by D. Narasimha Reddy
Violence against women has been a constant, in various societies, for different reasons, across different time periods. However, in most places, awareness and networking among women has been helpful. There have been individuals and organization, who have been and are playing their role in reducing violence against women.
D. Narasimha Reddy represents the Centre for Handloom Information and Policy Advocacy based in IndiaHowever, VAW is set to rise for different reasons. Global trade, as defined by the WTO, has been distorting societies and destroying livelihoods. Pitting livelihoods against each other across the countries, trade-centric policies and programmes have been inducing situations which enable the growth of violence against women.
The handloom sector is also part of this phenomenon. Women handloom weavers are now increasingly facing violence, previously unknown in most of their homes. For ages, women in the homes of handloom weavers have been working with their partners, inside their homes, on various production functions. However, this work has been traditionally seen as part of the family engagement, and was never recognized an "income activity". Women's work increased as handloom production graduated from household production to commercial production. Despite this change, in many places, the work of women weavers was still considered as supplementary activity. There has been no recognition to this work, neither in terms of praise or costs. As a result, this production relation became a part of the exploitation process. Exploitation of women weavers did not stop at this process level. As the handloom production became commercialized and more organized in terms of a sectoral activity, exploitation and subjugation of women weavers continued on an equal scale.
With globalization and liberalization of trade, the handloom sector became prone to discriminatory policy changes, and unfair market competition. This has induced further stress on handloom livelihoods.It is widely known that unfair and unregulated competition leads to price competition and depressing wages. Many entrepeneurs and enterprises resort to cost-cutting. Invariably, the easiest option would be to cut wages or pay low wages. This is also possible due to large human resources available for employment, weak legal framework and lax social attitudes. As a result, workers increasingly face decreasing incomes. Women try to cope up with these decreasing incomes in various ways: it could be through increase their involvement in production work, increase the working hours (besides household work), lowering their living costs (by compromising on the quality of food, clothes and living spaces) or decreasing their needs (basic needs even, such as food).
Men usually try to increase their working hours, find alternative sources of employment, migrate, or give up. Their giving up would mean resorting to alcoholism, crime, and suicide. In the process, they would find it easier to take out their stress on women in their family. Women end up working more, thinking more and taking more. They have to take in the failure of men to earn more and respond to their physical and mental needs. Women have to work more to supplement and/or bring in more income to cater to the family needs.
All these circumstances, not described above in detail, have been the cause of violence against women. It is no wonder awareness programmes on gender relations alone would not be helpful in bringing outcomes. There has to be focus on policy changes which impinge on social and production relations at the family and production unit level. While this conclusion does not exclude the responsibility of men from becoming responsible and humane, it is merely highlighting the need to look at other sources of reasons for gender violence.
Picture: focus2capture's flickR account.
