The Island (Colombo)
6 November 2002 Features
Women's space?
by Cat's Eye
1.What prompts the formation of spaces that are designated women-only in any society?
2.What sorts of power structures can exist within and outside of these spaces?
3.Does one's symbolic distance from a position of influence necessitate a place of refuge or is there something inherent about women that lends itself to bonding?
Looking at spaces that are designated women-only across cultural boundaries might, at one level, seem like a simple task. The notion of female bonding, through common experiences such as childbirth, domestic labour, friendships, or many other possible relationships amongst women, is not an uncommon one worldwide. A varied landscape of motivations prompts women to share common spaces with each other, and these can range from voluntary affiliations to forced isolation. What is in a space that exists outside the mainstream, and what sorts of potential opportunities can it represent? This article will explore two women's spaces and their respective capacity to transform women's spaces when they are located in the larger society. The women's college is an American phenomenon that dates back to a relatively recent inception in the mid-1800s. Women's literature is another kind of space that can represent a sort of refuge for women. By examining these spaces as part of larger societal systems of power that can either encourage or discourage them, we can come closer to an approximation of their significance in women's lives. Whether it assumes the form of a place of refuge, a utopia, or a prison, the women-only space can become a telling symbol when it is considered in concert with nationalism and the power of a state. In that vein, this article will explore some of the possibilities for freedoms and oppressions that are built into women's spaces.
In the US, women-only spaces have become rarities in the modern age. Several remaining women's colleges, some of the few vestiges of this tradition, were established in the mid-1800s. Initially limited to white women, these institutions catered to the elite upper class that wished to produce educated, refined women who would marry rich men and therefore proliferate their privileged social stratum. As it evolved, the women's college opened its doors to women of color and became more focused upon sending females into careers in any number of fields. Women's colleges in the US now boast their successes in graduating women who climb the financial ladder and shatter glass ceilings that society has built to restrict women. In the 1960s and '70s, women's colleges became bastions of feminist thought during the height of the Women's Movement. Many students and graduates sought to pursue social activism and joined NGOs and other projects involved in various social causes. Some of the first battered women's shelters to exist in the US were established as a result of women's collective organizing at certain women's colleges. As wonderful and liberating as this tradition in women's education sounds, it is almost nonexistent today in the US, as most women's colleges have succumbed to the pressure to become co-educational and have accepted male applicants.
What conditions might be causing the demise of the women's college, and of women-only spaces in general in the US? Even the women's colleges that do still exist seem to have once more evolved in the face of larger societal trends. In the past, the educational focus of many women's colleges weighed heavily in the direction of the humanities and a liberal arts-based education. The few institutions that remain have begun increasingly to shepherd students towards concentration upon economics and other subjects that are thought to improve the student's chances of getting a high-powered, high-paying job upon graduation. Many women's colleges have been forced to accept male applicants because they are committed to providing a liberal arts education that does not necessary lead to top-salaried jobs. These schools see their financial resources dwindling in the face of some other prestigious schools, and they are forced to increase the size of their student body.
Will the evolution of the women's college render it indistinguishable from its mainstream co-educational peers? Is it sufficient to describe the women's college as yet another cog in the American consumer capitalist machine, devoid of meaning as a women's space? No. Though patriarchal power structures may have initiated them, and may still, to an arguable degree, propel them, women's colleges will always be radical in the sense that they offer large numbers of women the opportunity to live and think and learn together. Women do not neccessarily present ideas that are different from those of their male counterparts, but a distance away from male institutions can allow a safe space for women to cultivate different identities that might be stifled in public venues where they do not mirror essentialist molds. It is dangerous to generalize that women's colleges might represent spaces of greater cultural and ethnic appreciation across boundaries, but ideally a shared women's space would not subscribe to cultural delineations and prejudices that have largely been generated and circulated by traditionally male institutions. At best, a women's college would be a place where a great diversity of opinions and worldviews could be shared without threats of violence or strife.
Women's institutions should be working towards this ideal and away from the types of hierarchical structures that have served to marginalize them. Women's spaces constructed in this manner are sites of resistance when we situate them within the larger societal context. Women's colleges continue to exist as challenges to the dominant paradigm, but they need to evolve continually in order to realize that ideal.
Women's literature is another powerful avenue through which to resist and subvert the common, expected ways in which society frames all issues having to do with women. Women's spaces, one might argue, need not necessarily exist under purely physical conditions. Female writers create a space in which the depth and complexity of women's lives and their interactions with others can be represented honestly and fairly. Burdened by historical accounts, news media, politicians, films, and other public forums that seek to essentialize and simplify women's lives, many female writers have responded by forging a platform from which they can speak their familiar experiences in their own words, through literature. Urdu writer Ismat Chughtai is a strong example of the importance of women's literature. Grappling with conservatism in the Muslim communities in India and Pakistan, Chughtai began writing at a time when women were not considered acceptable as fiction writers (1940s). She dispensed with the typically misrepresentative models of women in literature and crafted often radical and always richly detailed portraits of women's spaces in Indian Muslim homes. Chughtai very successfully molded spaces in which women can speak outside the lines of history, which have traditionally denied them any voice. Through her artful use of humour, truth, and anger, Chughtai earns her keep as a sympathetic sculptor of women's space in literature. Perhaps Chughtai's most controversial and well-known piece of short fiction is 'Lihaaf', or 'The Quilt'. 'Lihaaf' is a tale told from the perspective of a young girl that skillfully employs euphemism and satire to portray a living situation between two women that Chughtai's audience would have considered taboo. Through the childish ignorance of the narrator, the reader is offered a well-crafted and distinct view of an isolated matriarchal living situation within the confines of a patriarchal household. Subtle power dynamics are drawn between the female characters. By using the detached, unknowing observations of a child to explore issues that are considered taboo, Chughtai offers herself as a writer more freedom to illustrate the reality of the situation. In addition, the child's reactions to the relationship before her are not solely her own; she also enacts the conservative values of her Muslim community as she judges the women involved. 'Lihaaf' is a simple story whose meaning is complicated and layered by the manner in which it is told. Through the microcosm of the matriarchal space, it situates some of the depth of female opinions and experience in a larger context.
Women's spaces are steadily becoming obsolete in modern society. Women are sold the notion that their progress is measured by the degree to which they can compete successfully in business and other realms traditionally constituted as male spaces. A woman's freedom is to be measured in the rupees or dollars she can earn or the upward mobility she achieves. Do not misunderstand these statements as a call for women to necessarily return to the realm that has been constituted as traditionally female, the home. On the contrary, it is time for women to fight for their own space wherever they are, to learn from a history that has denied them, to resist the urge to become quietly subsumed into male power structures. Instead, let them carve out spaces, the room to define themselves rather than to be falsely defined, in whatever it is that they do. Whether it be in public or private discourses, whether the space be geographical, literary, or even mental, it is pivotal that women maintain their own developing ideas, questions, and criticisms on the events of the larger society. It is important that this articulation be made by women themselves, because otherwise the cycles of oppression will repeat themselves and women's experiences will remain misrepresentations at the margins of history.
+++ ends
- your
email
comments are welcome to help enrich the
movement