation of useful knowledge in order to make added contributions by different perspectives of thought. Feminism is based upon a praxis of women sharing the same agenda with men and overcoming the struggle relative to gender, race and class. The foundation of this was really built in the 1980’s. Feminist research has since become more focused on how the lives of women have become materially altered by men and the development of strategies in order to resist this process (Mary Maynard 2005).

Feminist research in general terms has had a lack of agreement to what precisely defines feminist theory and practice. As such there is not really a single unifying theory. It was Patricia Maguire (Breyton 1997) that offered the premise that feminism is (i) An understanding and belief that women face some form of oppression (ii) A commitment to understand female oppression and exploitation in all of its forms (iii) A commitment towards elimination of all forms of female oppression. (Breyton 1997).

FEMINIST METHODS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH: Feminist methods may have four main objectives: (i) the ability to uncover and overcome types of bias in research (ii) The ability to detect and create social change (iii) a concept or method to illustrate human diversity (iv) An acknowledgement of the credentials and position of the researcher. In order to create social change any method must include and respect the participants as change agents. The method needs to acknowledge diversity and that not all women see the social world in the same way e.g. the method approach to interviews and inquiry that explore the experiences of different religions. (Sprague 2005)i.e. evidence has been presented to support theory presented.

Feminist studies use both qualitative and quantitative research techniques, although qualitative research is more readily used. The term methodology relates to more of a process of how to conduct research i.e. what you need to select, empirical study of what to observe, what to measure and how to conduct analysis. The method id more related to the precise technique of carrying out the study. (Sprague 2005) A common assumption has been that methodology and epistemology are identical. This has created a relatively narrow technical approach towards carrying out and conducting research. The concept of methodology essentially opens the way for conducting choice i.e. the implications of what we should do and how we might do it. It facilitates questions on data collection and assimilation. As such methodology paves the way for critical reflection and creativity within the social sciences.

THE CHALLENGES AND CHOICES: Feminist researchers have taken very different approaches to the adoption of methodology. As such they have adopted differing means to the acquisition and validation of knowledge. This has tended to lean towards a more scientific and evidential base of presenting knowledge. This has avoided the more serious challenges of refuting feminist research and rejecting it on the basis that it contains no scientific method. The example being the study into child abuse, as such it never becomes a clear cut case but contains many complex shades of grey and is nearly always disputable. In many situations feminist researchers are particularly vulnerable in this regard. (Caroline RamazanoClu 2004).

In current terms it is important to recognise that a large number of women are employed in science, engineering and academic positions. As such they offer a diverse range of opinions on a wide range of subject matter. The female positions tend to have two distinct types of focus (i) that engaged with the sciences and (ii) that focused upon society. Researchers have emerged from former marginalised groups and as such have had a profound way of changing the pattern of inquiry and thought process. There are still those however that holds the opinion that feminism is a threat to the objectivity of science. Sandra Harding pointed out that if all knowledge is socially constructed it will pose a major threat and challenge to science. For example with most scientists “the notion that their views of the natural world are subjective is counter to their professional training”. (Wyer 2008) It is important to note that the feminist researchers have made a significant impact over the last thirty years. This has included a significant contribution to methodologies in the social sciences; particularly responding to the challenge of how women have been silenced in both society and research. The feminists have obtained significant success in bringing about social change and creating a degree of equity in both professional and personal lives. Whilst much of the success has been in the first world countries, there still remains a significant challenge for women in the third world and those emerging economies. In particular the native women of Africa, the women in the Islamic communities and others in the emerging countries like India and China.

LEADING CONTRIBUTIONS: Early contributions in the 1970’s were made by feminist sociologists that include the likes of Marcia Millman and Rosebeth Moss Kanter. [1] They made a number of suppositions in sociology that focused on issues or problems with existing use of sociological methods. In essence they objected to how assumptions to sociological theories manifested themselves. They challenged the empirical views of male sociologists and demonstrated a new vision as seen purely from the female perspective. (Harding 1987).

The researcher and author Carol Gilligan [2] [In a different voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development] agreed the point that conventional theorists are wrong to dismiss the wisdom of women on grounds of lower maturity. Gilligan asked that we listen to women in their different views and not try to compartmentalize them but credit women for the significant contributions over many disciplines in the sciences and the arts. (Harding 1987).

Evelyn Fox Keller [3] had completed a great deal of ground breaking work that exposed sexual bias in the sciences. She predicted that women needed to be careful in rejecting concepts of objectivity and rationality as they would not be regarded as the icons for creating a new frontier but were more likely to be doomed and marginalized outside of the political mainstream. Fox herself later found herself in the dilemma of having to choose between feminism and science. Fox stated that the more we questioned methodology the greater it generated papers on epistemology and as such methodology became an end-in-itself. (Winnie Tomm 1989).

Maria Mies [4] (McDonald 2004)concluded that “the quantitative survey method is itself not free from androcentric bias”, further “there is a contradiction between the prevalent theories of social science, methodology and the political aims of women” (McDonald 2004). Meis argued that if we revert to these old traditional concepts they will again be turned into instruments of repression – “new wine should not be poured into old bottles” (McDonald 2004)

One of the most influential people in the field of standpoint epistemology was that of Dorothy E Smith. Smith is famous throughout the world as a developer of theories and as such she has advanced the academic position from a feminist standpoint. Smith developed theories and concepts around the subject matter of gender and particularly that of the ‘ruling texts’ of man. She advocated that many texts were compiled from the male perspective and as such were responsible for defining gender. She further advocated that such rules written by men determined the rules of society and defined the way in which we live and conduct our lives. Amongst the books that Smith referenced were the US Constitution, The Holy Bible and the Communist Manifesto. Smith stated that the rulings defined in many of these books were completely opposite to the manner in which women conducted their lives today. Such obsolescence creates the way for transformation of thinking and revision in these areas. – Ryan B Johnson (Johnson, Standpoint Epistemology Summary 2010).

EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES OF FEMINIST RESEARCH:

Epistemology of feminist research broadly refers to the value of knowledge or the scientific method applied in order to conduct the research. An example being that of empirical or qualitative research. One of the important issues relates to the variation between quantitative and qualitative techniques in feminist research. The historical association that exists between the two research methods have been documented; however the logical associations remain debateable. As such feminist methodology cannot be firmly anchored to either camp of quantitative or qualitative style of research.

Gilligan [5] pointed out that qualitative research represents the voice that is most consistent with female research values. Equally the researchers often use the perspective of a ‘different voice’, this being done in order to provide the distinction between that of a male opinionated voice. The female voice seeking to be far more evident in defining in the definition of connection and relationships. Mie’s stated that because women have been well versed in repression they have greater objectivity than men in this subject area. This is evident when they are involved in researching exploited groups. In essence women have more empathy and are able to better understand the important issues in a different light or perspective. (Janet Holland 2010).

There is also the concept of stereotyping all women as feminists. Many female researchers have been primarily trained in traditional qualitative methodologies and despite the fact that they may have alternate or other views are most likely to revert to the traditional methods of carrying out research. Psychologist Laurie Rudman has completed research that has changed the views on negative stereotyping of women. Rudman’s research found that negative stereoptypes of women are very widespread and even include educated young women. Her research further substantiated that “strong independent women have satisfying romantic lives and their men are happy too – as opposed to the widely held convention that feminists are man hating harpies” (Branson 2007)

SUMMARY PERSPECTIVES

Female researchers have made a number of distinctive contributions to feminist methodologies in social science research. It remains questionable however as to whether a distinct feminist methodology exists, rather it is an approach to which female researchers have enlivened the debate by bringing fresh perspectives and valuable new insight, thereby challenging traditional methods. There have been some outstanding contributions to social science research from leading female researchers – “Goelting and Fernstermaker, [6] 1995; Orlans and Wallace, 1994 and Thorpe and Laslett, 1997? are to name but a few. (DeVault 1999)

Many sociologists agree that the original feminist movement had a core objective of changing the method of consciousness that was historically rooted in concepts of empirical research. Women became more aware of an alternate base for knowledge and the concept of introducing ‘the women’s experience’ into the methodology deployed. The early movement thereby highlighted the omission of this perspective. In addition, the group highlighted the racism that was faced by African/Americans in the USA and how white women had an advantage in obtaining academic research jobs. From these early beginnings female researchers have learnt to respond to the issues in social sciences and improve the overall field of inquiry.

The female approach has been compared to that of ‘excavators’ (DeVault 1999)where female researchers have been used to identify gaps or missing components in research or that which has been ignored. The unique voice of women often lends itself to a more empathetic approach to those delicate research areas i.e. child abuse, drug or substance abuse, juvenile crime etc. This often results in a more holistic and complete enquiry than would otherwise have been obtained from the traditional male dominated approach. (DeVault 1999).

The emancipation of women in social science would provide women with an increased knowledge of their own social circumstances within society. Any feminist methodology therefore needs to be grounded in objectivity in social science. The feminist movement, in achieving liberal values, must not itself become an instrument of repression against the male community. As such the concept goes beyond methodology to more of a process of transformational change and make research more inclusive and objective. Feminist research is therefore aimed at the liberation of women. In achieving these objectives they increase the base of knowledge and add value to the overall method approach in social research and inquiry. (Mary Margaret Fonow, 1991). “All the decent people, male and female, are feminists. The only people who are not feminists are those who believe that women are inherently inferior or undeserving of the respect and opportunity afforded men. Either you are a feminist or you are a sexist/misogynist. There is no box marked ‘other’.- Ani DiFranco”. (M. P. Johnson 2005).

3406

Course Diary Entry 1

Liesbet Van Zoonen: ‘Feminist Media Studies’ (chapter 6, pp 87 – 104)

1. ABSTRACT

The sixth chapter of Van Zoonen’s book ‘Feminist Media Studies’, ‘Spectatorship and the Gaze’, provides a compelling introduction to the area of feminist film studies, more specifically, to different issues surrounding the concept of the ‘gaze’. Van Zoonen draws on the arguments of Laura Mulvey’s work, who used psychoanalytic tools in explaining why women are presented in the media as being looked at and men as the ones who act. Van Zoonen stresses the difficulty of the proponents of psychoanalysis to explain the pleasures of female spectatorship, which, nevertheless, can be accounted for by employing different perspectives on media studies. After discussing ideas regarding the male gaze, Van Zoonen turns her attention to the way images of men are presented in popular media, emphasising the fact that, out of fear that their image could be homosexualised, different methods and narrative codes are employed in order to make the objectification of male bodies less evident. Hence, the traditional perception of men being the ones who have the power and women the ones who are looked at is still in place in patriarchal cultures, even though there are signs of trying to put it aside.

2. OUTLINE
women are constructed in western popular media as being the passive object of the male gaze, whereas men as being the ones who act; the psychoanalytical paradigm was employed to explain this state of facts

a) Laura Mulvey used psychoanalysis in her study of gender media representations as a useful tool in explaining the pleasures of male spectatorship, though failing to explain the independent female pleasure of looking at men

‘scopophilia’ – the deriving of sexual pleasures simply by looking
‘narcissistic identification’ – the desire of men to identify themselves with other men, presented on the screen as flawless characters
the film industry is linked to patriarchy, according to Laura Mulvey; both ‘scopophilia’ and ‘narcissistic identification’ are achieved by the way filmmakers frame the action, including the objectification of women – the male gaze
fear of castration – the trauma suffered by boys when discovering the physical gender differences is diminished by the way male spectators take control over women’s bodies in the film industry
one of the problems of the way Mulvey employed psychoanalysis – it equates masculinity with being male and femininity with being female

b) Mary Ann Doane contends the impossibility of reversing the gender roles (i.e. men becoming feminine and women masculine)

no preconditions of voyeurism in women – in childhood women do not experience the distancing from their mothers that boys do because of the sexual differences
the female spectator can become masculinized by identifying with the male characters in the film or narcissistically identifying with objectified female characters

c) criticism of the psychoanalytic paradigm: it reinforces the patriarchal norms by excluding the possibility of women to derive pleasure from viewing media products

Women derive pleasure by looking at other women – the psychoanalytical paradigm and beyond

a) some argue that the bonding between girls and their mothers creates the pre-conditions of finding pleasure in looking at other women

b) women have coexisting latent homosexual and manifest heterosexual desires – Chodorow’s theory of female development

c) Arbuthnot and Seneca assert that the psychoanalytic theory is concerned with male spectatorship and thus not appropriate to examine female experiences and motivations

Women derive pleasure by looking at men

a) Christianity repressing the abundance of nude representations of men made the patriarchal order imperceptible, whilst it still is the substratum of most societies

b) the female gaze – which is masculine by definition – looking at the male body is less dangerous than the homosexual gaze

c) narrative and visual techniques lessen the degree of subjection of the male body to the gaze of the female spectatorship

e.g. staring back at the viewer, looking up or away from the camera, the text accompanying the images personifying male bodies and thus creating characters
men presented as active (e.g. signs of physical activity or labour) and in control, just happening to be looked at, not as posing specifically for being viewed by female or male spectators
male bodies presented like romantic objects, not sexual ones (e.g. Playgirl)
3. LITERATURE REVIEW

The three chapters I have chosen – Kaplan’s (1983), Stacey’s (1988) and Van Zoonen’s (1994) – which do not offer a comprehensive discussion of the issue of the ‘gaze’, draw on the psychoanalytic explanations of the male gaze and attempt to explain which are the pleasures derived by female spectators watching media products. Hence, all authors use Laura Mulvey’s and Mary Ann Doane’s ideas as a starting point for their discussion; Kaplan argues that psychoanalysis is ‘a useful tool […] [, but not] necessarily uncovering essential ‘truths’ about the human psyche’ (1983: 23). She further argues that it can explain only the current structural organization of society, which, I would argue, is a Marxist perspective; in her view, cinema is seen as a means of releasing the tensions created by the industrial society and psychoanalysis as a necessary means to understand the causes of these (Kaplan, 1983). Stacey (1988) identifies the gaps in Mulvey’s line of argument, more precisely the discussion of the male as an erotic object (which Van Zoonen analyses) and of female homosexuality, and exploits the latter to address one of the issues tackled in little depth by Van Zoonen (1994): female homosexual pleasure, which has been ignored by studies within the psychoanalytic framework. Stacey (1988), like Van Zoonen (1994), draws on Mary Ann Doane’s idea that women’s pleasures are not related to fetishism and voyeurism, as men’s are and further acknowledges Mulvey’s argument according to which women oscillate between male and female identifications.

