One of the ways in which some scholars have attempted to map the evolution of feminist literature within sociology is the ‘stages approach’ which was thought to be useful for organizing the various feminist interventions in the discipline. In this approach, four broad stages were outlined. The first focused on understanding the reasons behind the absence of women in the cognitive structure of the discipline. The second stage focused on the societal construct around gender roles and inequalities while the third stage addressed the matter of conceptualizing gender in the societal structure. Finally, the fourth stage looked at the intersectional linkages between gender and other structural inequalities ( Chaudhuri 2016).
It is not easy to segregate all feminist writings into designated boxes according to stages for they overlap. The lines often blur. The other obstacle in identifying the feminist transformations according to a timeline is that the transformations were not taking place within disciplines alone but across disciplines. Feminist critiques one must emphasise were essentially interdisciplinary. Further, there is no well-defined criterion based on which the role of feminism in sociology can be measured.
The period that followed the national emergency in the 1970s saw the spread and intensification of women’s movements. This became the fulcrum of the women’s movement in contemporary times even as it led to a renewed acquaintance with the incredible stories of the women’s movement in colonial India. It is important to note that the Women’s movement in the 1970s received immense attention and support from the media. The Mathura rape case in 1979-80 was a defining incident that changed the course of history for women’s movements as it led to the coming together of various protests against violence meted out to women in various parts of the country (Rege 1998).
Violence against women became a focal point of these struggles and protests (Rege 1998). A concerted effort was made after the Mathura rape case verdict to bring a change in the rape laws. What is important to note here is that feminist struggles are not isolated events. For issues pertaining to gender are invariably linked to issues of class, caste and tribe on one hand and necessarily conjoined to issues of law, politics, economics and culture on the other. The protests in support of Mathura demanded certain reforms and amendments in the rape laws which included the fact that women’s sexual history should not be used as evidence in the trials and the onus to prove anything should be on the perpetrator rather than the victim. However, in reality, it was only the latter that was incorporated partially only in the case of custodial rapes. The campaigns were not able to break the stigma that revolved around rape victims and question the societal construct of shame and honour that was attached to women based on their virginity or chastity. Irrespective of its limits, the campaign was the starting point of feminist struggles in India which was to take various forms in days to come.
With this movement, another aspect of violence against women that came to light was the dowry incidents where women were killed or tortured after marriages for dowry with the most common form being burnt to death while cooking in the kitchen and then making it look like an accident. These incidents became extremely common, especially in the late 80s and the 90s which brought to light the fact that violence against women within homes, marriages and other intimate spaces.
These incidents also highlighted the linkages between violence against women and their status or position at home and in society at large. When these movements vocalized the concerns of the victims of dowry, the need to bring in law reforms further intensified which led to the amendment of the 1961 Act thereby changing the definitions of dowry from ‘as considerations for the marriage’ to ‘in connection with the marriage’ in 1984. Further amendments were made in 1986 to make the punishments for perpetrators more stringent thereby making the offence non-bailable and putting the burden of proof on the perpetrator.
However, all of this seemed way more positive than they were as there were hardly any changes in ground realities. There have been multiple criticisms of the campaigns and the protests which had occurred during this time. The campaign failed to identify the family as the breeding ground of patriarchy and point out the flaws in marriage as an institution with women’s right to property being the focus. These criticisms gradually changed the discourse of women’s movements by showing women as agents of social change rather than as victims.
The work of sociological literature is to show that what is made to look normal is problematic and that the foundation of a family’s existence is laid on the grave of women’s freedom of choice and their voice. Feminism in Indian sociology reopened new ways to study caste, gender, and the role of family and kinship while studying the role of women in various aspects. Various feminist writings highlight that the role of women and their contribution to the household was taken for granted and they were relegated to the position of mere vending machines of fulfilling desires. This was particularly relevant in Asian households where women’s contribution was central to the sustenance of the social reproduction process but their contribution was unacknowledged and taken for granted.
Kamala Ganesh argued (Chaudhari 2016) that initially women’s studies focused only on the role of the women in the household and the family and were restricted to the four walls of the house. However, gradually in the 1960s, the focus broadened to include the study of working women and their interlinkages with cultures, attitudes, and other preconceived notions, and then towards the 1970s, the focus shifted to include the increasing unemployment and the increasing percentage of women in the informal sector.
Towards the 1980s and 90s, the focus of feminist studies shifted to the black and third-world feminist approaches. The increasing invisibility of women from the marginalized sections especially Dalit women in the Indian context led scholars to study the struggles and movements of Non-Brahmins, especially women. The 1980s were the years when the struggles of the ones who were deemed voiceless sparked a new debate on the intersectionality of caste, gender, and identity politics (Phadke 2003).
Towards the 1990s, more and more Dalit women’s organizations asserted the need to voice their concerns against the brahminical feminist politics and the patriarchal practices within the Dalits. However, over the years the debate has only come to be one of the many approaches to feminism rather than it being a focal point of the main idea of feminism. Presently, three different standpoints have stemmed from the struggles and activism of Dalit women. One standpoint was the Marxist Phule-Ambedkarite position emerging of the Satyashodak Mahila Sabha. Another standpoint was the position of the Dalit Bahujan Alliance stemming from the Bahujan Mahila Mahasangh which criticized the Vedic and Brahminical traditions and stressed on community-based justice and customary law. A third position was that of the Dalit Mahila Mahasangathan who criticized the dominance of Manuvadi tendencies in the patriarchal society (Rege 1998). It highlighted the need for self-representation in a world where hierarchies defined not just society but knowledge production.
Even after almost fifty years of the second phase of the women’s movement, the Indian feminist movement is still accused to be westernized that has failed to identify with the complex nature of Indian society. At one level these critiques are against the exclusive tendency of mainstream feminism. At another level, this labelling must be contextualized against the conservative backlash to feminist struggles. It is important to recognize that feminism and its struggles are multifaceted and there are various local movements concentrated in different parts of the country which need to be recognized and included in the larger feminist movements to make the struggles inclusive and just for all.
References:
Chaudhuri, M. (2016). Feminisms and Sociologies. Contributions to Indian Sociology.50(3): 343-367.
…………………… (2000). Feminism in Print Media. Indian Journal of Gender Studies. 7:2 (263-288).
Kumar, R. (1989). Contemporary Indian Feminism. Feminist Review. 33: 20-29.
Phadke, S. (2003). Thirty Years On: Women’s Studies Reflects on the Women’s Movements. Economic & Political Weekly. 38(43): 4567-4576.
Rege, S. (1998). Dalit Women Talk Differently: A Critique of Difference and Towards a Dalit Feminist Standpoint Position. Economic & Political Weekly. 33(44).
***
Ishita Bagchi is a public policy consultant and a freelancer researcher currently running a newsletter and blog called The Wannabe Economist.