Check out the ultimate guide to 16 return-to-work programs in India for women
A gender-Inclusive education is the need of the hour. What needs to change is how we, despite demanding equality, still at times, perpetuate gender stereotypes.
A gender inclusive education is the need of the hour. What needs to change is how we, despite demanding equality, still at times, perpetuate gender stereotypes.
Science has no idea what causes gender. It can explain sex. It can explain sexual orientation. It can even explain romantic orientation. And yet, gender is a fact of life.
Being an element or aspect or attribute of one’s identity, in a day and age where the personal is invariably the political, there appears much of a challenge in the way gender is perceived: in the form of stereotypical and rigid notions informing the understanding of a gender experience.
The perpetuation of “gender norms” has resulted in skewed ideas of gender, and therefore, a skewed manifestation of gender dynamics in society. Sex is a biological dimension of the human body: the presence of genitalia, chromosomes, hormones, gonads and reproductive organs.
Gender is a range of characteristics that pertain to masculinity and femininity. While sex is more or less “fixed” — the only exception being sex-change operations, gender is less rigid, and a more fluid, dynamic attribute of one’s life.
Segregating gender into watertight divisions of a binary nature, i.e., “masculine” and “feminine” has only fed into a social hierarchy of dominance.
Historically, the roots of patriarchy tend towards the division of roles when fatherhood and community values began to take shape. When it became apparent that there were social groups that sought to gain prominence and dominance over each other, reproduction became the key factor in preserving the purity of their ethnic, racial and other community lines.
Hegemony and dominance found ways to preserve the purity of lineage by safeguarding the reproductive capacity of their women — and that, among other explanations, led to patriarchal dominance over women.
This is not the only known theory that offers an insight into what led to the creation of patriarchy as a form of structural violence, but it is generally arguable that this influential factor contributed in shaping attitudes to a large extent.
Whether it is in our verbiage or in our actions, we continue to perpetuate these stereotypes. Sometimes we do so without consciously intending to. It is a common habit to say things like “I stand for equality” and then surreptitiously share a giggle at someone’s (gendered) expense with statements like “stop PMS-ing” or “that’s so gay!” or “what are you, lesbo?” and the like.
It is regular behaviour to come up, with what we dismiss as, “jokes” when we see memes like “If a man rapes one man, he is called gay. If a man rapes eleven men, he is called Chris Gayle.”
It is all these instances of micro-aggression that feed into macro-aggression — it is these instances that inform and allow the “rape culture” to thrive. It’s these instances in peace-time that enable war-time strategies of carefully plotted sexual violence as war tactics.
It is easy to say that we need to effect change and that this change can come from education. But how much of our existing scope of education really cares about this side of things?
We have historical texts and narratives from which women’s stories and voices have been cut out completely. There are historical records that don’t even offer a place for gender identities beyond the binary.
Education is undoubtedly the primary path that can result in a shift in attitudes. But, education of an inclusive kind that opens up avenues to create woke people, people who are able to decipher the burdens of gender insensitivity and discrimination.
Kirthi Jayakumar is an Advisor at One Future Collective.
First published at One Future Collective
One Future Collective is a not for profit organisation that works towards building compassionate youth social leadership through the use of art, education, community intervention and policy advocacy – across verticals of gender justice, mental health, read more...
Women's Web is an open platform that publishes a diversity of views, individual posts do not necessarily represent the platform's views and opinions at all times.
Stay updated with our Weekly Newsletter or Daily Summary - or both!
If her MIL had accepted her with some affection, wouldn't they have built a mutually happier relationship by now?
The incident took place ten years ago.
Smita could visit her mother only in summers when her daughter had school holidays. Her daughter also enjoyed meeting her Nani, and both of them had done their reservations for a week. A month before their visit, her husband told her, “My mom is coming for 4-5 months!”
Smita shuddered. She knew the repercussions. She would have to hear sarcastic comments from her mother-in-law for visiting her mother. She may make these comments directly only a bit, but her servants would be flooded with the words, “How horrible she is! She leaves me and goes!”
Maybe Animal is going to make Ranbir the superstar he yearns to be, but is this the kind of legacy his grandfather and granduncles would wish for?
I have no intention of watching Animal. I have heard it’s acting like a small baby screaming and yelling for attention. However, I read some interesting reviews which gave away the original, brilliant and awe-inspiring plot (was that sarcastic enough?), and I don’t really need to go watch it to have an informed opinion.
A little boy craves for his father’s love but doesn’t get it so uses it as an excuse to kill a whole bunch of people when he grows up. Poor paapa (baby) what else could he do?
I was wondering; if any woman director gets inspired by this movie and replicates this with a female protagonist, what would happen?. Oh wait, that’s the story of so many women in this world. Forget about not giving them love, you have fathers who try to kill their daughters or sell them off or do other equally despicable things.
Please enter your email address