Hope for the broom makers: insights into the implications of structural violence against women in india
The only thing I hate more than India’s lack of female public restrooms is the pervasiveness of the caste system despite its abolishment. However, the caste system does not serve as the sole source of structural violence inhibiting the upward mobility of impoverished women in India. Indeed, a deeply ingrained notion of patriarchy within Indian culture compounded by India’s corrupt government’s inability to enforce laws equilibrating the gender divide serve as subsequent forces of structural violence perpetuating the disempowerment of Indian women.
I had heard plenty about the caste system before departing for India. It did not become real to me until I interviewed a SHG whose members were all untouchables. These ladies specialized in broom making, a task usually relegated to lower caste members as the Hindu elite take over all of the dignified jobs. Thus, a severe lack of opportunity in regard to upward mobility plagues those not born into the four main castes: Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishyas, or Shudras. Even with a good education, low caste members are bound by their caste position. Lakshmi, the Self-Help Group leader of the broom making SHG group said, “we are lucky to have the work that we do through our loan with Aastha. Otherwise our only chance at a job is to sell our brooms to shop keepers who give us no money for supplies. Before Aastha, we had financial problems [because of the shopkeepers].” This institutionalized oppression embodies Paul Farmer’s conception of structural violence because, “suffering is ‘structured’ by historically given (and often economically driven) process and forces that conspire- whether through routine, ritual, or as is more commonly the case, the hard surfaces of life- to constrain agency” (Farmer, p. 40). However, other factors complement the caste system to create an overarching notion of structural violence in India.
I had heard plenty about the caste system before departing for India. It did not become real to me until I interviewed a SHG whose members were all untouchables. These ladies specialized in broom making, a task usually relegated to lower caste members as the Hindu elite take over all of the dignified jobs. Thus, a severe lack of opportunity in regard to upward mobility plagues those not born into the four main castes: Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishyas, or Shudras. Even with a good education, low caste members are bound by their caste position. Lakshmi, the Self-Help Group leader of the broom making SHG group said, “we are lucky to have the work that we do through our loan with Aastha. Otherwise our only chance at a job is to sell our brooms to shop keepers who give us no money for supplies. Before Aastha, we had financial problems [because of the shopkeepers].” This institutionalized oppression embodies Paul Farmer’s conception of structural violence because, “suffering is ‘structured’ by historically given (and often economically driven) process and forces that conspire- whether through routine, ritual, or as is more commonly the case, the hard surfaces of life- to constrain agency” (Farmer, p. 40). However, other factors complement the caste system to create an overarching notion of structural violence in India.
A second factor feeding into India’s structural violence against women is the deeply ingrained notion of patriarchy. Indeed, “in many parts of India, women are considered to be less than men, occupying a lower status in the family and community, which consequentially restricts equal opportunity in women and girls’ access to education, economic possibilities, and mobility” (Upadhyay, 2012, p.2). This secondary status of women to men limits their access to social capital such as aforementioned educational and job opportunities. Women such as Lakshmi and her SHG ladies are better off now than most untouchable women because they migrated from the rural desert areas surrounding Jodhpur to the small urban city of Jodhpur proper. Indeed, “resources were especially limited for women living in the rural areas” (Journal of Contemporary Rural Social Work, 2009, p. 1). This lack of resources maintains women at the lowest rung of the socioeconomic ladder because it restrains their capacity to take part in economic opportunities. Indeed, “among rural women, there are further divisions that hinder women’s empowerment. The most notable ones are education levels and caste and class divisions. Women from lower castes… are often unable to access health and educational services, lack decision-making power, and face higher levels of violence” (Upadhyay, 2012, p.2).
In Lakshmi’s situation, her and the ten ladies she works with had to migrate from the rural desert villages to Jodhpur because of the lack of economic opportunities for women in their village. Furthermore, women living in rural villages are, “most likely to be impacted by traditional social customs… and are less likely to be able to read and write” (Journal of Contemporary Rural Social Work, 2009, p. 3). Patriarchy underlies all traditional social customs and regulates all village life, with men serving as the head of their household. Men also convene to make collective decisions for the village. Not only are women absent from this village decision-making process, but also they rarely receive an education. Due to economic constrains, families living in the rural areas save funds to send their sons rather than daughters to receive an education, if possible, outside of the village in the nearest urban center such as Jodhpur, where education is better. Lakshmi and her fellow Self-Help Group women did not receive an education while they were growing up in their village, and consequently must thumbprint their legal documents at Aastha because they do not know how to sign their own names.
In Lakshmi’s situation, her and the ten ladies she works with had to migrate from the rural desert villages to Jodhpur because of the lack of economic opportunities for women in their village. Furthermore, women living in rural villages are, “most likely to be impacted by traditional social customs… and are less likely to be able to read and write” (Journal of Contemporary Rural Social Work, 2009, p. 3). Patriarchy underlies all traditional social customs and regulates all village life, with men serving as the head of their household. Men also convene to make collective decisions for the village. Not only are women absent from this village decision-making process, but also they rarely receive an education. Due to economic constrains, families living in the rural areas save funds to send their sons rather than daughters to receive an education, if possible, outside of the village in the nearest urban center such as Jodhpur, where education is better. Lakshmi and her fellow Self-Help Group women did not receive an education while they were growing up in their village, and consequently must thumbprint their legal documents at Aastha because they do not know how to sign their own names.
While government efforts to end the caste system and overturn women’s disempowerment by advocating for policies focused on gender equality, the government’s failure to enforce these policies due to corruption has left patriarchy and the caste system in tact. Indeed, “The policy/practice gap in India cuts across all sectors and initiatives as a result of rampant corruption and lack of good governance practices…financial corruption hinders the government’s ability to invest in social capital, including initiatives to advance women’s empowerment” (Upadhyay, 2012, p.2). Where government policy fails with regards to women’s empowerment, opportunities open for NGO involvement. However, without an effectual government, the question arises of whether NGO policies can be effective in tackling the vast array of gender issues without complementary government policies. Furthermore, NGOs currently working for women’s empowerment in India tend to focus on the manifestations of the structural violence, initiating programs that help victims of domestic violence or child marriage. While these programs serve as a step in the right direction, they do not necessarily cut to the root cause of these issues: the structural violence perpetuated by cultural attitudes concerning women and their role in society. To change a cultural mindset begins with dialog at the roots of society, with the people. NGOs’ deep community ties allow them access to people and the capability to start conversations. Hope can be found in the discovery of this capacity for change. And hope can be derived from the small success stories such as that of Lakshmi, who have bettered their status despite the constraints of caste, and continue to fight these systems of oppression.