gender roles and inequality

Arts & Culture Culture, Arts, Literature & Linguistics
1

in search for explanation to the submission of women in most traditional society including the one most close to forum members, aka desi societies:

we all know the traditional roles share:
-women staying home, caring about children and doing housechores, these housechores including also field chores, and getting water, meaning women are not confined home especially in countryside
-men going out to work and earning money for his family

now there is another dimension that is central in desi society: women honor and their subsequent seclusion: purdah, burqa, niqa, hijab. the virginity is highly priced and the honor of a woman seem to be also dependent on her reputation, ie the way she walks, speak, smile, laugh…and what she does, go out, her friends…in the end everything in her life seemed monitored closely, in order that to have a “good” reputation she must show as little interest to the opposite gender as possible, and have sa weak a personality as possible.

so my wonder was how things eveolved to that point?

first i guessed all the pressure on women was to make sure she’ll be faithfull and not tempted to cheat on the husband.
then i asked myself why is that so important that a women have just one man in her life? obvious answer was: to ensure paternity! men need to own firmly a woman to be sure to be the father of the kid, while a man can cheat her wife, she’ll allways be sure her kids are hers!

then i wondered why some societies attach so much importance on fatherhood, while others are very loose about it and consider that any kid born in the community is a bliss anyway.
it reminds me of sal35 post about inuits

the answer was rather clear: anywhere where having children is essential for the community survival, women have a high value and can have as many partners as wanted because kids are needed anyway, that is the case in primitive societies, and tribes living in rude environement such as inuit
while in places like india, pâkistan, the population is so numerous that the need for children is less, furthermore thanks to easy life condition there are more men than women so any of them can (heoritically) get a partner, hence the need to make ure his kids will not be his neighbors!

ok, it is a long post, tell me what you think, esp PCG:flower1:

2

Re: gender roles and inequality

noor but there is the fact that children in developing societies like india/pakistan are seen as investments (suppport for parents) in agricultural societies they are also an investment since they equal a helping hand for the parents. However in societies like the USA children are an expense (hence the tendency to have less children)
so in this sense dont u think india/pak should place more imp on the woman? since children (especially sons) are important to the well being of families?

3

Re: gender roles and inequality


you seemed to miss my point: i explain it more: in places heavily populated like india (or china), the need for more human is not existant, rather there is a need for less human! cause of overpopulation. thought no one will say it openly in traditional culture for the reasons you mentioned (supporting parents at old age), there are too many mouth to feed! so women are seeing as a burden, who are making unecessary children, hence they are eaily killed when the men think they do not bear the "aproprate" child, ie not from the "right" father

4

Re: gender roles and inequality

i dont agree with you on that. WOMEN do not produce children, intercourse between men and women does. and the fact that family planning has traditionally been avoided by people in these societies shows that there is a tendency to have more children despite knowing fully well that the population is alot. on the contrary, marriage and having kids is actually encouraged in societies like pakistan and india to the extent that marriage is considered a sacred BOND. again you cannot dismiss the fact that these kids are looked upon as an investment and not an expense unlike developed western societies.

Pak Band Junoon Live Concert in Kashmir
5

Re: gender roles and inequality

interesting point of view, so now explain me why women are looking down upon?

Lahorians .....
6

Re: gender roles and inequality

that would be kinda off topic. i do wanna say its because humans act on different levels....cultural, religious, moral, self-serving....it can be a combination of this maybe. but lets wait for more input on this one...

Lahorians .....
7

Re: gender roles and inequality


no that is the topic! the topic is not having or not children it is to try to trace back the origin of various gender inequalities, and gender roles in society...:)

Lahorians .....
8

Re: gender roles and inequality

How did these gender roles evolve...that's the point of this post I suppose?

Um...you pose an interesting theory. I myself have not really researched into the evolution of gender roles or the history of gender roles. I do know that the THEORY is that historically gender roles went from women-dominated societies or egalitarian societies into male-dominated societies.

This has been attributed to population expansion, from what little I've read on the topic. In smaller communities, there are so many tasks, and so many threats to survival, that every individual in the community needs to participate to protect the community. Hence, women have more roles that went beyond staying inside a home all day. Later on, as societies got bigger, and more developed and protected by man-made mechanisms (ex. forts, walls, laws, etc), then a woman's community role was easier to marginalize. Doesn't mean she doesn't have any community role, or shouldn't have one if she choses to have one. But its just easier to say to a woman "we don't need you outside of the house, things are taken care of for our community".

