Great food for thought! Should be shared on Facebook. Thank you! Lissy Verghese
On 3/8/14, Sanchit Katiyar <[email protected]> wrote: > good read, thought why not share! > > Unspeakable Inequalities: Understanding the cycle of structural > violence: A case of women with disabilities > > December 5, 2013 > > by Anita Ghai > > As a child I dreamt being a doctor. I inherited this dream from my > mother's aspiration. However this dream was problematic, as I had > polio at the age of two. Thanks to my caring parents, I thought I > was very lucky because we found a school in my locality. The > experience in school was enjoyable. Gratefully, I also found a > Rickshaw to drop me home from school as my father would drop me to > school. > The guy was helpful and protective. Life was going fine. However the > usual guy fell ill and he sent his brother to pick me up from school. > I observed that he was helpful; however, suddenly I felt that that he > was trying to hold me powerfully, too powerfully! > While I sat on the seat, I felt his hands along my body. Later on I > felt his hands at places where they were not supposed to be at all. > When I tried to push him away, he told me that I was ungrateful as he > was helping. At first I could not tell my mother what happened. I was > scared to death of going to school. I used several excuses such as > illness to avoid going to school. After about a week, my mother became > suspicious. It was only then that I was relieved of guilt. > My parents took extra care after that and my mother started picking me > up from school. However the fear of this man has stayed with me, all > along. The fear was instrumental in creating a persona, which had > nothing to do with intimacy and sexuality issues. > Vulnerability of disabled women > Violence and abuse of anyone regardless of gender, age, caste or any > constituency is never permissible. Yet, there are many realities that > defy articulation. I recall a feminist working on issues of sexuality > in early 1980, was surprised that I was underscoring the issues of > violence against women with disabilities. She was shocked as to why > anyone would 'want to assault a disabled woman'. > Over the years, I have understood that silence really is complicity -- > because we are all affected, we are all related and we do not accept > the violence that affects women with disabilities. The fact is that > girls and women with disabilities are more vulnerable to exploitation > and abuse. The fact is that they are considered as soft targets with > the perpetrators assuming that they can get away easily. Since > disabilities are multiple, many women are unable to comprehend or > communicate about such acts of violence or assault they face in the > family, neighborhood and society. > Structural Violence > On account of many submissions to Justice Verma Committee, it is clear > that women and girls with disabilities in India are more vulnerable to > violence; almost 80 per cent of women with disabilities are victims of > violence and they are four times more likely to be victims. Disabled > women are exposed to a higher incidence of violence compared to the > population average. In 2013, the latest CEDAW meeting describes women > with disabilities as disadvantaged, despite a very clear understanding > of women with disabilities who face violence and abuse, which is > invisible to the society. > Though an understanding of direct violence is still somewhat > recognizable, but structural violence is not understood by society. To > me, structural violence can be understood in terms of absence of > equitable life opportunities for the disabled -- with specific > reference to voices of the disabled women. > The stories reveal the many assumptions and inequities that contribute > to their marginalization. Structural violence, according to Johan > Galtung, exists when some groups, classes, genders, nationalities, etc > are assumed to have, and in fact do have, more access to goods, > resources, and opportunities. This unequal advantage is built into the > very social, political and economic systems that govern societies, > states and the world. > Women with disabilities are marginalised in a patriarchal society in > India. This social and cultural apartheid is sustained by the > existence of a built environment, which lacks amenities for the > disabled and solely caters to the needs of the more complete and > able-bodied 'Other'. This social disregard coupled with experiences of > social, economic and political subjugation deny the disabled a voice, > a space, and even power, to disrupt these deeply entrenched normative > ideals that deprive them of their social presence and any semblance of > identity. > To survive as a disabled person in such a blinkered social environment > has meant coming to terms with unequal power relationships. This is > reflected most clearly by socio-economic status, health issues, > gender, has been confirmed by a range of studies that show that > disabled adults are likely to have low earnings or be unemployed. > Critical is the fact that the disabled woman faces a hostile > environment designed for "able-bodied' society, enhancing the subtle > violence. > Lack of access to communication, be it in the form of availability of > Braille materials, augmentative measures or sign language training, > heightens the oppression experienced by disabled women specifically in > reporting abusive experiences. > To my mind, disability does imply broken persons, as an inadequate > society is neatly tuned to the workings of normative structure serving > political and economic ends. Such disregard results in an ignoring of > pertinent issues with regard