In discussing possibilities for understanding and explaining the female gaze, all three authors argue that the reversal of roles is impossible without losing the specific gender identification; the female spectator becomes masculinized and vice-versa, and thus the structure remains basically unchanged (Kaplan, 1983). Stacey (1988), as does Van Zoonen (1994), rhetorically asks if women necessarily have to occupy feminine positions and men – masculine ones. I would suggest that ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ actually refer to a set of characteristics associated with men and women respectively only because it has traditionally been thought that they occur more often in the specific gender from which their names derive. Hence, they are not intrinsic to men or women. However, there remains the problem that they are in opposition, not on equal terms. Moreover, if these names which refer to gender and sexual roles would be disregarded, I think it would not be a problem for female spectators to adopt an ‘active’ (‘masculine’) stance anymore.

Further discussing the feminine and masculine spectatorships, Stacey (1988) contends that the subjectivities of spectators should be also taken into account, even if their standpoint is seen as ‘masculine’. Kaplan notes, drawing on Mary Ann Doane’s argument, that if attempting to confer female spectatorship an active role and not masculinizing it, there is the danger of denying pleasure and of ‘disembody[ing] their spectator’ (Kaplan, 1983: 28). An active main female character nearly always loses her traditional feminine characteristics in so doing – ‘[…] of kindness, humaneness, motherliness’ (Kaplan, 1983: 29). The problem with this statement is that all these characteristics of ‘femininity’ are actually constructed in the same way as concepts like ‘active’, ‘sexually desirable’ etc are. Therefore, Kaplan’s statement does no justice to the role of the female spectator.

The dominant images of women, all male constructs, as Kaplan (1983) emphasizes, are the objects of male fetishism and voyeurism, as all three authors mention. In addition to Van Zoonen’s (1994) overarching discussion of these Freudian concepts, Kaplan (1983) points at three male gazes in popular media, identified by Laura Mulvey: that of the film-maker, of the film viewer and of male characters in the film. According to this explanation of female’s position in the film framework, Kaplan argues, ‘the man owns the desire and the woman’ (1983: 27), whereas female spectators only ‘receive and return the gaze but cannot act upon it’ (1983: 31). Hence, male and female spectatorships are different in essential respects.

All three authors have a feminist standpoint in common from whence they look at the representation of women in popular media. Stacey (1988) is probably the most dedicated of all three to the feminist cause, discussing issues which are taboo for other scholars (feminist or not): the homosexual female spectatorship. The arguments they bring forward overlap, being complementary in the respect that all offer new information. However, they do not discuss each other’s contribution to the feminist debate mainly because all three (Stacey to a lesser degree) offer an overview of the arguments brought forward by Laura Mulvey and Mary Ann Doane. All three concluded by pointing to the need of further discussing the sources of pleasure for female spectators both in relation to men and to other women. Moreover, the problem of confounding gender identifications with sexuality in film studies has also been stated as being an issue.

4. CROSSCUTTING THEMES

The issues concerning the representation of genders in the media is one of the most important areas of concern for feminist scholars because of the many assumptions hidden under what comes across as common-sense. Nevertheless, this is only one of the issues in which feminists are interested. Among the general concern with the resources of conferring women a secondary role in patriarchal societies, feminists address issues of work and employment, and of motherhood. These two themes have several links with those raised by Van Zoonen’s chapter on the male and female ‘gaze’ in popular media.

One of the most evident crosscutting themes is that of women’s passivity and male activity and control. As we have seen in Van Zoonen’s chapter (1994), female spectatorship is constructed as being passive and to be looked at, whilst male spectators act upon women by looking at their objectified bodies. Witz (1993/1997) asserts that women have traditionally been seen as having the natural duty to do the domestic work, not men, and that feminists struggled to determine the official recognition of this ‘second job’ women performed. At least since the 18th Century, when the Victorian Domestic Ideology constructed women as passive, men have had the active role in a family, working in order to earn a wage for the household. Women, on the other side, have been seen as confined to the private sphere of life and, thus, as being passive since they did not have an active role in the public sphere, as men did. This way of seeing women as inferior to men has survived until the present day, when women have also acceded to work positions, and it can be easily seen in the structure of the labour market and in the representation of women in the media.

The images of women in popular media, as objects of the male gaze, are opposed to representations of motherhood in different cultures. Reynolds notes that ‘the ‘good’ mother is endlessly patient, forgiving, nurturing and, most important of all, unfailing in her love’ (1996: 41); this characterization powerfully contrasts with the images of women as sexualized objects or as secondary characters who only disrupt the narrative. For children, mothers are the main characters of their stories and are entirely feminine (whereas the character of a mother in popular media would be either masculinized or it would be the object of the male gaze). Nevertheless, as Reynolds further argues, the problem is that in reality ‘mothering [is] synonymous with subjugation’ (1996: 42). Moreover, motherhood is linked with psychoanalysis and the way boys suffer a trauma when they discover their difference from their mothers.

In conclusion, the chapters I have looked at on different topics written by feminists share the same view that women are currently oppressed in patriarchal cultures. Women share subordination roles in media, at work, in the family etc. However, the hegemony of patriarchy is most evident in media representations of women.

References:

Kaplan, E. Ann (1983) Women and Film: Both Sides of the Camera, London and New York: Routledge, pp. 125-141

Reynolds, Kimberly (1996) ‘Mothers’ in Madoc-Jones, Beryl & Coates, Jennifer An Introduction to Women’s Studies, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 38-61

Stacey, Jackie (1988) ‘Desperately Seeking Difference’ in Gamman, Lorraine & Marshment, Margaret (Eds.) The Female Gaze: Women as Viewers of Popular Culture, London: Women’s Press, pp. 112-129

Van Zoonen, Liesbet (1994) Feminist Media Studies, London: Sage, pp. 87 -104

Witz, Anne (1993/1997) ‘Women and Work’ in Robinson, Victoria and Richardson, Diane (Eds.) Introducing Women’s Studies, 2nd edition, London: MacMillan, pp.239-58

Discuss critically the contribution of feminist thought to social and legal analysis. Consider the extent to which you regard feminism as a distinctive and coherent approach to these fields of enquiry.

Introduction

This paper will critically examine the feminist contribution to legal jurisprudence and social analysis. The theoretical range and methodologies of feminist dialogue will be investigated in context of legal philosophy and social academic discourse. First, classical social theories of law will be discussed in order to asses the value of feminist analysis of social theories. In particular the feminist investigation of the socio – economic theory of Marxism will be discussed in order to understand the sociological perspectives concerning the role women played in the social order. Secondly, aspects of feminist legal inquiries looking at thematic issues central to feminist thought will be analyzed. In relation to this, internal academic criticisms between feminist factions will be addressed to highlight the sheer diversity of feminist legal jurisprudence. This essay will aim to demonstrate that feminism is a distinctive inquisitive range of inquiry, but it is not a unified approach to legal and sociological fields. In this sense its pluralism and diversity can at times leave the movement fractured and divided. But this essay argues that this does not diminish the ability of the movement to raise important ideas while tackling broad theoretical academic queries.

Feminism thought: contextual origins

Feminism thought originated from a historically wide ranging social debates and theories. It can trace roots back to the women’s liberation movement which gained momentum in the 60’s and 70’s along side other social struggles in the same era, notably the American civil rights movement. Feminist thought is indefinable as a single unitary theory. Feminist thought primarily is a ‘diverse, competing and often opposing collection of social theories, political movements and moral philosophies.’^[1] The innermost guiding issue is to critically discuss the role of women and their experiences in various social, political and economical contexts. Issues of inequality, discrimination, institutional female representation, socialized or biological constructions of gender differences and resulting cultural implications are a just a few lines of inquiry explored by modern Western feminist thought. Thus feminist thinking is a multifarious and pluralistic academic discipline. There is ‘no single form of feminism that represents all feminists.’^[2]

Social feminist theories

Feminist legal thought, it can be suggested, has made a substantial contribution to social analysis. It is a relatively new area of analysis for feminist scholars. Feminist social theory examines social relations between the sexes, expressly looking at how societal actions can be transported into the public domain for the emancipation of women. It is suggested feminist social theory has made pivotal contributions^[3] and changes in modern society. It has worked to revolutionize existing attitudes with reference to social structures. It is argued, that recent social changes have been achieved through the committed agitation of feminist thinkers who fully participating in socially engaged issues such as women’s rights and reform. This has resulted in the ‘increased involvement of women in public life’^[4] suggesting feminist legal thought has in some small way played a part to advance equality of the sexes. In this sense, social feminism is continually evolving^[5] through analytic inquiries to understand female subordination which assimilates issues of class and gender. This includes the consideration of wider factors related to identity, race, and ethnicity. By focusing on such factors, Holmstrom argues social feminist academics aim to ‘help use this analysis to liberate women.’^[6] In this context, feminist thought has been able to add confidently to general social theory. For example feminist inquiries of social theory have helped to change the way sociologists previously conceptualized social theories, by focusing upon reoccurring lines of inquiry. For example, first, feminist social theory discusses biological differences and socialized activity in society. Secondly the interpretative meaning and explanation of what the term ‘social’ can mean has been praised as helping to erect a broader scope of inquiry than exhibited by earlier forms of sociology. As a direct consequence it is argued ‘feminist theories have moved beyond the issue of women and point the way to a more creative form’ of intellectual inquiry.^[7] Thirdly, social feminists have usually examined patterned links between males and females which are socially structured. This can be seen in the work of Catherine Mackinnon discussed below. Finally, the feminist inquiry looks into how particular social relationships are formed and the structural workings of societal institutions.^[8] It’s methods of examining ‘the meaning of the “social”, how a person’s experience affects her understanding of the social world and how males and females relate to each other’ has led sociologists to rethink previously established and influential social theories.^[9]

Critiques of classical social theory

This impact is most noticeably seen in the radical feminist analysis of traditional social theories such as Marxism. Mackinnon ^[10] and Sydie^[11] critically reveal how classical theories of Marx, Weber and Durkheim marginalized women to varying degrees, in order to promote social and economic aspects of their theories. Thus a major criticism leveled at classical theory is that women are fundamentally ignored by male sociologists who were preoccupied with the ‘male activities, experiences and parts of society dominated by males.’^[12] For example, sociological classical theories are formulated within context of industrial society and economies. Feminists argue that capitalism helped to expand the male public sphere of influence through industrial structures. This expansion in turn was balanced by the constraint of females in the domestic private section of society, with almost no engagement in public, political or economic events.^[13] This can be seen in women’s electoral disenfranchisement and the suffragette movement in 18^th and 19^th century England.

Feminist analysis of Marxist ideas

A large area of feminist discourse concerns Marxist ideas. Marxism is analyzed through its historical materiality and approach. It conceptualizes history as distinct ‘succession of modes of production.’^[14] Each stage of society’s historical development will progress through evolving social stages such as feudalism, capitalism and socialism. Such phases are characterized by unique modes of production. Such modes of production within the economy are made up by the integral power relations between the ‘direct producers and the owners of the means of production’ who exploit workers. Holstrom explains that within Marxist theory, issues of inequality and class division are utilized by feminist scholars to extend the range of social inquiry. Further more, they are used to examine societal divisions between the sexes, and the ‘process through which social relations of gender are created organized, expressed and directed’ as such gender relations fundamentally ‘create society.’^[15] For example Mackinnon provided an influential feminist account of the social and economic theories of Marx:

Marxism and feminism provide accounts of the way social arrangements of patterned and cumulative disparity which can be internally rational and systematic, yet unjust. Both are theories of power and social inequality. As Marxism exposes value as a social creation, feminism exposes a desire of the socially relational^[16], internally necessary to unequal social orders.

Thus, Marxist study is focused on the production of commodities for exchange and the subsequent social exploitation encouraged by this phenomenon. Feminist thought argues Marxist emphasis is placed on creative human labour which sustains the productive economy. In analyzing the modes of production and social exploitation, the societal theory neglects females who were not seen to be exploited in the same way as male workers as they did not constitute the oppressed labor force.^[17] A further example of the disregard of women’s contribution to the production of commodities is the female role in the private sphere. It can be suggested that Marx ‘spends little time analyzing goods and services produced in the household and family’^[18] where the trade is non commercial. Thus, feminist theory provided a valuable analytic discourse exposing the fallacy that Marxist ideas discuss all types of labour. It is in fact, limited by the barrier of gender inequalities. It failed to adequately investigate such discrepancies according to feminist criticisms. Such external activities outside the market, such as reproduction which biologically provides the supply of labour from the family, are taken for granted by Marx.^[19] Thus, feminist thought crucially highlighted how Marxism failed to comprehensively debate how a woman’s domestic and familial role aided the value of labor power as an economic commodity in society.

