Societal Roles of Women - Groft

Reflection on the Societal Roles of Women in Case Studies Across the Developing World

Linn Groft, 4 February 2011

            Many of the case studies we have examined in our discussion of the societal roles of women in developing countries have demonstrated the ways in which women are commoditized within their cultures. In many low-income countries, a woman creates social and economic security by producing offspring; she keeps the family nourished and the husband happy; she is purchased and sold depending on whether she is considered more of an asset or a burden to her keepers; and investments in her health and education are viewed economically and weighted less than investments in her male counterparts. She is valued only in relationship to others—first as a daughter, then as a wife and as a mother. In many societies, a woman must be one of these things at all times. Otherwise she is placeless.

This commoditization and objectification of women goes hand-in-hand with the abuse and mistreatment of a woman when she does not conform to the expectations or desires of her society and kin. A woman is emblematic for her husband and her family, and if she performs poorly, she is removed from her husband’s asset portfolio like a bad investment. Of course, the degree to which this occurs varies across cultures, ranging from honor killings and female infanticide to physical or emotional abuse, but it seems largely present across many regions. If we examine some of the situations that we discussed in this section, we can find that this commoditization underlies many of these injustices and abuses.

            If any individual is valued based only on what she can provide or produce, valued only based on her relationship and service to others, then this creates an environment where that individual’s rights as simply being an individual and a human can be ignored. In Half the Sky, Kristoff and WuDunn share the story of a girl who left home to work and was sold into sex slavery. The society’s views of women as valuable commodities are the attitudes upon which a woman may be stolen, like only property can be, and then sold, like only property can be. Her role in serving one keeper was transferred to serving another. The police did worse than nothing because they, too, viewed her in the same way. By commoditizing we dehumanize. When we stop viewing another as a human just like us, we stop considering their human needs and rights.

            Honor killings, female infanticide, and refusing to adequately address women’s and girls’ health needs are another example. For example, in Iraq, as described in Half the Sky, a woman who was raped or who is even just possibly no longer a virgin for any reason, is considered to be a shame on her family. Her death restores the honor that was “lost”; she is compared to a broken plate, which is no longer functional. If the family feels it would be better off investing in its male children, then the family will neglect the girl children’s nutritional and health needs and educational opportunities. Female children die at a much higher rate than boy children simply because the boy children are more highly valued and more highly cared for. A boy can grow to be a man and provide for the family in ways that a girl cannot when she is a woman. Again, we are faced with the idea that functionality is her only worth, and so a female life is prioritized behind a male life because the male’s function is more highly valued.

            I notice a correlation between the degree of individualism and the degree of gender inequalities and societal roles. A more individualistic society allows a woman to construct her identity outside of her domestic, family-centered roles. In a more family-oriented, communal culture, there tend to be more traditional gender roles. I wonder which comes first. There are other factors like wealth and access to resources and opportunities that also would affect gender roles and male-worth vs. female-worth.

I think that men are also commoditized in many cultures, where they are only valued because of what they can provide and how they perform. A male child is kept alive not because he is valued for his human worth but for the economic value and security he can provide the family. But because of the way our societies are structured, males tend to survive because their contributions are valued more than female’s contributions to society. Of course, I have never heard of an honor killing for any man. And perhaps this is a result of a long history of patriarchal values. Society seems much less forgiving of any wrong (or so-called “wrong” that may not actually have been through any fault of hers) that a woman is associated with than any of the wrongs that a man is associated with. Men can err, but women, it seems, cannot.

It seems to me that in a more individualistic society, where she is not defined in relationship to a man, a woman can move beyond being valued based on her productivity and honorability for her kin. But I wonder what is lost for this gain, not because I think the gain is not important but because I think it is important to understand what the consequences are of a breakdown in family structures. This could ultimately have a strong negative effect on men and women both, perhaps affecting one more disproportionately than the other. This I do not know, but I am curious to find out.

The focus of my research this semester is actually to build upon a paper that I wrote last semester examining how gender roles in Rwanda affect women’s risk of HIV infection. I approached this by particularly looking at how the degree to which women ascribed to the accepted gender norms influenced their risk. A paper I found entitled “Application of the Theory of Gender and Power to Examine HIV-Related Exposures, Risk Factors, and Effective Interventions for Women”, provides another level of understanding to this by noting that the sexual divisions of labor, power, and relationships exist on both the institutional and societal levels, where the changes at the societal level occur more slowly than at the institutional level, although these are also very gradual. The authors found that women’s work was less valued than men’s work, which creates an economic imbalance. This imbalance, in turn, creates a social and decision-making imbalance that negatively affects access to health resources and health outcomes for women. There are many findings in this that I found useful and interesting, but one of the most interesting discoveries was how societal values placed on conceiving children can influence women’s risk of HIV. They point out a fairly obvious fact that there is no way to both conceive a child and prevent HIV at the same time. Thus, societal values and the values placed on a woman’s life and a woman’s functionality would have a great influence on her risk of HIV.