to disability from the point of view of > both active social struggle as well as contemporary academic > discourse. Unfortunately such incipient stigmatisation against those > who carry the insidious label of 'disability' with them results in an > exclusion that creates both a sense of despair and distress, often > leading to a suppression and non- recognition of the 'lack' that marks > them initially as different. > Thus violence is not a direct act of any decision or action made by a > particular person but a result of an unequal distribution of resource > creating a lack of agency that can fight the inhumane society. > Structural violence has the effect of denying disabled people > significant rights such as economic opportunity, social and political > equality, a sense of satisfaction and self-esteem. When disabled > people experience starvation, have serious issues of sanitation and > basic requirements such as toilets, and are locked in their houses, > violence is taking place. Similarly, when disabled women suffer for > reproductive rights and have diseases that could be prevented, when > they are denied a decent education, housing, an opportunity to play, > to grow, to work, to raise a family, to express themselves > spontaneously, a kind of violence is occurring -- even if bullets or > landmines are not used! Violence happens when optimum potential > enhancement of a disabled woman is denied. > Institutional Violence > I believe we need to understand "institutional violence" too. > "Institutional violence" and structural violence are not synonymous as > the former includes violence that is perpetrated by families, > neighborhood, schools, health centers, universities, and recreational > organisations, as opposed to individuals. > In India, 59% of unmarried women have experienced violence from their > natal family members, friends, and neighbours, and 54% of the > ever-married women had faced violence from family members, natal > family members and friends. Also, 78% of the women who faced violence > had experienced severe mental distress as a result of violence. > Another area of concern is the possibility of disabled women > experiencing subtle abuse and being controlled, rather than being in > control of caring relationships. Most of the women who have shared > their experiences with me feared abuse and violence more from the > extended family and acquaintances. In this sense, though the family is > directly responsible, it does lead to a 'fear psychosis' as many of > their accounts are treated as overactive imagination. > As she recounted this to me, Neelima repressed her disgust. "I tried > telling my mother about my uncle. She had such a look of disbelief as > she said to me, 'Arre who tumhe kyon tang karega? Usko ladki ki kami > hai? Tumne kabhi apne aap to shishe mein dekha hai?' (Why would he be > interested you? Is he short of girls outside? Have you ever seen > yourself in the mirror?)" > Thus women with disabilities are especially vulnerable; being less > able to defend themselves as the risk of assault and rape from > acquaintances is generally greater than that from strangers. > As an institution family tends to infantilize and patronize women with > disabilities, and don't consider them seriously; their choices are not > respected -- thus, denial is not respected as "denial". Women fear > that they may not be seen as dependable -- thus reporting abuse may not > be believed; they also face damaging social values of being 'inferior' > or 'throwaway', which can lead offenders to believe that the abuse is > permitted. Many fellow disabled women report instances of male family > members fondling a female's breasts each time they touch them. Verbal > abuses are also prevalent, such as "you are a burden to society" and > "we are so unfortunate. We cannot even kill you". > Violence by caregivers > Further, the relationship between the caregiver and care recipients is > problematic as the creation of dependency is linked to the 'burden' > caused by the disabled person. One of the primary reasons for > under-reporting is the fact that 99% of the perpetrators are family, > friends and/or caretakers (such as residential staff like maids, > drivers etc.) Perpetrators often use threats, such as deprivation of > food, charger of the wheel chair, social activity or personal care in > order to force the person with a disability to submit to the abuse. > It's also important to note that though the women would like to report > abuse, they often lack the resources or information to do so. > I have noticed when women with disabilities have reached the hospital, > they find venereal diseases or bruises all over their bodies, and yet > the doctors, too, overlook the abuse. Even in hospitals, women often > hear the staff hurling abuse such as "one who can't wipe her own shit > has no right to be concerned about her hair, so let me chop off your > damn hair". > I feel that there is a close alliance between direct, structural and > cultural violence, as subtle forms of violence include unfair intimate > relationships, social exclusion, circumscribed autonomy and a higher > tolerance for ill-treatment within segregated settings, affecting the > daily experiences of disabled women. For instance many mothers request > for hysterectomies. On inquiring, they say they want to control the > menstrual hygiene; they also fear that sexual abuse might lead to > pregnancy. The tragic part is that since the systems do not support > the mothers of disabled daughters, they consider abuse as legitimate > abuse. > My understanding is that mainstream research on violence indicates a > lack of understanding about issues of abuse of women