This is one of my recent projects for my Feminist Though class that I took last semester.
Just thought it may be of interest for some...
opensourceforwomen.com
Jul 15, 2010
Mar 10, 2010
National Abortion Day
March 10th is the National appreciation abortion day. It is celebrated (or better put, remembered) in honour of Dr. David Gunn, the first doctor that was killed in the US because of his profession as an abortion provider.
As part of your support, you can send an appreciation note to the national abortion federation. Please click here.
As part of your support, you can send an appreciation note to the national abortion federation. Please click here.
Jan 15, 2010
Feminine sexuality- a symbolic space for political struggle
Women's bodily integrity has been contested for a long time. The debate over reproductive rights, forced sterilization, domestic violence, wartime rape and forced marriage have reflected a political struggle over a woman's autonomy of her body. Bodily integrity can be, and has been, defined in many ways. Particularly in this essay I will discuss how women's bodies are used as a weapon during war (or civil conflict) by expanding on Castillo's proposition that “feminine sexuality tends to become a symbolic space for political struggle” (p. 153). Although it is not the only way to define a woman's violation of bodily integrity it certainly is one way that has been used for countless years yet it has been disregarded as a war crime by international justice bodies. I will further discuss how the state can impose or ignore rights that result in the violation of women's bodily integrity as well as the advantage of using capabilities approach to measure women's access to such rights.
In her essay, Aida Hernandez Castillo explains that indigenous women in Mexico have been targets of Mexico's militarized regime. She points out that Mexico's racist powers silence acts of rape of indigenous women that have been committed by the military. She further explains that women's bodies are particularly targeted by the militarized forces during such conflict in order to weaken not only the the women who were raped but also but also to weaken the men as well as the rest of the community. She explains that rape strips women of their autonomy. Rape, according to Castillo, is an act that violates bodily integrity by invading the most intimate part of a human. She also attributes the use of women's body to weaken men in the indigenous communities to the traditional believes of patriarchy. She explains that traditional beliefs of patriarchal systems consider men as 'protectors' and 'guards' of women and children. Therefore, by raping an indigenous woman (or child), indigenous men are seen as 'unable to protect' a women in need and therefore the men of that community are feminized. By feminizing the men of the indigenous communities, indigenous communities as a whole are then feminized, they are seen as superior to the Mexican dominance that is imposed through the masculinized militarized regime. The second role of rape, according to Castillo, is to silence women. Rape is a form of control whether it is used during a conflict, or absence of. It is used as a warning to other women who speak up in public. This is better described by Castillo as she notes that rape “is a message for all women” (p. 153). A message of control and power that could be exercised by Mexican authorities when they think is needed.
As Castillo demonstrates power relations between indigenous groups and Mexican authorities, Binaifer Noworojee extends similar bodily integrity violations to the conflict of Sierra Leone. Unlike in the case of Castillo where indigenous women were the target of the Mexican government, the women of Sierra Leone were a target of a different number of opposing groups. According to Nowrojee, women in Sierra Leone were targets for the “rebel forces of the RUF, the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) and the West Side Boys.” (p. 90). Women's bodies were literally serving as, what Castillo defined as, a “battleground” of political struggle between the government's militarized groups as well as different counter-military groups (Castillo, p. 154). Like Castillo, Nowrojee also recognizes that women's bodies were particularly targeted to devastate not only the women but also to devastate communities by feminizing the men as they were forced to watch the victim while she was being raped. However, Nowrojee further points out that in Sierre Leone, the rape of pregnant women were disturbingly high. Particularly she notes that 23% of all women who were raped, were pregnant (p. 90). The staggering number of pregnant women who were raped in Sierra Leone clearly indicates that those women were particularly targeted during the conflict. The perpetrators marked their culture by “planting a seen” in the woman and her potential child as they violated and degraded her body (Petchesky, p. 312). A woman who is pregnant is also presumed to be the sole protector of her child while it is still in the womb. Therefore her rape also sent a clear message of weakening the woman's role as a mother of being a 'protector of her child' and therefore discredit her position as a woman in her own culture.
Just like pregnant women were targeted in order to symbolize a victory, according to Nowrojee, raping virgin women also served a way to declare dominance. Unlike the rape of a woman, rape of a virgin was “perceived as a serious crime” by the international justice bodies (p. 88). The notion of who is a victim of rape during a conflict was therefore framed by the international justice bodies through imposing a set of values regarding women's bodies as well as measuring the worth of a body according to previous sexual activity of a woman: “the rape of married women or a non-virgin is often not considered a crime at all” (p. 88). Also the rape of a virgin, perhaps created a competition; whichever group was able to reach the 'target' first would win. Although one may not agree with the particular attention that the international justice bodies stigmatized virgin women as 'worthy' of trial, nevertheless, the rape of a virgin within many cultures themselves is characterized as the only sexual crime that could be committed towards a woman. Although I would argue that the reason for rape of a virgin is often punished in a community not because of the personal violation of the woman (or the girl) but because of its larger disturbance of the community as a whole- this was clearly illustrated by Castillo. Nonetheless, the value of a woman's body as it was perceived by the community on the grassroots level was therefore reflected on an international level.
Nowrojee admits that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Special Court had some negative ramifications, but she explains that through the establishment of both courts, the case of Sierra Leone was able to re-frame the concept of women's bodily integrity at the international level. All women that were raped during the Sierra Leone war were recognized as victims, and for the first time the “invisible war crimes [became] visible” (p. 85). It was no longer that virgin women or pregnant women were the only ones that were considered as victims of politicized rape, but women of different sexual backgrounds were now 'worthy' of trial. Nowrojee demonstrates that “the experience of the Special Court illustrates that sexual crimes can be effectively addressed if the appropriate political will exists” (p. 99). Therefore, as Castillo writes in her piece, bodily integrity of indigenous women will be attained partly when the Mexican powers will cease using indigenous women's bodies as a political tool of the civil conflict. Although women's mass rape was recognized by the international justice bodies as a war crime, it may still be disregarded at the national- domestic level. Nevertheless, Nowrojee acknowledges that the top down process is important as it provides local grassroots organizations with tools to pressure their governments and bring public awareness to the crimes committed.
Like Nowrojee, Rosalind Petchesky also thinks that law, in particular human rights law, provides local movements with tools for “holding governments, private corporations, and international agencies accountable” for violations against women (as well as against men) (p. 303). Petchesky notes that rights come in two different forms, negative and affirmative. Negative rights, according to Petchesky, are a “duty to avoid needless inflicting of harm” while affirmative rights are a “duty to provide essential care and services” (p. 303). She points out that both types of rights are needed for women to achieve bodily integrity. For example, a woman should be protected by the government against rape (this can be through laws), and also the government should provide services for victims to recover, including abortion and health clinics for women affected by rape (p. 303). Additionally, Petchesky points out the importance of the recognition of rape as a “crime against humanity” at the international level. She says that it is a necessary step “toward incorporation of sexuality as a basic domain of human ethics and affirmative rights” through which women can come a step closer to achieve full autonomy by recognizing the devastating effects on the woman herself (p. 304).
Martha Nussbaum also acknowledges the different types of rights that can be either enforced or ignored by the state. She discusses human rights (such as bodily integrity) as capabilities. She explains that capabilities and human rights “have a very close relationship” because rights should be measured as capabilities rather then as transcendent entity (p. 239). The capabilities approach literally measures a woman's capability to access resources that are basic necessities of life as well as necessities for intellectual and spiritual growth. Nussbaum explains that instead of asking “how much in the way of resources is she able to command” the capabilities approach asks “what is she actually able to do and be” with both resources and rights that she is able to access (p. 233). Nussbaum explains the capabilities approach is divided into two categories. Basic capabilities are the ones that are necessary to meet basic needs of a person, such as food, clothing and shelter, those serve as a base for internal capabilities. Internal capabilities are ones that allow “the exercise of requisite function” (p. 237). Together the two different kinds of capabilities are called combined capabilities. Those provide an environment in which a person can achieve and exercise her rights.