Interestingly, in the USA, where I live, there is an increasing need for women to be part of the community. Since both men and women are out on the work force, our country can chose the best workers to work. Now a man doesn't compete with just other men for his job, but he also competes with women. Which means if competition is tough, then the performance is better in the community. That means its easier for us to top other countries economically. The American work force is immense, and its one hell of a dedicated work force. We work our behinds off. And then of course, now American families NEED a female to work and bring in an income many times (single family homes, homes where husband is not making enough). Individual avg income, about 4-5 years ago, when I looked at stats was 30,000 or 35,000. I'm sure its higher now. Back then, however, FAMILY INCOME was 75,000. To run a family on one man's income is no longer enough. You will just get by. So either you have one working husband but he has to make a lot of money, or you have both spouses working with average incomes and pooling their money together. Its become a hard core reality here now. So now, by your logic, since we need women more now in the USA in the work force (the modern equivalent of the stone age female who used to work in the field gathering herbs/plants, etc), the importance of women has arisen once again, and women in the USA are once again respected. Sure you'll have people trying to classify all women as sluts or whores, but most working women are respected to a higher degree in their own workplace than you'll find elsewhere I think. Prolly cuz there are laws that you can get sacked at the workplace for sexual harassment, where you dont have such laws in pakistan.

Anyway, its an interesting theory parrissenoor, but I think there's got to be more to it. I really can't say much more on it, since that's where my knowledge ends on the topic. I'm not so interested myself in WHY it existed or has evolved, but in HOW to stop it. I'm more interested in interventionist techniques, and how to solve the problem of women's abuse, which are more extreme cases. Well, anyhoo, that's the plan as of now. I don't know what I'll be doing with it in the next 10 years, but I definitely can't comment on this topic, since evolution of the problem is never something I really focused on.

9

Re: gender roles and inequality

You guys do know that among hunter gatherers women were considered far more valuable than men?

CJ stopped Mush & Shaukat from billion $ fraud
10

Re: gender roles and inequality


yes, of course! women were the only one able to bear and feed children, as children were future of tribe and survival very hard at the time hence women were priced.
as i explained ituation in overcrowded earth is reverse!

11

Re: gender roles and inequality

Interesting and informative. But let me tell you and others that man and woman working to run a home is an artificially created situation in the western countries. I will call it a vicious circle. Let me explain what I mean. When more people work then more money is generated and when more money is in circulation with the same amount of commodities then prices for each go up. So cost of living becomes more and so both partners must work to run the home. Women are working only in the service sector and not in manufacturing or industry and so goods produced are same but the money generated is far high and so cost of living is high. This artificially created vicious circle is worse than what you see in more conservative society.

In countries like India and Pakistan, only husband work, the goods created are same and money generated is also not high so money in circulation is not high enough to jack up the prices . And so just one man works and runs the home. It's a much happier situation then both partners working and then clashing with their egos and eventually creating an unstable family.

The high performance comes with high cost of living. The low performance with low cost of living. What is required is a balance between both. I am not in favour of either extremes. I will prefer a social model which doesn't jeopordise family at the cost of performance.

12

Re: gender roles and inequality

^^ excellent!

13

Re: gender roles and inequality

So the reason for increased prices is because women are now working. Let me explain something to you. Your prices will increase when you have inflation as well, and inflation can be attributed to many many causes. I’ve never heard of it being attributed to working women.

As sectors expand, a country will need more workers to work. Simple. So women enter the work force. You have more people ready to work and do creative things, you have, in turn, an expanding economy. I don’t call that a vicious cycle. I call it a good circle.

:cb: Rise in prices is due to women working. Haha, I’ve never heard of such a misogynist modern theory in my life. Oh well, it is the internet.

an outfit of mine
14

Re: gender roles and inequality

You have missed my point. Wealth or asset or goods are created only in the industry and in agriculture sector. Service sector doesn’t produce wealth. Women work mostly in service sector and so they don’t contribute much to the creation of wealth. Since women are working so it creates a positive feedback situation where more and more jobs are created in service sector. So more money is generated which is not proportion to the goods or wealth produced. So prices go up.

