Yesterday's New York Times featured this series of photographs on child brides in Afghanistan, an practice that is prevalent across the developing world (although is not always given the attention it deserves as a significant problem because it does impinge on the rights of young women, as opposed to other groups whose voices are often heard louder). However, this particular topic is one that, for me, exemplifies how truly complex and layered these sorts of dilemmas on rights are in the developing world.
When in grad school, I watched a really startling documentary about child brides in rural Ethiopia. Girls as young as 8 years old are married off to men old enough to be their grandfathers, sometimes as a second or third wife. Culture and religion take the lion's share of the blame - families are encouraged to marry their girls off early in order to protect their virginity. The older a girl is, the more likely she is to have had sex, and thus decreased her "value" to a husband. It's actually very difficult for me to write these words because I find them so repugnant (on this issue, you will find me on the anti-cultural relativist stance). The documentary we watched showed male priests decrying Western influence on the subject and encouraging his parishioners to continue the practice. I feel it's pretty clear how women, girls, and their rights are conceptualized in these situations (they have none).
However, this is not a simple debate on cultural relativism, because other issues that plague the developing world - most importantly poverty, and lack of education - have a great deal to do with it as well. Families are more often than not left without the means to feed all their children and sometimes marrying a daughter off young may be the only way to keep her alive. This issue is too a gendered one - daughters are not valued the same way sons are and can fall at the bottom of the pecking order - but it is sometimes basic necessity that causes a family to sell it's daughter to the highest bidder. Education too, or the lack of it, comes into play. There are so many statistics linking women's education to better quality of life; yet here not only are women forced to finish their education when married, but frankly, there are not enough resources for them all (nor all children, male or female) to make it to school.
The documentary I watched added a further layer to the debate. Ethiopia is plagued with a high occurrence of obstetric fistulas in women, which cause them to leak bodily fluids; women become unable to control their urine or faeces and are vulnerable to infections. This condition is often caused by early pregnancy or labor; something most child brides are no stranger to (some of these girls are pregnant by 11 or 12, if their biology allows). Women with fistulas are ostracized from their families and communities, often forced to live alone. Sometimes their child is taken away from them as well. Imagine the life cycle - married at 8, had a child at 11, and sent away to live on your own at 12. Used and discarded - this is the life that many women face.
Fistulas are cured by surgery - a surgery that some estimate costs only $300. Once solved, the woman can go back to leading a normal life. Moving beyond the fact that it would take families making under $1 a day over a year to earn that kind of money, most women can't even get to the hospital in the first place; so many of these families in rural areas where as the hospitals that can deal with fistulas are in the capital. There are not always sufficient roads, or even if there are, means of transportation besides walking.
I provide this example to show how issues, even ones that may seem deceptively small, in the developing world are complex, compounded, and incredibly difficult (I hope not impossible) to solve. For more information on how to help child brides, go to UNICEF's website.
6 comments:
Dear Alisha - You write that on the issue of child brides you hold an "anti-cultural relativist stance." I wonder, in your opinion, what criterion must be met in order for you to lean towards the side of cultural relativism? In other words, when is cultural relativism a valid excuse or reason for different practices and/or beliefs?
Dear Anonymous,
While it is not my entry, I attended the same law class as Alisha, where the subject of cultural relativism and women's rights was debated constantly and whilst I don't speak for Alisha, I am passionate about this subject and thus will jump in with my two cents.
In terms of your question "when is cultural relativism a valid excuse or reason for different practices and/or beliefs?", that is harder to answer and will be getting back to you soon.
Cultural relativism is an extremely important and valid stance to be considered on such subjects. However, I find that it can easily be used as a form of unarticulated defence or end to a debate when you cannot find comparable situation in one's own cultural.
And as Alisha pointed out already, the issue of child brides is not simply one of cultural tradition. It crosses over into discussions of poverty and further gender issues in Ethiopia that cannot be written of as simply cultural. One of the concerns that has developed out of childr brides is that many young girls are often abducted: husbands-to-be only then have to pay a minimal payment, if any, to the brides parents. In such situations, how can cultural relativism be argued effectively when other social-economic concerns obviousley intersect with it.
Thanks for your comments. I find that multiculturalism and cultural relativism are really two sides to the same coin, and, as Carter-Ann stated, very often used as a scapegoat or end to a debate when reason fails. Furthermore, it's generally employed against those who are marginalized in society - women, indigenous people, those in poverty, etc. In our law class, we often found that even some of the most strident feminists, deeply concerned about women's rights, would find themselves defensive about their own "culture" when pressed about practices that may be deemed unfair. I want to make clear that I see this happening in American culture to the same degree as it happens in the locations you might hear about it most (e.g., with Shariah law or customary law).
It is my own belief that you have to walk a fine line between multiculturalism and cultural relativism because I do feel like multiculturalism has significantly enriched feminist discourse (most importantly, it opened the debate about inclusiveness in ways that were critical to the survival of the movement) and think that being completely anti-multiculturalist is just as limiting as the other side of the spectrum (and will more likely than not lead to a not-so-productive imposition of certain values on others in an imperialist discourse).
So I do feel like there's any important place for the multiculturalist side of the cultural relativism debate so wouldn't always discount it. However, in the case of child brides, I see no excuse for this being an important cultural practice to be protected.
Dear c-a & Alisha - Having also studied cultural relativism and multiculturalism, I do not disagree with either of you; I understand that, realistically, you can't dissect any one of the discourses that are at play from any other (intersectionality). I would like to point out, however, that neither of you answered my question; to her credit, c-a did say that she would get back to me.
When is cultural relativism a valid excuse or reason for different practices and/or beliefs? In its incarnation as multiculturalism, let me share one example from my own US culture.
This example was shared with me by an author at a book talk I attended. Basically, she was talking about how programs geared at empowering girls by raising their self-esteem were unsuccessful with women from Mexican-American backgrounds. The message being put forward had to do with believing in yourself and empowering yourself by making the right choices for you, and that sort of rhetoric. Upon further research, it was discovered that this message didn't resonate at all with girls from Mexican-American cultures -- not because they did not want to be empowered, but because from their cultural perspective, the family, as opposed to the self was the most crucial unit, and they couldn't resolve this idea of taking care of yourself above taking care of your family with thier own beliefs.
You have this situation occuring in the debate about women's empowerment programs, especially those that outreach from Western countries to the developing world - to be successful at giving women their own personal forms of empowerment, people running these programs need to understand the cultural importance of the family, and will frankly be better informed by a multiculturalist reading of those situtions (E.g., understanding each culture's reaidng of empowerment and how the self vs. the family fits in and finding an empowerment within that setting). I hope this answers your questions.
Some might like to know about the Fistula Hospital in Addis Ababa, which from all accounts I've read does a spectacular job in helping individual women and trying to prevent the problem.
You can donate direct in US dollars through here,
http://www.fistulafoundation.org/hospital/
I donate in the UK through Ethiopiaid
http://www.ethiopiaid.org.uk/
Post a Comment