Understanding the second sex

Understanding the second sex

Women’s studies have changed the way we perceive the world. But how seriously is it taken? As another Women’s Day goes by, pamela Philipose looks for answers.

Some 30 years ago, nobody really regarded women’s work as having any real economic value. By 1991, census enumerators were asked to gather data on women’s work since it was seen as contributing, not just to family welfare, but the generation of national wealth. Thirty years ago, very few cared about the skewed sex ratio.

Today, there is widespread concern about there being only 927 women to every 1000 men in India, and people talk about the estimated 25-40 million ‘‘missing’’ women. Some 30 years ago, rape did not figure on the radar screen as a heinous crime but rather as a manifestation of a man’s ‘‘lust’’ or a woman’s ‘‘bad character’’. Today, it is fairly widely regarded as a crime that violates a woman’shuman rights.

How did these changes come about? Through a unique combination of activism and academics over the last two decades. Lotika Sarkar one of the four Delhi academics who penned the famous Open Letter to the Chief Justice in 1979 that sharply criticised the Supreme Court judgement on the Mathura rape case puts it way, ‘‘That letter was the result of our understanding of the law and the realities of women’s lives. We sent copies of our letter to women’s groups in Gujarat, Maharashtra, and some southern states, and it had a multiplier effect not only did it buttress the fledgling women’s movement, it brought about changes in the law.’’ Sarkar believes this illustrates the importance of bringing a gender dimension to academics.

Last month, the institution with which she has long been closely associated the Delhi-based Centre for Women’s Development Studies (CWDS) celebrated its 20th anniversary. A four-day seminar organised on the occasion sought to assess the progress women’s studies has made and the challenges it has had to face. Mary John, a senior fellow at the CWDS, who along with colleagues Vasanthi Raman and Smita Jassal, had organised the conference, believes that women’s studies has had considerable impact on higher education. ‘‘Today, can you conceive of development economics without the gender dimension?

Can you do social history without referring to women, or literature, without considering the woman writer?’’ she says. She admits, though, that certain disciplines, like political science, have remained immune to the process.

Vina Mazumdar, who was one of the founders of CWDS, and its director for many years, feels it is crucial to understand the context in which women’s studies was first envisioned. ‘‘It came, let’s not forget, as a decision taken 10 days after the Emergency was proclaimed. J.B. Naik, secretary, of the Indian Council of Social Studies Research, and an old freedom fighter, wanted a counter force to neutralise the damage being done by the emergency. He wanted a sponsored research programme focusing on poor women. The idea was to impact on policy, influence the educational system and reopen the social debate on women’s poor status. ‘You have to acknowledge that research can also be a tool for action,’ he used to tell us,’’ reminisces Mazumdar.

‘‘It is this integrative approach that makes women’s studies unique. On the one hand, it links up with academics, on the other, it links up with those working in the field,’’ underlines Narayan K. Banerjee, the present director of CWDS. But it is an approach fraught with problems and is perhaps the reason why women’s studies today finds itself in a kind of never-never land within the university system. Zarina Bhatty, the current president of the Indian Association for Women’s Studies, is forthright, ‘‘The rigidity of the university system results in women’s studies being tagged along with other departments. It does not seem to have an identity of its own.’’

What has added to the problem is the nebulous fashion in which the University Grants Commission (UGC) treats it. Observes Mazumdar wryly, ‘‘In the early 80s, the UGC actively encouraged the setting up of women’s studies centres. Then, at one stage, it wanted to close down nine of the 20 existing ones. When Parliament reiterated its commitment to women’s studies, there was again some enthusiasm.’’ Part of the problem lay in plain confusion and the inability of the university system to actually measure the worth of the courses on offer. Some institutions attempted to approach women’s studies as a separate discipline, others integrated it into other disciplines. Generally, it was the latter approach that was favoured. For instance, the Women’s Studies & Development Centre, attached to Delhi University, conducts refresher courses in women’s studies for the academic community once a year. As its director, Malashri Lal, puts it, ‘‘The aim is to sensitise the faculty so that they can bring a gender perspective totheir own disciplines.’’

If the relationship with the university situation is problematic, ties with women’s activism have been uncertain too. Vasanthi Raman, a senior fellow with CWDS, even while she points out that the spirit for women’s studies came from the women’s movement, believes that there is a perceptible parting of ways.

‘‘For instance, activists tend to view ‘women’ as a single entity and gloss over differences of caste, class and other categories that academics tend to take seriously,’’ she says.

Mary John sees this as a challenge. ‘‘I would say the relationship has been an active, vibrant one, although it may have its conflicts. In the US, for example, women’s studies as a discipline has attained a high degree of sophistication, but its impact beyond the confines of the university has been very, very slight.’’ John believes that the situation in India is different. ‘‘While on specific issues, like sati, we have had a very rich influence, on other issues, like state violence, we seem to have failed the movement by not providing the necessary data and analysis,’’ she says and believes that the biggest drawback seems to be language. ‘‘English has been the lingua franca of the women’s studies in the country and this has inhibited its reach,’’ says John.

Activists, on their part, agree that there is need for more interaction between academics and activists.

They feel that there is a tendency on the part of those working in women’s studies to either inhabit the ivory towers of intellectualism, or remain insensitive to new trends in a fast changing world. Says Gauri Chaudhury of Action India, ‘‘This relationship between Us and Them needs to be strengthened for our mutual benefit. The Open Letter that Lotika Sarkar and the others wrote on the Mathura Rape case, I remember, came out at a time when the autonomous women’s groups were emerging and its effect was telling.’’ But Choudhury has a complaint. ‘‘Many researchers come to our organisations to research. They gather material, and possibly do an excellent job in analysing the data, but we never hear from them again!’’