Also please remember that U.S. doesn’t print its currency against its gold reserve which is a normal practice in most other countries.

The high cost of living in U.S. is an artificially created situation. I can bet with any economist that if women go back home then one man can bear the cost of running home. If just one member in every U.S. family works then the natural prices of commodity will be such that just one member can run the home. If four members in every U.S. family work then prices will be such that four members will be needed to run the home. It is so simple to visualize.

15

Re: gender roles and inequality

More women work in the service sector, as you say (I am not verifying this as true or not, I don't know the stats), so that leaves more men to work in the industry or agriculture sector. So wealth, goods, and assets increase.

Simple logic.

List of Good Restaurants in Karachi, Lahore and other Pak Cities
16

Re: gender roles and inequality

High growth always produces high inflation. This is a common fact. Now India and China will face high inflation because of high growth in their economy. I will prefer a low growth and low inflation situation. If man and woman both work then economy moves in a high growth path and so it produces high inflation.

17

Re: gender roles and inequality

First a correction...

Good news for all male chauvinists out there... your manlihood will be a definite asset within the next few years... as its predicted that women will outnumber men.

No more competition for the "fairer" sex... we'll be able to sit back and relax.

Back to the point...

Why are men allowed to procreate/recreate as freely as we can... while women have to suffer the agony of being monogamous.

Simple... the paternity issue...

If a woman was allowed to have as many sexual partners as her heart desired, then there would always be a question as to the paternity of the child.

Inuits aside... its a pretty important thing to know just "Who's your daddy?", in cultures as far apart as Japan to the United Kingdom. While Inuits may cherish children for the reason that they're thankful they're around, other cultures like in Polynesia where conditions are considerably less harsh also have a system where the women can practice polygamy. It's not a result of the environment.

Which is probably the reason why women are sequestered and secluded as much as they are. The simple and sole purpose of ensuring undisputed paternity of children.

It all boils down to the male chauvinistic instinct of wanting to be in total control of their harem.

18

Re: gender roles and inequality

Funny thing...not that I'm looking to start any kind of dissention here but think about it....its REALLY and truly a luxury to have a husband providing enough income that the wife CAN (IF she WANTS) stay home and raise the kids and care for hearth and home.

We struggle very much with our bills but so far MASHALAAH we have been able to do this and its really the biggest blessing I could every ask for - to be here for my boys. I in no way see it as something derogatory towards women.

On the down side, there really arent many who really and truly understand that. Our eldest son has troubles and many docs, when they see or hear that I'm "housewife", assume that I'm just some dummy gal without a CLUE how to raise children. When I could give THEM a lecture or three on the problems that my son has. This too in the US of A - I dont even want to think about how things would be in a less "progressive" country.

19

Re: gender roles and inequality

Let me over simplify and explain you further. Suppose there are 100 men and 100 women in a country and 100 men work and produce 100 units of goods and are paid 100 dollors collectively. So simple arithmatic will tell that the price of each goods will be 1 dollor. Now suppose 100 women join the workforce and work in the service sector. This may help boost the production say by 20%. So now 120 unit of goods are produced. Since labour laws will not allow people working in service sector to be underpaid so another 100 dollors are paid to the women workforce. So now there are 200 dollors in the market for 120 units of goods. So now each goods will cost 70 to 80% more. If this trend continues for quite a long period then there will be enough money in the market to keep the prices high and so now living cost will be high and now both man and woman must work to run the home.

Indian women are now out in a big way to work and soon there will be lot of money in the market to make every Indian man and woman to work to keep the home running.

My above statement doesn't mean that women don't contribute in the generation of wealth. If they take care of home and take care of kids and other necessary things then they make man to be more productive and more efficient and establish a happy and healthy family. In America, now there are more divorces, more indisciplined and violent children and more and more people are living an individual, lonely and stressful life. There is only work and competition. Whole family fabric has been distroyed. This is the price for high performance and prosperity.

20

Re: gender roles and inequality

where did you get that???
don’t you know that the biggest country in the world: china and india have practiced gender selection that leads to more men than women in the young generation!
the only places where men are less than women is the oldest generation of the western world:rolleyes:, and i don’t think young indian and chinese males will find 70 years old western women able to fill the gap:devil: