When even in 2019, an amplitude of feminist movements are being
termed as farcical exercises of privilege, it becomes essential to explore the impact
feminism creates on global economy and prove to the insular populace that women
rights actually matter. While it is imperative to define feminism in order
to perform this exercise, the variety of narratives and approaches to the idea puts
forth a dilemma. Sacrificing the pluralistic nature of the ideology and simply
stating “Feminism is empowering women” sounds ideal, the depth and variety of
the topic is only justified when we talk about how feminism has evolved over
the years. The first wave of feminism, which ranged from the 19th to
earlier 20th century mainly focused on Women’s political rights in
Europe and USA. While the first wave of feminism was predominantly led by white
women, it was during the Second wave where racism against women of colour was
finally shed and their contributions were recognized and feminism bloomed as an
ideology. However, the failure of second wave of feminism to create any
tangible impact birthed the third wave of feminism. It was now that the
definition of empowerment went beyond the boundaries of qualitative ideologies
and had more quantifiable factors, such as enrolment in schools, women
employment rates amongst others. The third wave of feminism coupled with the
internet boom enabled the message of intersectionality, transfeminism and post-modern
feminism to evolve and change social dynamics way more rapidly than ever
before.
Empowering a woman implies providing the woman not only a
choice of being capable but providing her the right means and tools to exercise
her choice in a sustainable manner. Historically, most policies that intended
to empower women were mostly focused on their well being. While there is
absolutely no denial about the nobility of the intention that went behind these
programs or the colossal impact they had in reducing the suffrages of these
women, very few of them actually focused on increasing a woman’s financial
independence. However, there is substantial evidence that attempts of making
women capable through welfare route has not always translated into an economic
benefit for the society. This is proved by Ester Boserup’s empirical research
on how modern agriculture was introduced to men and not women in several parts
of the world, thereby creating a pay parity. The steady but noticeable
reduction in pay for primary and secondary teachers as women began to take over
the positions generally filled up by men also proves how most governing bodies
have always considered a woman’s income as supplementary and not necessary.
This is further confirmed by the standing wage gap at 23% along with the
penalties a woman has to pay during and after pregnancy. This is without
considering the unpaid domestic work every woman provides to her family. However, in there is one notable instance
where women were economically empowered to drive change. In case of Grameen
Bank, set up in 1983, was an initiative which
stemmed in Bangladesh wherein the concept of microcredit was used not just to
singularly empower women, but to empower the country in general. With over 95%
of its loan takers being women, Grameen Bank within 10 years of it’s foundation
had mobilized USD 306 million and disbursed approximately USD 1 billion .
Grameen Bank’s success story has inspired many countries to replicate its model
in some way or other.
The advantages of having women in all domains of work is
further proved by “Women Parliamentarians Impact on Economic Growth: A
Cross-Country Analysis Evidence” wherein Eman Khorsheed mathematically explores
the effect under-representation of women in political bodies has on national economies.
The author uses three economic indicators: (i) GDP/capita, (ii) FDI inflow and (iii)
population growth for 20 countries for a period of 12 years; from 2006 to 2012.
His findings support what countless feminists have been lobbying for ages, that
women inclusion has a positive impact on the economy. A recent IMF report on
the economic benefits from including women in the work force further goes on to
prove that the direct cost of gender parity can be upto 20% of welfare and
growth costs in India, several countries in North America and the middle-East
as well. The paper goes on to prove that women have a crucial role to play in
not only bringing diversity but also in sector re-allocation. The estimates
shown in the report also prove how men and women complement each other in
production. It also proves that depending on the initial value of Female
participation in Labour force, closing the gender gap will actually have an
increase from 10-80% in GDP.
IMF estimates further show how in countries like Ireland,
Brazil where Female Labour Force Participation has rapidly increased has had a
positive effect on the Total productivity factor as well as the the GDP, when
compared to countries like Morocco and Egypt where Female Labour force
participation has stagnated. Even with this high cost of gender parity, 104 out
of 189 economies have laws preventing women to work in specific jobs. Adding to
this there are 59 economies have no laws on sexual harassment in the workplace,
and 18 economies, where husbands can legally prevent their wives from working.
Women have always had an important function in economies, whether
it be as the head of household regulating the outflow of income or as an
individual earning member. The aim of feminist movements, while not restricted
to, but largely focused on aiding a “modern” woman’s journey to financial
independence has huge impacts on economies simply because they enable women to
work. These movements play a crucial role in ensuring this independence and
thereby reducing the damage that gender parity will bring to economies. But,
even with this knowledge in public domain, in 2019, an amplitude of feminist
movements are being termed as farcical exercises of privilege.
References:
Anushree Ghosh
B19126@astra.xlri.ac.in
No comments:
Post a Comment