Social theory examines many aspects of gender differences and inequality, factors which the works of classical sociologists developed no such theories about. Feminists revealed deep-seated conceptual weaknesses in such theories. For example Mackinnon’s critique of Marx discusses the notion that within the idea of class relations, women were to Marx defined by nature^[20] and not by society. Therefore Marxism offers no authoritative scrutiny on the role of women within class division of society. Social feminist disciplines are argued by Adams and Sydie to help voice challenging questions which are ‘women centered in perspective, questions core concepts and assumptions of sociology’^[21], and asks how change can produce a more socially acceptable human society for the sexes.

In summary this paper believes feminist thought has performed a pivotal function in reassessing the nature of traditional sociological theories such as Marxism. In doing so, feminist scholars have created new perceptions of sociological theories in relation to discussing women in society.

Feminist Legal and Jurisprudence

Feminist legal theory, developed from the Critical Legal Studies School of jurisprudential thought. Feminist legal theory, aims broadly to:

Analyze the contribution of law constructing, maintaining, reinforcing and perpetuating patriarchy and it looks at the ways in which this patriarchy can be undermined and ultimately eliminated.^[22]

According to the writer Leslie Bender patriarchy is a term used by feminists to address the ‘ubiquitous phenomenon of male domination.’^[23] Discussion of patriarchy allows feminist discourse to examine social and legal power relations, primarily as men have used institutional methods of power to subordinate women. These methods of power ‘manifest itself in the political and economic world that governs families and sexual relationships.’^[24] Freeman argues that this fundamental belief in social patriarchy is the only primary notion which brings together feminist legal theoretical discourse as a whole body.^[25]

Theoretical lines of inquiry stemming from the Critical Legal school, demonstrates that feminist legal thinking also aspires to create a basic critic of the:

‘inherent logic of law, the indeterminacy and manipulability of doctrine, the role of law, in legitimating particular social relations, the illegitimate hierarchies created by law and legal regulations.’^[26]

In this sense, feminist legal theories endeavor to locate and identify the underlying imbalances in legal rules and institutional structures in society, assessing the impact upon women as a whole. In a wider context, feminist thought is seen as an inevitable progression in academic debate into the area of jurisprudence. Ashe argues it is a ‘natural progression of the engagement of female reflection to one more area of discourse’ in view of other feminist studies in sociology, philosophy and history.^[27] Therefore the extent of feminist contributions to legal jurisprudence can not be underestimated. It forms a solid ‘committed inquiry’ according to Dalton^[28] in order to address female subordination, analyzing fundamental questions as to how and why mechanisms operate and succeed in placing women in such social positions. Furthermore feminist inquiry into law is a vital contribution for those studying the field. For example, this author believes continued female expression and analytical work helps promote feminist legal jurisprudence within mainstream discourse. Dalton pessimistically characterizes the belief that from an outsiders view it is ‘beyond the pale’ to be a ‘women who teaches and writes as a woman, expressing women’s concerns.’^[29] This paper would doubt the assertion that the role of academic feminist legal thought is viewed so disparagingly by mainstream society. Feminist legal thought may be thought of as a selective field of inquiry, but it is important for legal jurisprudence that all aspects of the law are examined from a variety of theoretical standpoints. This enables academics to discover and discuss the nature of law as an evolving social institution in a comprehensive manner.

It helps to frame feminist jurisprudential within an inquisitive, exploratory framework which guides such discourse. This enables academics to focus on particular points in the discussion. This can be demonstrated by Heather Wishik,^[30] in which feminist legal inquiry concentrates on answering the following analytical questions to provide a structurally coherent focus within the legal field:

1. What have been and what are now all women’s experiences of the ‘life situation addressed by the doctrine, process or area of law under examination?

2. What assumptions, descriptions, assertions and or definitions of experience –

male, female or gender neutral –does the law make in this area?

3. What is the area of mismatch, distortion or denial created by the differences between women’s life experiences and the laws assumptions or imposed structures?

4. What patriarchal interests are served by the mismatch?

5. What reforms have been proposed in this area of law or women’s life situation? How will these reform proposals if adopted, affect women both practically and ideologically?

6. In an ideal world what would this woman’s life situation look like and what relationship if any, would law have to this future life situation?

Such an analytical framework and inquiry demonstrates the reasoned theoretical approach plotted by feminist legal thought within jurisprudence. Locating specific questions enables feminist legal discussion to examine areas of law with purpose and structure, while sustaining its clear purpose of understanding the position of females operating within social structures.

Feminist Legal Methodology

To understand how feminist thought in relation to law is carried out, it is necessary to discuss the methodology of the academic school. The methodology can be simplified into three main points. First, it challenges the ‘positivist empirical tradition’ arguing that it is assumptive to accept the validity of observation and objective measurement. Feminist legal theorists therefore challenge a firmly established positivist concept within jurisprudence, that through a neutral standpoint the ‘truth or reality will emerge.’^[31] Lacey discusses the ‘supposed’ neutral framework for legal reasoning such as the rule of law which is central to liberal and positivist legal philosophy.

The idea of the rule of law is that it sets up standards which are applied in a neutral manner to formally equal parties. Questions of inequality and power may effect the capacity of those parties to engage effectively in legal reasoning. Gilligan on constructing moral problems in relation to gender has opened up a striking argument about the possible masculinity of the very process of legal reasoning.^[32]

The importance of challenging the conventional legal methodology helps to legitimately question the fundamental instutionalized legal reasoning processes which impact upon society.

Finally, feminist methodology continually asks what is known as ‘the woman question’, investigating the nature of law through probing and recognizing female events which the law regulates in society. K.T Bartlett elaborated on the ‘woman question’ in Feminist Legal Methods^[33] to mean ‘how the law fails to take into account the experiences and values that seem more typical of women than men or how existing legal standards and concepts might disadvantage women.’ Secondly, female practical reasoning stemming from contextual investigation is used to highlight the fundamental differences between people, and recognizes the value of the disenfranchised in society. Freeman suggests female practical reasoning is an interpretative approach^[34] also used by the critical legal methods. Such influence means the interpretative approach is drawn on to ‘emancipate and uncover aspects of society especially ideologies that maintain the status quo by restricting or limiting groups access to the means of gaining knowledge.’^[35] Thirdly, through the tactic of ‘conscious raising,’ sharing and increasing individual awareness of the female life experience is a tool for feminists. Such ‘conscious raising’ enables the exploration of social constructs while challenging the objective truth exhibiting itself as ‘law and the criteria for legal legitimacy.’^[36] The validity of such characteristic feminist methodological traits discussed by Bartlett reveals ‘things which traditional legal methods ignore.’^[37] Such an approach places emphasis on the idea of:

Positionality – a stance that acknowledges the existence of empirical truths, values and knowledge. Knowledge is situated in social contexts and reflects different experiences. Thus they key lies in the effort to extend ones’ limited perspective.^[38]

This methodological standpoint is used as a launch pad by feminists to comprehensively consider different types of knowledge. Through experimental and far-reaching scrutiny, feminist scholars believe such a methodology will lead to heightened responsiveness achieving the goal of self determination and change in society. Freeman argues this point by stating an ‘improved methodology will result in a better understanding and ability to urge transformative practice.’^[39]

Categories of feminist legal thought

Within feminist jurisprudence, there are many theoretical branches focusing on different conceptual points by academic feminists. Freeman identifies four main categories within feminist jurisprudence which have discussed extensive aspects of law’s relationship to the female gender in society. For example Liberal, Radical, Cultural and Postmodern approaches to feminist legal thought have provided thought provoking and powerful examinations of how women can be affected by law. Such diverse inquiries also investigate the consequences this has for female gender identity and socialized power relations. All theories are important as particular writers under each category discuss very real topical legal subjects which the reader can relate to.

Examples of legal topics discussed by feminist scholars

For example the legal subjects of rape, domestic violence, and harassment have been examined under English case law. R v. R (1991) has been a notable case for radical feminist attention in discussing the laws of rape, which attempt to protect women from sexual violence within and outside marriage. Feminists look at such emotive topics in order to place critical attention on women’s legal rights as citizens, examining the context of situations associated with the female experience. It can be suggested, a crucial aim of such discourse in not only theoretical, but represents genuine pragmatism to produce change which prevents rape head on,^[40] and alters traditional ingrained conceptions which permeate gender relations in society. For example, rape should not be conceptualized as a phenomenon female victims should ‘have to deal with trying to avoid’ but infact it should be reformulated as an act which men must prevent.^[41] It can be argued, it is imperative for feminist legal scholars to continue to question how we view issues of sexual violence and critically assess how laws might unintentionally reinforce negative male values against women. A second area of feminist legal analysis is concentrated on the notion of equality for the sexes. Laws regulating pension retirement ages and equally pay opportunities under labour laws have been an issue within liberal feminism. Aspects of inequality between the sexes have been discussed using the differences in pay opportunities between the genders, and the existence of the glass ceiling in economic corporate structures. Such examples showing the range of analysis feminist legal thought pursues, demonstrates how resourceful the discipline is. Further more feminist thinking can provide distinct and logical investigations of previously unexplored areas of law. Black letter law, statutory legislation and rules effecting social relations and power structures have been exposed by feminists questioning the nature of legal rules upon female social existence. In this respect, feminist aims of uncovering the patriarchal aspects of the legal system increase awareness and help to establish necessary debates challenging the current condition of legal structures. This essay will now discuss some of the theoretical contributions of liberal, radical, and cultural feminist thought to legal theory.

Feminist responses to Liberal theories

This essay believes analysis of equality and earlier liberal theories have provided a valuable contribution to legal analysis. The work of Cain^[42] and Lacey both examined models of equality in a legal environment. Liberals believe in the autonomous rational individual and minimal state involvement with private agents, which theoretically displaces gender differences. It suggests all humans are equal on the basis of possessing free will.

Liberal feminism is rooted in the belief that women as well as men are right bearing autonomous human beings. Rationality, individual choice, equal rights and equal opportunities are central concepts for liberal political theory. Liberal feminism building on these concepts argues that women are just as rational as men and those women should have equal opportunities with men to exercise their right to make rational self interested choices. ^[43]

Cain directly challenges established libertarian thought, arguing it is not the point ‘ to make women into men but expand the possibilities for female life experience by freeing women from the limitations of the male constructed category of “women” if she so chooses.’^[44] Nicola Lacey extends this line of argument by examining the institutional limitations which are placed on women. This is known as the public and private sphere which effects power relations between men and women. The private spheres of life, such as family domestic life are contrasted to male dominated areas of public life such as in employment. Freeman argues ‘family is seen as beyond the control of the state, as power is deemed to be in the public arena while power relations in the domestic sphere can be ignored.’^[45] Lacey raises an important theoretical point, questioning the extent to which the state should legitimately intervene into the private realm, especially in the context of domestic violence and sexual abuse within family relations. It is argued the state should favor a pro interventionist policy in such cases even if it goes against traditional liberal values infringing on individual civil liberties and private autonomy. Thus, Lacey argues the ‘ideology of the public and private allows the government to clean it’s hands of any responsibility for the state of the private world and depoliticizes the disadvantages which may spill over the divide, affecting the position of the privately disadvantaged.’^[46] Lacey argues the language of public and private spheres helps to support the status quo of pre existing power relations. For example, in the case of domestic violence the victims are ignored, resulting with ‘women being depoliticized and marginalized.’^[47] It is suggested by Freeman that women’s injuries are ‘often not recognized by public legal culture’^[48] such as in prosecutions which involve Battered Women’s Syndrome, and the application of provocation and self defense in criminal prosecutions. Olsen suggests the lack of state intervention is itself ‘a political act confirming the status quo and affirming the public private power relations.’^[49] Such powerful discussions of feminist thought applied to legal analysis shows how traditional theories can be persuasively challenged from the feminist perspective to encourage new degrees of awareness and dialogue.

Radical ‘identity’ theories

Radical feminist thought is voiced by Mackinnon^[50], claiming the dominant official voice is that of the male. It is suggested that the only significant distinction between the sexes is inequality. It is a patriarchal society where socio – legal structures facilitate the entire oppression and exploitation of women by men. Law is viewed to perpetuate the imbalance of power representing ‘a particularly potent source and badge of legitimacy’ which is systematically geared to enable male domination. Radical theories are controversial as they argue that dominance within power relations is central to accurately voicing the ‘authentic feminist approach.’^[51] Such theories can be criticized for being defeatist as it implies that ‘inherent masculinity of the law can not be changed by increasing women’s entry into the structures of the legal system or by incorporating female values into its rules and processes.’^[52] Therefore, laws aimed at abolishing discrimination and establishing equality in the workplace is deemed ‘futile’ in attempting to realistically alter the status of women. Logically the theory follows, if the law is fundamentally male orientated then its apparent objectivity and ‘equality for all persons’ is a cruel myth promoting a ‘false consciousness’ among women who believe they are regarded equally under law. Harris suggests that radical feminist legal theory believes only in the validity of exposing the ‘systematic stereotyping and denigration of women’^[53]. Only through the broad methods of conscious raising will true social freedom grow, overcoming patriarchal structures as female self awareness of their own oppression is enhanced.