Capabilities approach provides a better measure for the rights that women are able to access. For Example, Castillo points out in her piece the irony with regards to indigenous women's rights. Castillo explains that while the Mexican powers were signing the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Mexican leader, Felipe Calderon also increased the militarized regime against indigenous people in which, like previously explained, women were particular targets of rape. By understanding the woman's ability to access rights, rather than measure according to promised rights, provides a better understanding of the status of women in that country.
When discussing women's integrity through negative and affirmative rights as well as through the capabilities approach, it becomes clear that rape violates a woman's autonomy based on all those aspects. Castillo and Nowrojee have demonstrated how women's bodies have been used as a political weapon in patriarchal societies through systematized rape. Therefore, because a woman's body is shaped through both law and politics, the recognition of rape as a war crime is an important step at the international level in order to eliminate the use of rape of women as a weapon to devastate a community. Consequently, the recognition of rape as a war crime at the international level will provide a language of local grassroots organizations to pressure governments for the recognition of rape as a war crime.
Women's bodily integrity has been contested for a long time. The debate over reproductive rights, forced sterilization, domestic violence, wartime rape and forced marriage have reflected a political struggle over a woman's autonomy of her body. Bodily integrity can be, and has been, defined in many ways. Particularly in this essay I will discuss how women's bodies are used as a weapon during war (or civil conflict) by expanding on Castillo's proposition that “feminine sexuality tends to become a symbolic space for political struggle” (p. 153). Although it is not the only way to define a woman's violation of bodily integrity it certainly is one way that has been used for countless years yet it has been disregarded as a war crime by international justice bodies. I will further discuss how the state can impose or ignore rights that result in the violation of women's bodily integrity as well as the advantage of using capabilities approach to measure women's access to such rights.
In her essay, Aida Hernandez Castillo explains that indigenous women in Mexico have been targets of Mexico's militarized regime. She points out that Mexico's racist powers silence acts of rape of indigenous women that have been committed by the military. She further explains that women's bodies are particularly targeted by the militarized forces during such conflict in order to weaken not only the the women who were raped but also but also to weaken the men as well as the rest of the community. She explains that rape strips women of their autonomy. Rape, according to Castillo, is an act that violates bodily integrity by invading the most intimate part of a human. She also attributes the use of women's body to weaken men in the indigenous communities to the traditional believes of patriarchy. She explains that traditional beliefs of patriarchal systems consider men as 'protectors' and 'guards' of women and children. Therefore, by raping an indigenous woman (or child), indigenous men are seen as 'unable to protect' a women in need and therefore the men of that community are feminized. By feminizing the men of the indigenous communities, indigenous communities as a whole are then feminized, they are seen as superior to the Mexican dominance that is imposed through the masculinized militarized regime. The second role of rape, according to Castillo, is to silence women. Rape is a form of control whether it is used during a conflict, or absence of. It is used as a warning to other women who speak up in public. This is better described by Castillo as she notes that rape “is a message for all women” (p. 153). A message of control and power that could be exercised by Mexican authorities when they think is needed.
As Castillo demonstrates power relations between indigenous groups and Mexican authorities, Binaifer Noworojee extends similar bodily integrity violations to the conflict of Sierra Leone. Unlike in the case of Castillo where indigenous women were the target of the Mexican government, the women of Sierra Leone were a target of a different number of opposing groups. According to Nowrojee, women in Sierra Leone were targets for the “rebel forces of the RUF, the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) and the West Side Boys.” (p. 90). Women's bodies were literally serving as, what Castillo defined as, a “battleground” of political struggle between the government's militarized groups as well as different counter-military groups (Castillo, p. 154). Like Castillo, Nowrojee also recognizes that women's bodies were particularly targeted to devastate not only the women but also to devastate communities by feminizing the men as they were forced to watch the victim while she was being raped. However, Nowrojee further points out that in Sierre Leone, the rape of pregnant women were disturbingly high. Particularly she notes that 23% of all women who were raped, were pregnant (p. 90). The staggering number of pregnant women who were raped in Sierra Leone clearly indicates that those women were particularly targeted during the conflict. The perpetrators marked their culture by “planting a seen” in the woman and her potential child as they violated and degraded her body (Petchesky, p. 312). A woman who is pregnant is also presumed to be the sole protector of her child while it is still in the womb. Therefore her rape also sent a clear message of weakening the woman's role as a mother of being a 'protector of her child' and therefore discredit her position as a woman in her own culture.
