Question the Question
My sister (a software engineer in India) had an essay
competition. The topic was "Career and Marriage- Can women
have best of both the worlds?" She wanted my opinion on it
and I opined:
I will not answer this question; I will simply try to
critically analyze it briefly instead. I feel that the
basis of the question is flawed. It indicates certain
assumptions that should be discouraged; for example
1. assuming men have the best of both worlds
2. assuming women need to struggle disproportionately in
order to achieve the best of both worlds
3. assuming that career is an addition to the (traditional)
role of women
4. assuming that women have not found a way to juggle home
and job duties satisfactorily
Secondly, who defines what is "best of the worlds"? And
whose aspirations are we discussing:
1. of the chauvinist husbands of the "career-women"
2. of the patriarchal society, which dictates what's family
and what's happiness for women
3. of the "career-women" who have "circumstantially"
attained education and job, and yet adhere to the
traditional notion of marriage which cannot provide an
equitable position to women
The question is not only pitting the condition of women
against men from a very sexist and conventional lens, it is
also overlooking the social conditions that are maintaining
the subjugation of women. The question is a very male
centric question, which showcases a very natural concern of
the male centric society.
Why should it be any less/more difficult for women to have
the best of both worlds than men? It is a great matter of
concern because we are unwilling to break the cocoon of our
knowledge/expectations of what the role of men and women
should be.
If work is a part of life, so is marriage; may it be the
work of a homemaker or moneymaker or money-cum-homemaker.
Traditional marriages are more of an economic subjugation
of women, than the need of women to be "homemakers" or the
belief that children need the mothers to be at home.
What kind of careers are we talking about? If you
remember/notice that we always had women around us with
"careers". The housemaids, female-laborers, female-farmers,
and female-construction workers etc., have been juggling
home and work (for ages) just like men, and owning more
responsibilities than men. Nobody showed any concern to
their well being? Then we had teachers, secretaries,
nurses, clerks etc., making a little more than the ones
mentioned above, who always have been a part of India's
economy. And most of them had families.
Thus, viewing it from another angle it might seem that, as
the earning power of women is increasing, and the range of
careers they are infiltrating into is broadening, the
apprehensions for the wellbeing of the family unit and the
ability of women to secure the best of two worlds is
growing. The women are marching on to claim their economic
independence; however the basic societal unit, i.e. the
traditional family structure and roles are not keeping up
with the change. Additionally, the government and the
corporate sectors, which are primarily male-dominated, have
not been able to restructure in order to accommodate the
changes that are required to re-weave the social fabric and
make it more favorable for women and children.
~Amrita
09.23.06
Comments:
3. Todd Steven Burroughs Oct 11, 2006 11:22
AM
“I will not answer this question; I will simply try to
critically analyze it briefly instead.”
Hehehehehe……
Between that and the dropped pizza, :) I think I’m going to
LIKE reading from your mind.
Congrats!
2. Amrita Misra Oct 7, 2006 7.41
PM
Hey Aradhana
Thanks for the encouraging remarks. However, I would want
you to contribute to the website and also raise questions
as and when you have any.
1. Aradhana Oct 7, 2006 3.49 PM
hey amritani … its a great start..
good that u’ve created a website of ur own.
better late than never.
am sure your notions will b very effective in bringing
about some change in the thinking of people regarding the
potential of women ..
cheers for now.
Bookmark: ...