Criticism of radical theories

It is important to note such radical feminist legal theories have been ferociously criticized by those of difference and equivalence feminism. For example academics such as Cornell^[54] specifically attack Mackinnon for conceptualizing female experience as a form of sexually passive victimhood. Secondly, Harris^[55] criticizes radical feminist thought for over generalizing the suggestion that female dominance is the only universal experience encountered by women. Furthermore, is it incorrect to characterize the law as male, since discrimination is not limited to gender. It can apply to race which can affect both men and women. Cornell attacks Mackinnon’s conclusion that the distinctive female values are simply a social construct formulated within the confines of the male dominated system. Therefore they are not truly feminine values per se. Cornell strongly criticizes Mackinnon’s reclamation of tough language to argue the point that women are degraded for example, in pornography as ‘passive receptacles’ in intercourse. ^[56] Cornell believes such ‘militant anti utopianism, is the inevitable expression or her argument that there is only one self-enclosed, self-perpetuating reality for women’^[57] that of male domination. Cornell contends that the sexes are different, and this must be recognized to encourage positive conceptions of sexual difference. She argues it is possible to maintain equality but also remain different and embrace the existence of womanhood which is rejected by the radical theorists. Such internal factionalism within the movement of legal feminist thought, it can be suggested reflects negatively on the discipline in terms of promoting a coherent and distinctive approach to the legal field. But such disagreements are ultimately reflective of the extensive nature of feminist thought in tackling the legal field.

Cultural feminist theory

It can be suggested cultural feminist theory, especially exhibited in the work of Gilligan^[58] has provided a distinctive but divisive legal analysis of law. In Gilligan’s difference feminism, the writer argues constructs of morality are formed at an early age and are crucially gender orientated, thus specific to males and females in different ways. Difference feminism has created an alternative paradigm assessing male and female social structures. Gilligan suggests women focus on an ‘ethics of care’ instead of the male ‘ethics of justice’. An ethics of care is argued to stress the values of

Introduction

Gender Equality and Feminism have become growing topics all around the globe during the past half a century, with women organizing and protesting against the stereotypes imposed upon them by the men. Several theories exist about how these stereotypes and inequalities came about, with some people arguing that it is caused by the chauvinistic nature innately present in all human beings, with others rejecting this as a “lazy” argument to make, and attributing it to more specific causes. In the times of hunter-gatherers, the women occupied an equal status to that of men, and everyone had to contribute in order to survive and bring up the young ones. As agriculture started to appear, along with importance to ownership of land, the patriarchal form of society started dominating the scene, as men were bestowed with the duty to acquire and defend property, and hence the passing down of property down the line of male descendants (patrilineal) became relevant, thus side-lining the women in the society. With the growth of capitalism, the importance of the nuclear family had increased, which required the male to be employed, typically in industries, in order to earn income, and the women would have to stay at home and look after the domestic needs such as cooking, and raising of children, etc. The reason for this was that the main means of production was the modern nuclear family, and so this setup was promoted as the norm in order to maximise market gains and increase efficiency[1]. This effect of capitalism along with the patriarchal nature of most societies is what many argue to be the major reason behind the stigmatization and stereotyping of women as weaker, and restricted to household work. Challenging these notions, feminist movements have been seen in several countries of the world, thereby ensuring that the women in their country had rights and were relatively equal to the men, preventing further social downtrodding of women. Several countries have allowed women to join the army even, with some sending them into combat as well[2], in order to promote gender equality and inspire women to believe in themselves and change the way society looks at women. However, the situation in India is quite different. Gender inequality is rampant here, and nearly in every sphere of life, women are marginalized and oppressed, viewed as mere tools or property possessed by men. India witnesses the second highest amount of gender inequality in all of Asia, second only to the Taliban-ruled Afghanistan[3]. However, some feminist movements have been seen even in India, however their task is much more difficult here due to a vast number of reasons which will be discussed in depth in this project with the help of some interviews of Indian feminist social activists.

Methodology

The first step I took towards this project was to search for social activists in India who had made contributions to the feminist movement, and identified some feminists out of whom I had picked the interviews of Dr. Vandana Shiva[4], Dr. Sarojini Sahoo[5], Ms. Flavia Agnes[6] and Mrs. Madhu Kishwar[7]. Of these, Dr. Vandana Shiva would be the most prominent activist, who has written several books for the cause of feminism and making the women of India aware of such discrimination, and also won the Fukuoka Prize in 2012[8]. Dr. Sarojini Sahoo is also a well-known activist who has written several books about gender and sexuality, and won the Laadli Media Award in 2011, and her interview offers us the most information regarding the topic, and therefore is the central interview for the purposes of this project. From all the interviews, a few major issues have been identified and then analysed with the help of other sources, and their impact on the society at large is shown. The activists are generally in agreement with each other, and usually only the main focus of their argument is what changes. I have also identified a handful of interviews of feminists from countries other than India in order to compare them with those of the Indian feminists, and this affirm what is it that makes the feminist movement in India more essential and complicated than in other countries.

Core Chapter

After going through the interview[9] of Christina Hoff Sommers, a feminist activist from the USA, we can tell that the main focus of the interview is on improving women representation in politics, and mostly to disillusion women from several other schools of feminism which she believes to be false and misleading to the women population at large. This shows that feminism has already successfully granted them basic social equity in the USA.

The interview[10] of Perla Vasquez, a feminist from Mexico, has also been identified and analysed. The major issues in this as well mostly comprise of economic and political difficulties faced by women in Mexico.

This is in contrast with the stage in India as we can deduce from the 4 interviews analysed for the sake of this project, where the focus is on basic discrimination of women in the social field, and to stop the many forms of injustice suffered by them daily, and in almost every sphere of life. The major points of difference I have identified from these interviews is the basis of patriarchal values and oppression of women being strongly embedded with religious tradition, particularly Hinduism, since the later Vedic period; and the second being the rampant cases of sexual violence against women all around the country. It is this basic factor which makes feminism so much more essential in India, especially the rural places, and the reinforcement of patriarchy in the Hindu tradition, and the fact that a large majority of India is still religious, makes it much more difficult to acquire the goals of social equality and basic dignity for women.

Effect of Culture and Traditions

In her interview, Sarojini Sahoo states “At one time in India – in the ancient Vedic period – there were equal rights between men and women and even feminist law makers like Gargi and Maitreyi. But the later Vedic period polarized the sexes. Males oppressed females and treated them as ‘other’ or similar to a lower caste.”[11]

This statement has been proven to be true, and women had indeed enjoyed a position of equal rights to those of males in the Vedic period, with women being venerated, and the prevalence of several Goddesses and female Deities in the Hindu tradition from that time, further reinforcing their position in society[12]. However, during the time following the Vedic period, the situation of women deteriorated much further down. With the arrival of the Dharma Shastras, the Patriarchal form of society was stressed and promoted, causing the oppression of women in the society. However, most people argue that it is during the time of the Mughals when women in India became truly secluded, although there is evidence of such being practiced as early as during the time of Asoka.[13] The Smritis were another reason which led to the side-lining of women in the later Vedic society, which reflected the legislators’ chauvinistic nature in enforcing traditions and practices which led to the further oppression and control of women in the society by males, and laws which lacked all notions of equity and justice. These causes led to a solidification of a society where women were treated worse than Shudras (untouchables)[14], suffering several inequalities from the men every day. This has continued for a long time, with practices such as the Dowry system and the system of Sati being followed widely all over India when the British had arrive, and had not declined until the British Empire issued legislations banning the practice of Sati[15], following which it slowly started declining. The dowry system was originally only prevalent in the middle class who actually owned property which they could give away for dowry, but later was adopted even by the poorer sections of society, often resulting in cases where one would give away a lifetime of savings as dowry. It was banned by the Government of India in 1961, by the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961, but the practice of dowry is still very much prevalent almost everywhere in India, especially in the villages where the law has little effect. This gives rise to a social horror known as Dowry death, which will be discussed under the next topic. Another issue arising out of traditions is that women are assumed to be weaker, and are made to stay at home and taught how to perform household work such as cooking and cleaning, and are not allowed to take part in most social events. As a result, most parents do not allow their daughters to go to school, and make them stay at home and learn household skills. As a result, while 76% of men are literate in India, only 54% of women are literate[16]. This indicates how much of an effect such traditions and notions can have on a country as a whole.

Violence against women

One of the major issues discussed by almost every feminist in their interview is dowry death. This is a practice where the bride is killed when her family does not give a large enough dowry. It has in fact been on the increase, seen largely throughout North India[17]. This has caused women to be looked upon as a burden in their family of birth. Sarojini Sahoo has stated the same in her interview, describing how women are usually viewed in society: “An unmarried daughter — seen as a spinster even in her late twenties — brings shame upon her parents, and is a burden. But once married, she is considered the property of her in-laws.”[18] This burden leads to wanting a male child over a female one, along with the fact that the Dharma Shastras and other texts of Hindu religion which make a son more desirable than a daughter due to the fact they can inherit, carry on the name, and only a son can perform the last rites of his father/grandfather. This leads to the social practice of female infanticide, which has been on the increase in India. It is basically the act of killing young female children, as their parents want a male child. This has caused the sex ratio to drop in India over the years. India has a child sex ratio of 914:100, as of 2011.[19] Next is the actual physical violence against women, which is very widespread in India compared to all the other nations. India has of late become famous for rape, following the Delhi rape case. A statement from Madhu Kishwar regarding such violence aptly sums up a variety of such problems prevalent in India: “Another main issue is sexual violence of all kinds, from what goes by the name of “eve-teasing”, which is a very mild, insulting word used to describe what goes from pinching and rubbing to lewd comments to physical violence, hitting you… Then there is rape of all kinds…”[20]

Sexual violence is at its highest in India. Some theorize that this is the backlash of a strong patriarchal society[21] witnessing westernization of women. It is the biggest social issue in all of India, and is the major reason why India needs feminism. The final problem to be discussed is the fact that marital rape is to this day not criminalized in India. The Indian Penal Code has no sanction against this act. The only recourse for the wife is to ask for divorce and leave her husband, but apart from that, there is no punishment meted out to the husband/rapist. Domestic violence also has a separate law which many say is not stringent enough, thus making it prevalent in countless areas of the country. Flavia Agnes addresses the topic in her interview: “In a society where marriage is the norm, the ultimate power rests with the husband.” To sum up the issue of violence, a statement from Vandana Shiva fits perfectly: “This violent economic order can only function as a war against people and against the earth, and in that war, the rape against women is a very, very large instrument of war. We see that everywhere. And therefore, we have to have an end to the violence against women.”[22]

Conclusion

We have seen how the dawn of private ownership of land and property gave rise to the Patriarchal society, pushing women to a side role, and how this was further solidified by the rise of capitalism and its need for the nuclear family and the “ideal setup” for division of labour. We then discussed how it originated in India, and how the Vedic period originally had great equality for the women in their society, and how that status deteriorated over time due to the Dharma Shastras and the Smritis, giving rise to traditions like dowry and sati. We have seen how these practices came about, the efforts of the government to curb them, and the effectiveness of these laws. We also see how the traditions affected the rate of literacy among girls drastically, and then how dowry leads to murder in several cases, and how this burden then leads to female infanticide, and the culmination of all these oppressive traditions leading to the sexual violence against women due to them being viewed as weaker, or as property, and finally how the law even now is quite unfair with regard to women, denying them any just recourse marital rape, despite several protests for the sake of the same. To conclude, we have seen how gender inequality has its own unique points in India, and how it is all the more essential for India to learn feminism, and the higher difficulty of actually bringing about changes in this society.

Bibliography
JSTOR
The Hindu
The National Geographic
The Times of India
Foundation for Sustainable Development
The Guardian

Are being lower in status and weaker sex lead to violence and abuse towards women?

Nowadays, feminism and gender equality are still an issue that will draw attention among the society. Women status is a complex issue and a hard-to-define subject. Overall, the rights and status of women have improved considerably in the last century. According to Macmillan English Dictionary (2007), “status” carries the meaning of someone’s position in a profession or society especially when compared with others. I strongly agree that women in this era are still considered as human beings who are lower in status and being the weaker sex compared to men that lead them to being easily abused by men. In this essay, I will discuss how women are treated as property and how they suffered from various forms of physical violence and sexual abuse that prove they are lower in status compared to men.

To most of the men, female are often regarded as property.

Women’s status in each society and culture varies in different ways around the world. In examples female genital mutilation which is common in Nigeria, Togo, Egypt and Somalia is existed which is the female will undergo a surgical remove of clitoris (Boyle, 2002). It is the means of social control that shows the selfishness of men. The reason some of the female perform this kind of surgical is husband hope their wives be virgins before marriage and remain sexually faithful after marriage. In my opinion, the virginity of a female should not control by using surgical method that had restricted women’s rights. For me, genital mutilation is unnecessary to be performed although virginity of a female is admittedly crucial for them before marriage. This is because there are other ways and means in order to control a female’s desire to have sex. In the event of this, why men did not have to perform the same kinds of operation to control them have sex before marriage? This has been shown that women are lower in status and powerless to voice as the surgical is consider as a part of their culture. Women are regarded as properties have to bear with the pain during the surgical and the effects after the operation either in the aspects of mentally or physically. Female genital mutilation is reportedly not practised in Malaysia and does not have any law on it. (Inter-parliamentary Union, 2010)

In reality, men always consider as the stronger sex that somehow the issue of physical violence against women had occurred. Gender equality is highly significant for the world to function well. When one sex believes that its strength or position is far better than the other then the issue of inequality arises. Domestic violence is one of the examples that testified women are lower in status and powerless than man. Sometimes, men abuse women to show their men’s power and their higher status than women. This is because women usually dare not to issue after they receive abuse form men. In my standpoint, women need to face the situation head on and be independent. They must realize what happened to them are inappropriate. Abuse from men to women should put an end mark from now onwards therefore clarified that women are not lower in status and powerless to achieve their women’s rights. In Malaysia, Domestic Violence Act is one of the laws that protect women’s rights when they get abused by men. Nevertheless, the Domestic Violence Act criminalizes violence against women, but only if you are a married women.