with > disabilities. As secure, accessible and protective accommodations for > disabled women are available, I protest the label of being > 'vulnerable'. My contention is that the issues of women with > disabilities should be understood structurally. As a myriad political, > economic, legal and social forces are instrumental to the ongoing > likelihood of violence and conflict, unless the underlying > inequalities are solved, the violence will continue to appear. > Asexualisation of disabled women > Finally, I would like to point to the politics of control, which gets > activated through the nature of the 'gaze' and violence. Gaze has been > historically established, pervasive, powerful, gendered and > engendering structure of control and dominance in a given culture. My > contention is that in case of the disabled women, it is not only the > male gaze, but also an able bodied gaze, which has to be encountered. > In my interviews with disabled women, the most difficult discussions > are around a culture where any deviation from a norm is seen as a > marked deviation, and the impaired body becomes a symbol of > imperfection. The myth of the beautiful body defines the impaired > female body as unfeminine and unacceptable. The ramifications of such > historical rendering are to be found in the North Indian Punjabi > culture, where, for instance, girls -- though allowed to interact with > their male cousins -- are not allowed to sleep in the same room. > Disabled girls, on the other hand, are under no such prohibitions, as > they are considered sexually safe, or asexual (Ghai, 2002c). The > assumption is that they will not perceive any of the interaction as a > 'come on signal', nor invite a sexual encounter. It is almost as if a > disabled girl is perceived not like other girls but 'above all that', > which has the effect of freeing the other to imitate any action, which > in more cases than not turns out to be exploitative. > As the personal narrative of Simi reveals, "When I was young, I would > be thrilled at being allowed to sleep in the same room as Vipin, who > was my first cousin. However, as I grew up, I realised that this > benevolent gesture of my family was to be understood as a complete > de-sexualization of my body. Later that same cousin proposed to me and > said that he was willing to satisfy my sexual desires, if I promised > to keep quiet and not publicise the illicit liaison." > Thus 'asexual objectification' highlights the disregard of the dangers > of sexual violation to which disabled girls are exposed. Although > never reaching the headlines, there are enough instances, where their > own fathers and uncles have sexually abused disabled girls. As one of > my informants, whose sister has cerebral palsy revealed: "My sister > always had problems in communicating because of speech problems. > However after her school gave argumentative aids to her, she shared > with me an experience, which was absolutely horrifying. At first, I > did not believe her, yet her tears finally convinced me. My Dad's > younger brother took advantage of the fact that both my mother and I > had to leave town for work and college. As there was no school that > would accept her after the age of 13, we had to leave her at home. He > stayed with us for a month, and my sister became a wreck during that > time. However, as she could not communicate, we attributed her > agitation to her disability. It was only later that we came to know > how he raped her everyday for a month or so. The maid who was to take > care of her also cooperated with him for money. Even after this > episode, my father refused to break his relationship with his brother. > After being threatened that we all would commit suicide, he stopped > visiting our house." (Quoted in Ghai, 2003, p. ) > Thus violence against women with disabilities needs to be understood > in terms of the relationship to gendered power relations and the > historical, social and material conditions that perpetuate and > reinforce violence. Violence not only includes physical, sexual and > emotional abuse, as in hitting, rape and verbal abuse, but also > incorporates other forms of violence, for example medical > exploitation, institutional abuse and structural violence. > Even though some positive answers have come in the form of the > Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 2013, some problems like the gender > neutral definition of the perpetrator in sexual offences, as is > currently the case, is not in the interest of disabled women. Also, > the committee was much more sensitive to the issues, but the ordinance > has given the "bare minimum". > My submission is that 'personal is political' is still a slogan that > we must internalize. Disabled women have to be a part of all the > possible consultations that create disable friendly structures. More > important, we need to share our lived realities, so that specter of > violence and abuse can be eliminated. We need to tell ourselves that > we are entitled not only to the citizenship rights, but to connect > with the "able" society so that a safe world can be created. > > Source: > > http://gritprajnya.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/unspeakable-inequalities-understanding-the-cycle-of-structural-violence-a-case-of-women-with-disabilities/ > > > > -- > With best regards, > Sanchit Katiyar. > > E-Mail: > [email protected] > > Skype ID: > sanchit.katiyar11 > > facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/sanchit.katiyar.5 > > Mobile: > +919013816320. > +919456616244. > > > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > [email protected] > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