Furthermore, the case of dowry death is deemed as physical violence has proved to be lower the status of women.

The practice of dowry is glaring in parts of India where the status of women is less important than dowry. Dowry normally means it is given during the marriage to the son-in-law parents either in the form of cash or gifts. There are also brides who are constantly harassed physically or mentally for failures to bring sufficient dowry. From my point of view, culture is the main issue that have an abstruse impact on women. It is the culture that encourages women to be the weaker sex. People have passed down attitudes and traditions since the first established society and the sexist sins of their ancestor whom stereotyped women as lower in status and weaker sex.

On the other hand, sexual violence is one of the issues that women are being exploited as the weaker sex.

One of the examples of sexual violence is date rape. Date rape is a crime in which the victims are forced in to having sexual intercourse with someone they are familiar with. According to Hoebel (2002), one of the biggest risks from a male to a female is date rape. A research has shown that, one in four women will be raped in their life time (Nancy, Sylvester, Priscilla & Ana, 2001). This is a very scary, yet true statistic. In my viewpoint, rape is looked as a crime of assault. It can causes physical and mental injuries to victims. No one should ever force someone else to have sex against their will. That is rape! From Hoebel saying, I can conclude that men frequently assumed women as the weaker sex thought of they could easily do whatever things they want towards women including sexual violence. Davis Thomas and Camille Paglia (2006) believe the world will always contain men who use their advantage of strength to harm women. For me, I seriously hope that women need to be strong as well as be educated what date rape is. Therefore, more women will come out and report the incident.

Moreover, there are some issues like prostitution which is also a kind of sexual abuse to women, have been around for thousands of years and will never go away.

Hence, it is for this reason that, as Barbara Walter (2003) said, “Prostitution is a world that is here to stay, like it or not it is time to make the best of it”. Men exploited women in the prostitution field assuming that sex for money is legal. There are some cases which women are forced by their husband to sell their body in order to earn money. This scenario has shown men just only care about the profit and rather to sacrifice their wives in sex traffics. In my perspective, a woman must have the right, under constitution, to not only sell her property, but to do it in privacy. Women commonly regard as the lower status group ought to fight for their rights but not just let themselves being exploited by men. Prostitution is illegal in Malaysia, however, laws banning prostitution remain largely unenforced.

To conclude, there are several issues that had shown that women lower in status and being the weaker sex easily exploited by men. Men feel they are superior than women always treat women as property that those females have to perform surgical to please the superior one. Men often use violence means to try to overpower women. Many women also feel that they are lower in status and regard as the weaker sex usually exploited in sexual field which considered as sexual violence. Education is one of the methods that can prevent violence and abuse in women. People must look ahead to educate the next generation and instill in them new ideas in order for intellectual reform to occur not just for women, but for all people.

Sex-selective infanticide has increased in present day patriarchal India. The bias infanticide is the practice of terminating a pregnancy based on the predicted sex of the fetus (Goodkind 53). The preference of male children has lead to over millions of female deaths and abortions; the cause of the rising of female infanticide in India is due to the influences of over population, the dowry system, economic statuses, caste systems, social norms, women’s role, cultural beliefs, religion, etc. Most of these practices are due to the value or devaluation of women in some parts of the world. The system, custom, and tradition of these patriarchal societies lead to the neglect of girl children, which is what is happening today in India.

Sex-selective abortion was unusual before the late 20th century, because of the difficulty of determining the sex of the fetus before birth. But due to new and improved technology introduced in India like the ultrasound, it has made the selection an easier task. The process began in the political text during the emergency in the 1970’s. The examination of the text in India, was up to debate whether “it was in order to demonstrate that the effect of conjuncture between the overt rhetoric of over population covert discourse of femicide is that female populations are targeted for extermination” (Bhatnager 3). (this is awk, idk how to fix/rephrase). During the years of the Emergency, Amniocentesis was introduced in 1974. It was “to ascertain birth defects in a sample population,” but “was quickly appropriated by medical entrepreneurs. An epidemic of sex-selective abortions followed.” (Karlekar) Female infanticides are oppressing female mother and women in general.”[T]hose women who undergo sex determination tests and abort on knowing that the fetus is female are actively taking a decision against equality and the right to life for girls. In many cases, of course, the women are not independent agents but merely victims of a dominant family ideology based on preference for male children” (Karlekar). 10,000 female fetuses are killed every year in India (Bhatnager 2), and every year its being more and more accepted by the community. Families are trying to find an easy way out where they don’t have to live with a life long debt.

As known, India is one of the most overpopulated countries, but unlike Africa, the Caribbean and other, there’s a higher percentage of males than females. Due to Hindu beliefs and the strict caste system, young girls were being murdered daily. When demographic statistics were first collected in the nineteenth century, it was discovered that in “some villages, no girl babies were found at all; in a total of thirty others, there were 343 boys to 54 girls. … [I]n Bombay, the number of girls alive in 1834 was 603.” (Rummel 65-66.) The significant decrease in the female population occurs after birth and before the age of 4. From 1978 to 1983aˆ¦ of 12 million girls born each year only 9 million lived to be 15. (Balakrishnan 276). 1991 the ration from women to men was 945 to 1000, 2001 was 927 to 1000. This decline was attributed to regressive manifestations of patriarchy in a modernizing society, and not simply to ancient traditions, like the religious obligations in Hinduism. Amniocentesis, increased female infanticide; and although sex-discriminatory abortion is illegal and expensive, it’s practiced. From the year “1978 to 1983, 78,000 were reported killed, or 13,000 female fetuses annually aborted following the use of amniocentesis as a sex determination test” (Bhatnager 3). A portrayal of a gendercide against women.

“In Jaipur, capital of the western state of Rajasthan, prenatal sex determination tests result in an estimated 3,500 abortions of female fetuses annually,” according to a medical-college study. (Dahlburg) Most strikingly, according to UNICEF, “A report from Bombay in 1984 on abortions after prenatal sex determination stated that 7,999 out of 8,000 of the aborted fetuses were females. Sex determination has become a lucrative business.” (Zeng Yi 297.)

Gender has become secondary interest to a nation focused on religious and caste controversies. A study of Tamil Nadu by the Community Service Guild of Madras found that “female infanticide is rampant” in the state, though only among Hindu (rather than Muslem or Christian) families. “Of the 1,250 families covered by the study, 740 had only one girl child and 249 agreed directly that they had done away with the unwanted girl child. More than 213 of the families had more than one male child whereas half the respondents had only one daughter” (Karlekar).

Religion and economic status intertwined as one. Due to what caste you’re in determines your economic status within society. In the Hindu religion once a young girl is set of to marry, she becomes “property” of her husband’s family, but before those arrangements occur, the wife’s family would have to hold a well planned wedding. One way of these families avoiding themselves from getting into a situation like this is not having and girl child at all. During this whole festivity “the family of a prospective bride must pay enormous sums of money to the family in which the woman will live after marriage. Though formally outlawed, the institution is still pervasive. “The combination of dowry and wedding expenses usually add up to more than a million rupees ([US] $35,000). In India the average civil servant earns about 100,000 rupees ($3,500) a year. Given these figures combined with the low status of women, it seems not so illogical that the poorer Indian families would want only male children.” (Porras) Murders of women whose families are deemed to have paid insufficient dowry have become increasingly common.

The modern holocaust of feminicide signifies not only the serial killing of female fetuses also girl-child murder by negligence through discriminatory practices such as uneven food allocations causing nutritional deficiencies, uneven access to medical care, family resources, and minimum survival needs (Bhatnager, 3). The bias against females in India is related to the fact that “sons are called upon to provide the income; they are the ones who do most of the work in the fields. In this way sons are looked to as a type of insurance. With this perspective, it becomes clearer that the high value given to males decreases the value given to females” (Porras). “[A]nother disturbing finding,” namely “that, despite the increased ability to command essential food and medical resources associated with development, female children [in India] do not improve their survival chances relative to male children with gains in development. Relatively high levels of agricultural development decrease the life chances of females while leaving males’ life chances unaffected; urbanization increases the life chances of males more than females. … Clearly, gender-based discrimination in the allocation of resources persists and even increases, even when availability of resources is not a constraint.” (Kishor 262.) In Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh [states], it is usual for girls and women to eat less than men and boys and to have their meal after the men and boys had finished eating. Greater mobility outside the home provides boys with the opportunity to eat sweets and fruit from saved-up pocket money or from money given to buy articles for food consumption. In case of illness, it is usually boys who have preference in health care (Karlekar).

It’s Ironic that although Indians have defied knowledge as the goddess Sarasrati, Indian women have been regulated to educational subservience throughout India’s history. Education is power, which is in male’s hands. In 1947 the ratio of literacy from women to men was 6% to 22.6%, in 1961 15.3 to 40.4, 1981 28.5% to 76, and in 2001 from 33.6% to 60.3%(ADD MORE, SOURCE?).

“In rural India, the centuries-old practice of female infanticide can still be considered a wise course of action.” (Dahlburg) According to census statistics, “from 972 females for every 1,000 males in 1901 … the gender imbalance has tilted to 929 females per 1,000 males. … In the nearly 300 poor hamlets of the Usilampatti area of Tamil Nadu [state], as many as 196 girls died under suspicious circumstances [in 1993] … Some were fed dry, unhulled rice that punctured their windpipes, or were made to swallow poisonous powdered fertilizer. Others were smothered with a wet towel, strangled or allowed to starve to death.” A case from Tamil Nadu:

“Lakshmi already had one daughter, so when she gave birth to a second girl, she killed her. For the three days of her second child’s short life, Lakshmi admits, she refused to nurse her. To silence the infant’s famished cries, the impoverished village woman squeezed the milky sap from an oleander shrub, mixed it with castor oil, and forced the poisonous potion down the newborn’s throat. The baby bled from the nose, then died soon afterward. Female neighbors buried her in a small hole near Lakshmi’s square thatched hut of sunbaked mud. They sympathized with Lakshmi, and in the same circumstances, some would probably have done what she did. For despite the risk of execution by hanging and about 16 months of a much-ballyhooed government scheme to assist families with daughters, in some hamlets of … Tamil Nadu, murdering girls is still sometimes believed to be a wiser course than raising them. ‘A daughter is always liabilities. How can I bring up a second?’ Lakshmi, 28, answered firmly when asked by a visitor how she could have taken her own child’s life eight years ago. ‘Instead of her suffering the way I do, I thought it was better to get rid of her.’” (Dahlburg)

Indian state governments have sometimes taken measures to diminish the slaughter of infant girls and abortions of female fetuses. “The leaders of Tamil Nadu are holding out a tempting carrot to couples in the state with one or two daughters and no sons: if one parent undergoes sterilization, the government will give the family [U.S.] $160 in aid per child. The money will be paid in instalments as the girl goes through school. She will also get a small gold ring and on her 20th birthday, a lump sum of $650 to serve as her dowry or defray the expenses of higher education. Four thousand families enrolled in the first year,” with 6,000 to 8,000 expected to join annually (as of 1994) (Dahlburg). Such programs have, however, barely begun to address the scale of the catastrophe.

Female Headed Households are largely associated with deprivation and poverty. Though this assertion is contested by some scholars, there is the general consensus that FHHs face obvious limits in accessing productive assets, credit, health care and agricultural services (Buvinic and Gupta, 1997). However, scholars also recognise that among FHHs, poverty is experienced differently, hence lumping them together, as done in most literatures does not paint the right picture of these differences. Two FHHs are identified in the literature – de facto and de jure FHHs (Youssef & Hetler, 1982). Among them, it’s been observed that de facto FHHs are likely to have more resources hence a better standard of life relative to their de jure counterparts. Invariably, these differences translate into different educational opportunities for the children who are located in either of these households. This study is therefore designed to examine how location in a particular FHH affects children’s educational experiences.

1.1. Background to the Study

A growing trend of female-headed households (FHHs) households has been observed in many parts of world, particularly Africa. International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD, 1999) and other authors have noted this to be the result of several factors including, male migration, death of males through natural causes, civil conflicts and wars, un-partnered adolescent fertility, family disruption, divorce and separations (IFAD, 1999; Joshi, 2004; Kabeer, 2003; Zhan & Sherraden, 2003). IFAD undertook a study in eastern and southern Africa where it was found that an estimated 25-60% of rural households in that region were headed by women. Though this range is too wide for comparison, making desegregation difficult, a similar situation has been observed by the Ghana Living Standard Survey (GLSS, 2008). According to the GLSS (2008), the “proportion of FHHS is higher in urban areas outside of Accra (35.1%), rural coastal (34.3%) and rural forest (31.2%) than in Accra (28.1%) and rural savannah (14.9%)” (2008, p 5).

Some empirical studies show that FHHs are poorer, relative to male-headed households (MHH) (see e.g. Buvinic and Gupta, 1997; Rajaram, 2009, Zhan & Sherraden, 2003). According to IFAD (1999), poverty among FHHs results from women’s limited access to land, livestock, other assets, and credit, education, health care and extension services. Buvinic and Gupta (1997) have also argued that woman’s lower average earnings, access to remunerative jobs, and productive resources such as land and capital contribute to their economic vulnerability and hence the vulnerability of the households they head.

However, there is another school of thought that argues that female-headship does not correlate with poverty (see e.g. Dreze & Srinivasan, 1997; Senada & Sergio, 2007), and is in fact empowering for women in the long run (Buvinic & Gupta, 1997; United Nation, 2005). According to the World Survey on the Role of Women in Development, female-headship give women the opportunity to develop their decision-making skills as well the skills needed to coordinate the full social and economic responsibility for the well-being of household members (cited in United Nations, 2005). The survey acknowledged that these skills, coupled with the assumption of male-related task are empowering experiences for women. Moreover, in the IFAD study quoted above, its household budget surveys revealed that rural FHHs are no poorer, and may in fact be less poor, than MHHs.

Among FHHs however, there is evidence to support the fact that poverty differ from one household to the other (Fuwa, 2000; Kabeer, 2003), indicating that these households are not homogenous in nature (Joshi, 2004). For instance, Fuwa (2000) found in Panama that women who head households as a result of widowhood or being unmarried were significantly more disadvantaged in income and non-income measures. Recognizing two types of FHHs – de jure and de facto FHHs – enables some differentiation in poverty experiences. It can be argued that de facto FHHs are generally better off than de jure FHHs in both income and non-income dimensions (Fuwa, 2000; Kabeer, 2003). De jure FHHs results from unmarried adolescents, widowed, divorced or separated women whiles de facto FHHs results from the migration of the male spouse (essentially, the women in de facto FHHs are married but do not reside with their spouses).

The World Survey on the Role of Women in Development emphasized that female headship is empowering. However, it was actually found that it is de facto FHHs that empowers females and not de jure FHHs. Furthermore, findings from studies in Kenya and Zambia argue that the best predictor of whether FHHs is or is not likely to be poor is whether the female head does or does not receive support from a current partner, husband or adult son (IFAD, 1999) or any other economic provider other than themselves. The above arguments illustrate conflicting evidence on the status of FHHs relative to MHHs but the general analysis points to the fact that FHHs are at a relative disadvantage on the poverty scale. Among FHHs however, evidence points out that de facto FHHs are better off than their de jure counterparts.

The correlation between family’s economic resources to a child’s well-being have earlier been established by Becker and Tomes (1986) and Becker (1991, 1993). These authors argued that when “capital markets are perfect, altruistic parents borrow to maximize the net incomes (earnings less debt) of children” whiles in imperfect capital markets – mostly developing countries’ markets- “parents may need to either forsake their own consumption, liquidate some assets, or choose among children. Moreover, expenditures on children’s education will depend not only on the children’s endowments and public expenditure, but also on parental income, parental preferences for child schooling and the abilities of their children” (cited in Joshi, 2004, p 4-5).

It stands then to reason that the more financial resources a family has, the more secured and provided for the children will be and consequently, this will spill over to their academic performance. As a matter of fact, other evidence corroborates this stance. For instance, an 18 years longitudinal study in Detroit Metropolis revealed a positive relationship between income/assets and ward’s school completion (Duane et al, 1984; Hill and Duncan, 1987). In addition, a study done by Joshi (2004) in Bangladesh revealed that children from de facto FHHs had stronger schooling attainments than children in de jure FHHs. Moreover, he found that children from de jure FHHs had a greater propensity to work outside the home. Based on these empirical finding, this study will assess how children’s educational attainment in Ghana are affected by the kind of female-headed household they find themselves in.

1.2 Problem Statement

There is overwhelming empirical evidence which suggest that relative to men, women are disadvantaged in their access to assets, credit, employment, and education, a situation which makes them more vulnerable and hence less able to invest in the education of their children (Joshi, 2004, citing Folbre, 1991; UNDP, 1995; United Nations, 1996; World Bank, 2001). This assertion was further corroborated by Zhan and Sherraden (2003) who found that mother’s wealth and expectations of child’s educational achievement and child’s actual educational outcomes were positively correlated in FHHs. Kyei (2008), citing Ashiabi (2000) minced no words when she asserted that children from poorer households in sub-Saharan Africa have lower educational attainment. This observation has a sobering implication for schooling in Ghana, where despite the government’s Free Compulsory and Universal Basic Education (FCUBE) system, parents are still required to make substantial contribution towards their ward’s education. Some of these contributions come in the form of PTA dues, uniforms, books and supplies, transport, food and lodging and sometimes extra tuition fees (Lloyd and Gage-Brandon, 1996). Although several studies have been done to compare female and non-female headed households, not many have been conducted to compare the academic attainment within the two types of FHHs (Richards and Schmiege 1993). This study therefore seeks to fill this void in literature by comparing children’s pre-tertiary academic achievement of de jure and de facto FHHs in Ghana, using data from the Tema Metropolis in this pursuit.

1.3 Objectives of the research

The main objective of the study is to examine if children’s academic experiences are affected by the particular FHHs they are located.

The specific objectives will be:

Examine whether location within a particular FHH affects children’s retention and completion of school.

Investigate how location within a particular FHH affects the quality of education children receive.

Ascertain how factors such as female heads’ educational attainment, asset holding/landed properties and type of financial support affect children’s educational experiences.

1.4 Hypothesis

HO: Children located in de jure FHHs are less likely to complete their pre-tertiary education than children from de facto FHHs

HA: Children located in de jure FHHs are not less likely (thus equally likely or more likely) to complete their pre-tertiary education than children from de facto FHHs.

HO: Mothers education is more likely to be associated with lower pressures for children to work.

HA: Mothers education is not less likely (thus equally likely or more likely) to be associated with lower pressure for children to work.

1.5 Significance of the Study

The global increase in FHHs makes this study very essential. This is especially so when one notes that failure to solve it leads to associated negative effects or social problems such as streetism, spread of HIV, violence, homicide, suicide among others. This study will especially highlight the differential disadvantages of the two major FHHs, in the light of children’s pre-tertiary academic attainments. This study will especially highlight the differential disadvantages of the two major FHHs, thereby adding to the literature on households and female poverty and children’s pre-tertiary academic attainments.

1.6 Organisation of the Study

The study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One introduces the study – stating the problem to be studied, the objectives as well as the hypothesis for the study. Chapter Two provides a critical review of the existing literature on the subject matter of the study. Chapter Three discusses the methodology employed in this study. It will emphasize the procedure in undertaking this study as well as the method of data analysis used. Chapter Four is presented in two sections. Part I presents the findings of the study. Part II analyzes and discusses the empirical results. Chapter Five summarizes and concludes the study.

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction

In this review, attempt will be made to critically assess various publications on the subject of FHHs, with a special focus on the two types they are – de facto and de jure FHHs. The bulk of the review will center on how children’s education are affected or facilitated by virtue of the FHHs they are situated in. in addition, the theories that underlie the subject matter will be reviewed, leading to the specifying of the theoretical framework of the study. Finally, some empirical studies, especially Bodenhorn’s (2006) in the US and Gurmu and Etana’s (2013) in Ethiopia will be reviewed

2.1 Definitions of Female-Headed Households

There are multiplicities of meanings associated with the term ”household head”. Fuwa (2000) observed that the multiplicity and near ambiguity associated with the term came about principally because demographers (interviewers) classified people as household heads as a need of survey implementation, i.e., avoid double-counting by classifying a reference person as household head, against whom all the relationship in the home is identified, and not necessary for any analytical purposes. Similarly, Hedman et al posited that the term ”head of household” is used to cover a number of different concepts referring to the chief economic provider, the chief decision maker, the person designated by other members as the head, etc.” (1996:64). Accordingly, the author observed that even where the definition of the term has been relatively adequate, criteria used by interviewers to arrive at their definition are often vague and leave room for subjective interpretation.

However, before the term “household head” can be understood, we have to define the term “household”. Similar to “household head”, there is the general belief that the term “household” is abused. Individual researchers are not alone in their criticism of the rampantly ambiguous use of the term ”household”. Other bilateral organizations, notably the World Bank, also observed that the conception of the term poses challenges in its definition (Rosenhouse, 1989: p 4). In the light of these ambiguities, the Department of International Economic and Social Affairs. (1988) suggested the use of the term ”household reference person”, rather than the household head.

In Ghana, one often cited definition of the term is the one given by the Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) in its Population and Housing Census (GSS, 2012). The report defines a household as “a person or group of persons who live together in the same house or compound, share same house keeping arrangement and are catered for as one unit”. This definition will form the working definition of “household” in this study.

Budlender (1997) noted that interest in the definition of households arose out of perceived economic, nutritional, educational and health differences between homes headed by males/females, males and females. According to Buijs and Atherfold (1995)there is the need to desegregate families headed by males and females as it is “directly related to some of the major economic and policy issues confronting developing countries today” (p 1) which will ultimately facilitate those households as “objects of targeted welfare assistance under programmes concerned with the social dimensions of adjustment” O’Laughlin (1996:2).

Similar to the definitions of the household, Hossain and Huda (1995) observed that terms used in defining women households may carry different meaning. Buvinic and Youssef (1978) also posited that households described as “female-headed” cover a wide range of situations ranging from the absence (for a variety of reasons) of a resident male head to the presence of a male who no longer has, or never had, a function of being the principal economic provider (cited in Machado, 1992).

Researchers have classified FHH into two broad categories (Hossain & Huda, 1995; Javed & Asif, 2011; Machado, 1992; Youssef & Hetler, 1978). De jure FHHs are those which do not count on or receive the economic support of a male partner, whereas de facto FHHs are those in which the male partner is absent for some periods or his contribution is marginal (Machado, 1992). Hossain and Huda (1995) also defines de jure household head a permanent head of a particular household while a de facto household head refers to that head of a household who is temporarily taking care of the household (usually acting as a head in absence of the actual head of the household). The underlying assumption in these definitions is that in the FHH, the woman is the main decision maker and in most cases the main economic provider for the household.

2.2 Female Headed Households and Poverty

It is generally accepted that women constitute a greater number of the poor. Among the poor, however, FHHs are considered the poorest (Bradshaw and Linneker, 2003; MOWAC, 2004; UNRISD, 2010). Though this perception has been challenged in several academic treatise (for instance Chant, 2003; Chant 2009) the fact that women and especially female heads of households are considered relatively vulnerable has been embraced by bilateral, multilateral organizations/donors and national policy makers – leading to a concept generally referred to as “feminization of poverty” (Bradshaw & Linneker, 2003).

Commenting on the feminization of poverty, Bradshaw and Linneker (2003) explained that poverty among women can be understood from a multi-dimensional and multi-sectorial perspective and added that “women experience poverty in different ways, at different times and in different social spaces – the society, the community and the household” (p 9). According to Chant (2003), female household headship is more prone to arise in “situations of economic stress, privation and insecurity, through migration, conjugal instability and/or the inability of impoverished kin groups to assume responsibility for abandoned women” (p 6). Bradshaw and Linneker (2003) alluded similar causes when they emphasized that women are poor because of their preoccupation with reproductive (as against productive) activities, the patriarchal ordering of society and the altruistic nature of women which naturally inform their choice of productive activities and allocation of resources. Chant (2003) added that women’s lack of training or education, discrimination in the workplace and inadequate provision for parenting by employers as some of the factors that exacerbate the situation of female heads of households, reinforcing their poverty situation.

The opinion of FHHs as the ‘poorest of the poor’ is founded on a critical examination of complete household earnings, with the conclusion that their earnings are relatively lower than MHH or Couple-Headed Households (CHHs) (Bradshaw & Linneker, 2003; Chant, 2003). Additionally Chant, citing Fuwa (2005), IFAD (1999), ILO (1996) and UNDAW (1991) states that FHHs are relatively poorer than CHH because they lack a “breadwinning partner or an adult male wage earner. Additionally, female heads have the added responsibility of fulfilling several household necessities with their already insufficient funds, such as the offsetting of academic fees and other academic needs.

Possibly one author who has effectively connected female-headship, poverty and educational outcomes is Bodenhorn (2007). He detected that “children raised in mother-only households are more likely to underachieve academically, to drop out of school, to become single parents themselves, to have lower labor-market attachment, and to engage in criminal activity as young adults than children raised in two-parent households” (p 33). The findings of his study will be discussed further in the review.

2.3 The role of Remittances in De facto FHH

The relationship between migration and remittances is well known, almost routinized. Wiafe recognized this relationship when he indicated that “Emigration is a precondition for remittances to come about” (p 23). Adams and Page (2003) define remittances as portion of migrants’ earnings sent from the migration destination to family members or a community back home. They further explained that remittances are usually monetary and other cash transfers but can also be in kind (cited in Wiafe, 2008). Centering more on internal migration, Owusu (2005) defined remittances as “the flow of cash (money) and gifts, referred to as remittances or transfers, between rural and urban” (p 200-201).

The United Nations (2002) estimates that more than 170 million people from developing nations live outside their home countries, sending back more than $80 billion in the early 2000s (cited in Lu and Treiman, 2011). This estimate is modest when one considers Ratha’s (2009). According to him, in 2008, global remittances reached a whopping $330 billion. Similarly, Maimbo (2003) observed that remittances to developing countries far exceed Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) which comes with stringent conditionalities (cited From Wiafe, 2008). Indeed, the potential of remittances have been noted by the IMF and other bilateral institutions (Wiafe, 2008).

However, it must be emphasized that remittances cover everything from individual, firm, formal and informal remittances, most of which does not fall under the preview of this study. The interest of this study is on individual remittances, which mostly move from husbands, family members who remit money to help their relatives back at home. Arguing along those lines, Russell et al (1990) concluded that remittances do not only satisfy subsistence needs, but also aid investments in children’s education, rearing of livestock, farming activities as well as development in small scale enterprise.

Though migration is one major cause of FHHs (de facto FHHs), it’s is also recognized as a huge source of funding for these households, ultimately lifting such households out of poverty. Lu and Treiman (2002) argue that while marital dissolution is the predominant cause of FHHs in the developed world, migration is the major culprit in the developing world. In fact, Lu and Treiman (2011) were blunt in their assertion that FHHs usually benefit from remittances. However, the author did not desegregate which type of FHHs benefit most from remittances. However, from his argument, it can be inferred de facto FHH are a bigger beneficiary of remittances from de jure FHHs. According to Bryant, approximately 15-30% of children in Africa, Asia and Latin America live in households with at least one migrant parent (cited in Lu and Treiman, 2011), further confirming the fact that de facto FHHs are those who benefit most from migration. The author further noted that having one or both parents away for work has thus become a common experience of childhood in many parts of the world. However, despite the economic benefit generated through remittances, McLanahan and Sandefur (994) were quick to point out that children in single-parent house-holds fare less well than their peers who live with both parents (cited from Lu and Treiman. 2011). Again, the focus is on de facto and not de jure FHHs

2.4 The Influence of Family Structure on Children’s Academic Experiences

The previous chapter has traced and established that one disruption to the family structure is migration, of which the de facto FHHs are the major beneficiaries. This disruption has consequences – positive as well as negative, which has been traced as well. In fact, empirical evidence shows that family disruption, which occurs as a result of divorce, death and migration (parental absence) leads to decreased access to physical and social capital, with a rippling effect on educational attainments (Lu and Treiman, 2011). Unfortunately, the trend, especially with respect to migration which leads to greater number of de facto FHH, is observed to be increasing, feeding into the general increase in FHHs.

Duncan and Brooks-Gunn (1997) also observed that the effect of parental absence does not just reflect on educational attainment but might also have such far reaching effects on a child’s cognitive development, physical and psychological well-being. According to Lu and Treiman (2011), “children whose families experience divorce are more likely to drop out of high school, complete fewer years of education, and have lower grades in school”. The author further cite empirical evidence to support that educational outcomes of children from single-mother homes are relatively worse that educational outcomes of children from single-father households. This affirms that though family disruption has its consequences, it is not uniform for all family types that suffer the disruption. It could be quite devastating for some, not-so-devastating for some and very devastating for others. However, the fact still stands that family disruption affect children’s education deleteriously. This observation was buttressed by McLanahan and Sandefur (994) when they emphasized that children in single-parent house-holds (either single-mother or single-father households) fare less well than their peers who live with both parents.

Conducted studies also reveal the adverse effects of marital breakdown in developing countries. However these findings have not followed a steady approach as divorce in these parts of the world is not comparatively rampant and the family unit is rather intricate. (Buchmann and Hannum 2001). A lot of research has rather been devoted to how these intricate family units affect scholarly achievements. It has been observed that better academic opportunities await children living in female headed households in some African nations because it is more probable for these households to devote resources to their children. (Lloyd and Blanc 1996). Other researchers have acquainted themselves with examining the extent to which family units (measurable by sibship size and make-up) affect the devotion of academic resources within their set ups (Gomes 1984). Also, the subject of earlier research involves the role of members of the extended family, especially the contribution of grandparents in enhancing the upbringing of children and causing these children to identify with their extended family. (Buchmann and Hannum 2001).

Academic writings dwelling on academic achievements of children who grow up in resource-deficient homes have observed the input of academic resources. These findings prove that children from wealthier households attend school more and climb up the educational ladder better, (Behrman and Knowles 1997). Furthermore, since education is usually perceived as the preserve for boys in these social environments, girls are relatively disadvantaged because education is often regarded as an extravagance.

2.5 The Influence of Household Head on Children’s Academic Experiences

Parents represent a very crucial factor in the education of children. Their actions or inactions determine whether children go to school or not. Similarly, their presence or absence determines to a large extent what resources are available for children’s education, the choice of the quality of education offered and supervision and hence the general outcomes of educational endeavours. The UNESCO confirmed this when it concluded based on findings in its 2011 Global Monitoring in Yemen, Burundi, Syria, Serbia and Mongolia that patterns of literacy in the general populace are strongly related to wealth and household location.

Consequently, whether ones parents are alive or dead can have a correlation to school enrolment and success in children’s education. According to Gurmu and Etana (2013) the loss of parents – either one or both – represents another channel through which the pattern of allocation of household’s resources influences investment in children’s education. The author however noted that such a loss has far greater or lesser consequences when other factors such as the sex of the child or that of the surviving parent are factored. Particularly, on the sex of the surviving parent, Gertler, Levine, and Ames (2004) noted that the death of a mother could have a greater effect on children (cited from Gurmu and Etana, 2004). However, other studies, such as those of Lloyd and Blac (1996) dispute such a relationship, rather arguing that there is no systematic relationship involved in the sex of parent that survives and children’s education.

Weir (2010), however found results that confirms that children who are situated within FHH have a clear advantage in school enrolment, relative to children in MHH, implicitly confirming Gertler, Levine, and Ames’s (2004) findings. However, I must point out that the researcher did not state whether the MHH implies the presence of a female partner, in which he should have called those households CHHs. Weir (2010) argued that children in FHHs are likely to go to school because of the limited opportunity costs of children’s schooling due to female household heads’ lack of access to productive assets. Again, these findings were disputed by Rose and Al-Samarrai (2001) who rather asserted that there is less likelihood in school enrolment of children situated in FHHs, relative to those from MHHs. Clearly, therefore, empirical evidence is not conclusive as to who has the advantage – whether it is children whose mothers have died or children whose fathers have died. Neither is the literature evidence conclusive as to whether it is children in FHHs or those in MHHs who have the advantage in school enrolment and success in their educational pursuit.

In another twist to the argument, empirical evidence shows that change in the family structure does not have as much impact on children education as much as employment status and level of education of the household head (McKerman & Ratcliffe, 2002; Iceland, 2003; OECD, 2001; Lichter & Crowley, 2003). Ozawa, Sun-Hee and Myungkook (2009) citing Lichter and Crowley (2003) summed that increase in maternal employment from 1996 to 1999 accounted for 50% decline in child poverty, whereas the change in family structure accounted for a meager 7% of the decline. Similarly, McKerman & Ratcliffe (2002) observed a 65.2% probability of exiting poverty through employment whiles that of marriage was 48.2%, with a consequential relationship to children’s education. OECD’s (2001) did a cross-country study that lent a greater credence to this empirical position when they also observed that entry into and exit from poverty were more strongly affected by changes in employment status than by changes in family structure. Ozawa and Lee (n.d.) also argued that “higher level of education of the household heads tends to be positively related to the economic conditions of FHHs” (cited in Ozawa, Lee & Wang, 2007).

The finding does not however, discount family structure as other findings, such as that of Rainwater and Smeeding (1995) runs contrary to it. According to these researchers, family structure very much explains whether a child lives in poverty or not. Specifically, they noted that children in single-parent families are 5.5 times more likely to live in poverty and hence dropout of school relative to children from two-parent families. Similarly, Bodenhorn (2007) asserts that children living in FHHs are more likely to start school later and quit school earlier than children and youths from CHHs. The argument on employment and educational consideration rather tries to remind researchers that one’s location within a particular household is not the only factor that impact on children’s education. Equal attention should be focused on other factors. In fact, it is obvious from McKerman & Ratcliffe (2002) study that though employment has a greater effect than family structure, the difference of only 17% cannot be said to be very significant.

2.6 Models that Explain Children’s Education Experiences

Scholars have tried to explain the various underpinnings that influence children’s schooling. These could be termed the theoretical perspectives that explain the multiplicity of factors determining whether a child schools or not. This section will explain three of those theoretical perspectives – the Human Capital Model, the Family-Economy hypothesis and the Siblings’ Resource-Dilution Hypothesis.

2.6.1 Human Capital Model

The Human Capital Model was developed by Becker and Tomes (1986) as a framework to analyze school enrolment. The theory holds that the resolution of parents to educate their wards is largely dependent on the desired expectations of educating these children as well as the amount of expenditure that will be incurred in having them educated. (Morduch 2000; Pal 2004). Becker and Tomes (1986) explains that parents have altruistic love for their children but the decision to invest in their education is “on the consideration of maximization of resources and redistribution among family members based on their preferences” (cited in Gurmu and Etana, 2013, p8). Accordingly, different socio-economic as well as demographic consider

Over the years, the issues of gender inequality and female empowerment in the developing countries and Sub-Saharan Africa in particular have been a call for concern by local, national, Sub-regional, regional and international Institutions and governments per se to promote development. Unlike women in the developed counties who are, in relative terms economically empowered and have a powerful voice that demands an audience, and positive action, women in the developing countries have been generally silent and their voices have been stifled by economic and cultural factors. In Sub-Saharan Africa, economic and cultural factors, coupled with institutional factors dictate gender based division of labor, rights, responsibilities, opportunities and access to and control over resources. However, literacy, education, employment, access to media as well as decision making are some of the most disputed areas of gender disparity and female empowerment in SSA. (UNDP 2005)

However, this project is focus to analyze why the process of gender and female empowerment is lower than expected in SSA. Therefore, to have a flexible understanding of the analyzes, the project would analyze the issues of gender and empowerment in SSA and to give attention to some country statics and analyses on gender variations in urban and rural milieus. To have a balanced presentation of the analyses, the project would make use of the modernization and inequality theory to argue the facts. Recent studies indicate that women in the developing countries and SSA in particular, lack enough access to productive resources such as land, education, employment, health services, decision making, basic human rights and harmful traditional indicators are some of the socio-economic marginalization of women in these societies.

Analyzes
Gender and education:

In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Right acknowledged that everyone has the right to go to school (UDHR article 26), but yet educational inequality is still a major violation of rights of women and girls and an important barrier to social, economic and personal development in SSA. Since then, a number of treaties and declarations have been adopted to turn these aspirations into reality, but nevertheless discrimination on female education remains pervasive in most societies of SSA. (UNESCO 2003) According to DFID (2006), in Sub-Saharan Africa, the highest numbers of out of school girls are in Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria and Mozambique.

Considering the case of Mozambique in SSA, gender disparity in primary, secondary and especially tertiary education continuously persist despite government and international stipulations. Following a CIA 2006 report Mozambique has a population of 19.7million and 800,000 square km. and as one of the largest poor countries in southern Africa, faces a set of unique development challenges such as physical and social-cultural infrastructure and effective local administration is far lacking behind. (CIA 2006)

A UNDP (2004) report also points out that 32 percent of the population is 6-18 years of age with annual population growth rate of 2.3 percent and child mortality rate is 152 per 1000 and most Mozambicans are not expected to survive more than 40 years of age due to HIV/AIDS, malaria, and extreme poverty which girls and women are the most vulnerable. Following a similar view, primary education is compulsory and free, but yet parents are unable to afford school needs for kids such as school uniforms, books, shoes and other related materials, because of poverty and other traditional influences and the obvious result is drop out from school and the most affected are girls. (UNDP 2004)

Generally, gender gap in access to education pronounces more in the secondary and tertiary levels in the developing countries and SSA in particular than in primary level. In an article of UNFPA (2005), based on 2001/2002 millennium indicator data base of United Nations, the ratio of female enrollment in the secondary school per 100 boys is 46 in Benin, 57 in Equatorial Guinea, 60 in Cambodia, 62 in Djibouti and 65 in Burkina Faso. The report therefore indicate that disparity in education increases at higher level of studies in most developing countries of SSA (UNFPA 2005)

Although the problem of gender disparity in education have been affected by poverty and traditional upheavals, the government and International Institutions have taken drastic measures to ensure a balance in education on both sexes in most developing societies and communities (SSA). Yet there is still a grand difference between rural and urban enrollment in most of this societies. However, the issue of gender inequality remains a fact in educational sector though might equate as time elapses in SSA.

Gender and employment:

One of the areas where there is high gender disparity between males and female in SSA is at the employment status which is manifested at occupational segregation, gender based-wage gaps, women?s misappropriate representation in the informal employment, unpaid jobs and higher unemployment ratio (UNDP 2005) “if development is not engendered it is endangered” (ibid) This means that the fact that women are under-represented in the formal sector hampers development since traditional Muslim women and rural African women are mostly engaged in domestic unpaid jobs.

As women in Sub-Saharan Africa have low status in the community, the activities they perform tend to be less valued and that explains why women?s low status is perpetrated by their low status activities (ibid). “Almost everywhere women are worst paid than men in the same work done”(Hedman 1996 p; 19) In-depth analyses on women employment status by Hindin (2005) showed that only 17% women in Zimbabwe, 12% in Zambia and 4% in Malawi are employed at higher status paid jobs meanwhile the respective percentages of women whose partners have higher status jobs are 52, 43 and 53 percentages (Hindin 2005, p; 121)

Women are overrepresented in the informal sector in the developing countries especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. The 2009 World Economic Forum Gender Gap Report holds that women in SSA have very difficult working conditions and even harsh particularly in countries with higher informal sectors. These women have undefined work places, unsafe and unhealthy working conditions and often low level of skills and productivity. They receive low or irregular incomes; have long working hours, lack access to information, market, finance training and technology. According to the same report, rural African women are the most affected by this situation, about 85 % in Somalia, 70 % in Gambia and 90 % in Zimbabwe respectively. (WEFGGR 2009)

Following a BBC world news report 2005, rural African women do not have access to media to get more information on market situation and world trends since most of them are illiterates, poor and local farmers. According to this report, less than 2% of rural Sub-Saharan African women read newspaper and women are disadvantaged with regard to women access to watch television. The report indicated that in the year 2000, among girls and women aged 6-49, only 3.6% and 6.9% had access to television in Malawi and Rwanda respectively. (BBC world news report 2005)

Employment gender segregation is mostly found in rural areas than urban cities in developing countries. Take for instance in Cameroon in SSA, employment gender related issue are lower in big cities such as Yaounde, Douala, Baffoussam, Ebolowa, Bamenda and many other major cities than in rural outskirt villages where the main source of employment is farming. Here women do the bulk of the job though informal but are relegated at the background because of traditional beliefs. Local farming is the main source of employment, but yet traditional norms do not give women access to landownership, credit accounts and a complicated inheritance tradition is practiced. (Cameroon tribune 2004)

Gender and Decision making:

The fact that Sub-Saharan African women have low access to education, employment chances and couple with limited media access and other cultural upheavals minimizes their decision making power in general and in the household as well. (UNDP 2005) “No society treat it women the same as men” (ibid). Regarding decision making at household level, local level, community level, and national level of women in Africa, though parliamentary representation has lightly increase, no country in the world has reach gender parity level in decision making.(ibid). According to data obtain from the millennium development indicator of the United Nations; cited in UNPFA (2005) women represent 16% of world parliamentary seats, 21% in the developed world, and 14% in the developing countries. This minimal parliamentary representation of women could be due, among other issues, different electoral systems in different countries, women?s socio-economic status, socio-cultural status, traditional and other cultural beliefs of women?s place in the family and society and of course women?s double burden of work and responsibilities. (UNFPA 2005)

Women?s low decision power, particularly in SSA, is more pronounced at the rural than urban localities as well as in house hold decisions making. According to a survey carried out by Emmanuel Vasty (1993) about 50% of women in the Northern Muslim region of Nigeria stated that they cannot freely purchase children?s clothing without the full decision of their husband nor carry a child to the hospital without the authorization of their husbands. This they claim is according to Muslim tradition and beliefs that a man is superior in every aspect and therefore they have to succumb to men?s orders. (Emmanuel, 1993 p; 74)

Similarly, data of low decision power making is seen in the analyzes of Hindin (2005) in join SSA countries such as Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Malawi, Somalia and Cameroon. According to Hindin analyzes, rural women are the most low powered than urban women in these conutries. In the rural villages where strong traditional beliefs prevail and are in favor of men, men are more likely to have a final say over women?s own health care, large household purchases, visiting relatives, what food to cook as well as the number of kids to bear and when to have this children. Most of these decisions are jointly made in urban households since most of the females are well exposed and educated therefore participate in household decision making. (Hindin 2005, p; 164)

Gender and poverty:

According to IFAD (2005) it is asserted that there is feminization of poverty in gender especially in SSA and mostly in local outskirt villages and around urban slumps. That generally, poverty among women is rising faster than poverty among men. Following the same IFAD survey report, the poverty level of women living in the rural areas and urban slumps increased to 48% in 1965-70 and in the mid 1980s, by comparison, the numbers of poor men were 30% within the same period. “poverty has a woman?s face-of 1.3 billion people living in poverty, 70% are women” (ibid) This clearly indicate that women are the most vulnerable in extreme situations like war, disease, widowhood, poor inheritance rights, ownership of resources, and other traditional and cultural factors contribute to the high rate of female poverty level. (IFAD 2005)

“Gender subordination does not arise out of poverty per se, though a strong association is often made between gender and poverty, women are said to form the majority of the poor” according to UNDP (2004 p; 7) This means that Sub-Saharan African women despite the gender fight to reduce poverty are still subjected to poverty because of their subordinated position in the society. Developing women especially in SSA are not yet free because of strong traditional attachment and the fact that they are relegated at a private influence keep them dependant to their partners.(UNDP, 2004, p; 7)

According to Kabeer (1996) traditional subordination is the key factor of poverty among girls and women in the following developing African countries Ethiopia, Somalia, Burundi, Rwanda, Nigeria, Burkina Faso and Chad. Kabeer argue that because these countries are both made up of Muslims and Christians, women and girls in the Muslim sector of the countries are bound to be affected by poverty because of strict Muslim customs and traditions. The main source of income is by pastoral normadism in rural areas wondering from place to place in search of greener pastures for cattles. These local nomads have to move along with their wives and kids which indicate that steady education is not secured for the girls and other children and the wife depends soly on the sale of cattles for sustenance and decision on sales is carried out by the man. Therefore, the wife and kids stay poor and voiceless at the background. (Kabeer 1996, p; 89)

Kabeer in his analyzes further argue that rural women in developing countries especially in SSA are always affected by poverty because they are mostly engaged in non income paying jobs at the private spheres and in the household while measure financial decisions and income jobs are done by the men. In a typical traditional African setting women stay at home to take care of kids, prepare food, clean up the house, do laundry, and other domestic unpaid jobs. Meanwhile men go out there in search of income paid jobs and according to traditional beliefs a good wife is one who is not carelessly seen in public. That is why women are dumfounded with poverty and take whatever men give to them without much argument. However, some households have realized that it is necessary for women to be educated and have a job that would reduce the burden on men and relief women from poverty. (ibid)

Gender and Health:

“Gender gaps are also persistent in health status in access to health services and health outcomes” (World Bank 1993, cited in WHO 1995, p; 21) This means that the issue of gender inequality, poverty and female empowerment needs to be addressed in health status reforms in Sub-Saharan Africa and especially in the interior villages where there are little or no health services and women are badly affected during pregnancy to birth. In conformity with the same survey carried out by WHO in 1990, rural masses in SSA, over 36% of healthy lives are lost by adult women age 15-44 was caused by reproductive health problems especially maternity related causes and sexually transmitted diseases (STD) compared to only 12% for men. There is therefore a clear indication that women are more vulnerable to sexually transmitted diseases and complicated health issues especially during delivery. Following the same survey, an additional 5% of healthy life lost by women caused by domestic violence and rape. (WHO 1995, p; 21)

“It is certain that the gap between the health status of the rich and poor is at least wide like a century ago and have become wider still” (ibid) Health policies to improve the lives of the poor have been the main focus for the past 25 years and rural women are the most endangered by poor health services since most communities go without a full train medical doctor. Health diagnoses are done by traditional herbalist and women are vulnerable to more contracted and complicated health problems. (WHO 1995)

According to UNICEF (2004) the disparity between developed and developing countries maternity mortality ratio is greater than for any other indicator. Every year around 200 million women become pregnant, approximately 150 million come to terms, 20 million of the pregnancies are unsafe abortions many of which tend out to have complications, disabilities and death, of the remainder there are 500,000 maternal deaths and a further 20 million women suffer severe and disability poor pregnancy management and delivery (WHO 1994) However, the majority of the affected in maternity mortality is in the developing countries in the aforementioned statistics. It was estimated by WHO 1994 that, in Chad, Somalia, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, and Cameroon approximately, there are 10 medical doctors per 1000 pregnant women in urban city general hospital in SSA and 1 medical doctor in a whole rural sub-division with approximated population of 5000 people. (World Bank 1994, p; 2, WHO 1995/UNICEF 1996)

Gender and Power:

The influence of power greatly affect gender relations especially in household decision making and power differ depends on the region and level of exposure of the female. From every indication, African girls and women have been deprived of their rights and power and this have been however backed by traditional justifications. This has been a prevalent in many Sub-Saharan African countries that practice patriarchal succession especially in countries like Ethiopia, Somalia, Rwanda, Burundi, Burkina Faso, Equatorial Guinea, and Cameroon respectfully. There is a traditional belief in these countries that women have to be docile, submissive, tolerant, answerable, obedient, loyal, domestic and faithful for which there is traditional justification. These superior rights given to boys by tradition compel females to be inferior and lack total power and control over their own lives and obligations. (Hirut 2004 p; 35-42)

The socialization processes that determines gender roles in Sub-Saharan Africa are partly the reasons for the subjugation of females in these countries and societies rendering them powerless to an extent. Power determines the level of inequality between sexes and power relations differ from urban to rural and the more education a female acquire the more she become empowered and ignores most traditional subordination norms. Therefore, education gives power to most females to know their rights and obligations though traditional values still prevail despite the amount of education a female acquire in SSA. The issue of power relations in most households is felt differently in urban and rural areas in SSA. (ibid)

The differences in the way individuals are treated through their socialization process, due mainly to their sex status, leads to real psychological and personality problems between males and females irrespective of their level of exposure. In most African countries, society is socialized in such a way that boys have autonomous powers and girls are rendered inferior. In the process of upbringing boys are expected to learn and become self reliant, bread winners, authoritative, decisive and responsible in different activities meanwhile girls are brought up to conform, obedient, dependant, and specialized in private spheres activities like cooking, washing clothes, fetching water, caring for children and other household domestic activities irrespective of their level of education and exposure. This traditional socialization processes and unequal opportunities have made the process of gender equality slow in most Sub-Saharan African countries. (ibid)

Gender and Culture:

The fight on gender equality and female empowerment have been greatly influenced by cultural factors in the developing countries. Most African countries such as Nigeria, Cameroon, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Ivory Coast etc have diverged cultural backgrounds and have different perceptions on the issue of gender and female empowerment. (UN 2005) Traditional and religious beliefs have been the major cultural roadblocks for gender equality and female empowerment. Considering the fact that most African countries have Christians and Muslim populations, the issue of gender is more obstructed by the Muslim since Muslim norms are a taboo if disrespect. (Hirut 2004) Generally speaking, traditional norms, Muslim norms and Christian beliefs accept female subordination as a good practice and hence make it difficult for equality to reign in developing societies. (ibid)

A UNDP (2005) report indicates that female enrolment in schools is generally lower in Muslim sectors than Christians? in countries that have both Muslim and Christian populations in SSA. This means that education which is the main tool for female empowerment and gender equality is considered wastage of resources in some Muslim communities because of stiff Islam beliefs. Christian and other traditional beliefs also favor female subordination exposing men at a dominant position causing major obstacles for female empowerment. Although more Christians and Muslim societies have realized the importance of female education that gives girls and women power through employment and exposure, other factors such as poverty and traditional mal practices are still a socio-cultural hindrance to the issue of gender and female empowerment in SSA. (ibid)

Conclusion:

In the end, the issue on gender and female empowerment in the development process of Sub-Saharan African remains a heated debate among scholars, theorist, Institutions, researchers, Governments, NGOs and International Organizations to find a kind of approach to intrude in the cultural justification of female subordination in the development process of SSA. Contrasting studies have also questioned if the fight for gender equality and female empowerment is an actual push to enhance African development or it is just a way to impose western and North American superiority?

The question on “why is the issue of gender equality and female empowerment slower than expected” in the development process of SSA is a question of perspective. Many reasons can account for high gender inequality and low female empowerment in SSA, but this depends on which angle the problem is viewed. Throughout the project, the problem of gender inequality and slow female empowerment have been viewed at a cultural and traditional dimension explained by inequality and the modernization theory meaning that the project have choose to analyze the problems of inequality on the factors caused by culture and traditional values in SSA. That not withstanding, the same question can be analyzed by other economic and socio-political factors.

In the course of the project, a lot of factors have been illustrated as elements responsible for gender inequality and slow female empowerment in the development process of Sub-Saharan Africa. The elements analyzed by the project as responsible for high gender inequality in SSA are poverty, illiteracy, cultural barriers, traditional beliefs, disease and HIV/AIDS, unemployment, decision making and the issue of power sharing are all accountable for low female empowerment in the development process of SSA. Research have proven that the slow development process in SSA is not about gender equality, because gender inequality exist everywhere in the world, and inequality still exist among sexes regardless of the level of development a society have undergone.

In connection to the two theories used in the beginning of this project, it is crystal clear that gender inequality would still persist irrespective of the technological advancement of a society. This is clearly seen by tracing the origin of male domination, sex distinction and predisposition of men in extreme conditions as explained by the inequality theory. In the other hand, cultural roadblocks are viewed by the modernization school as the reason for wide gender gap in the development process of SSA. That notwithstanding, cultural values endures despite technological improvement in any society.

However, the issue of gender inequality needs a serious attention from both local, national, sub-regional, regional governments and International Organization to seek for alternative approaches in the development process of SSA. Although policies and institutions have been put in place pertaining women?s participation in the development process of SSA, existing programs and strategies should be reviewed to make the efforts more effective and innovative. To empower and integrate women in the fight for gender equality and the development process of SSA, the local government and International Institutions can embark on the following, intensify family planning methods, encourage more female education, fight early marriages and create conditions for women to work and earn an income, focusing on gender rural development programs especially working to bring cultural evolution toward gender equality in all aspects, and strategies of such programs should consider region specific problems i.e. customs and traditions in order to be more effective. This project ends up asking some questions for further investigation by other researchers, Can the equation of gender and female empowerment actually facilitate the development process of Africa? Or the true problems of Africa?s underdevelopment are political and economic stagnation caused by it tragic history.