Just like pregnant women were targeted in order to symbolize a victory, according to Nowrojee, raping virgin women also served a way to declare dominance. Unlike the rape of a woman, rape of a virgin was “perceived as a serious crime” by the international justice bodies (p. 88). The notion of who is a victim of rape during a conflict was therefore framed by the international justice bodies through imposing a set of values regarding women's bodies as well as measuring the worth of a body according to previous sexual activity of a woman: “the rape of married women or a non-virgin is often not considered a crime at all” (p. 88). Also the rape of a virgin, perhaps created a competition; whichever group was able to reach the 'target' first would win. Although one may not agree with the particular attention that the international justice bodies stigmatized virgin women as 'worthy' of trial, nevertheless, the rape of a virgin within many cultures themselves is characterized as the only sexual crime that could be committed towards a woman. Although I would argue that the reason for rape of a virgin is often punished in a community not because of the personal violation of the woman (or the girl) but because of its larger disturbance of the community as a whole- this was clearly illustrated by Castillo. Nonetheless, the value of a woman's body as it was perceived by the community on the grassroots level was therefore reflected on an international level.
Nowrojee admits that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Special Court had some negative ramifications, but she explains that through the establishment of both courts, the case of Sierra Leone was able to re-frame the concept of women's bodily integrity at the international level. All women that were raped during the Sierra Leone war were recognized as victims, and for the first time the “invisible war crimes [became] visible” (p. 85). It was no longer that virgin women or pregnant women were the only ones that were considered as victims of politicized rape, but women of different sexual backgrounds were now 'worthy' of trial. Nowrojee demonstrates that “the experience of the Special Court illustrates that sexual crimes can be effectively addressed if the appropriate political will exists” (p. 99). Therefore, as Castillo writes in her piece, bodily integrity of indigenous women will be attained partly when the Mexican powers will cease using indigenous women's bodies as a political tool of the civil conflict. Although women's mass rape was recognized by the international justice bodies as a war crime, it may still be disregarded at the national- domestic level. Nevertheless, Nowrojee acknowledges that the top down process is important as it provides local grassroots organizations with tools to pressure their governments and bring public awareness to the crimes committed.
Like Nowrojee, Rosalind Petchesky also thinks that law, in particular human rights law, provides local movements with tools for “holding governments, private corporations, and international agencies accountable” for violations against women (as well as against men) (p. 303). Petchesky notes that rights come in two different forms, negative and affirmative. Negative rights, according to Petchesky, are a “duty to avoid needless inflicting of harm” while affirmative rights are a “duty to provide essential care and services” (p. 303). She points out that both types of rights are needed for women to achieve bodily integrity. For example, a woman should be protected by the government against rape (this can be through laws), and also the government should provide services for victims to recover, including abortion and health clinics for women affected by rape (p. 303). Additionally, Petchesky points out the importance of the recognition of rape as a “crime against humanity” at the international level. She says that it is a necessary step “toward incorporation of sexuality as a basic domain of human ethics and affirmative rights” through which women can come a step closer to achieve full autonomy by recognizing the devastating effects on the woman herself (p. 304).
Martha Nussbaum also acknowledges the different types of rights that can be either enforced or ignored by the state. She discusses human rights (such as bodily integrity) as capabilities. She explains that capabilities and human rights “have a very close relationship” because rights should be measured as capabilities rather then as transcendent entity (p. 239). The capabilities approach literally measures a woman's capability to access resources that are basic necessities of life as well as necessities for intellectual and spiritual growth. Nussbaum explains that instead of asking “how much in the way of resources is she able to command” the capabilities approach asks “what is she actually able to do and be” with both resources and rights that she is able to access (p. 233). Nussbaum explains the capabilities approach is divided into two categories. Basic capabilities are the ones that are necessary to meet basic needs of a person, such as food, clothing and shelter, those serve as a base for internal capabilities. Internal capabilities are ones that allow “the exercise of requisite function” (p. 237). Together the two different kinds of capabilities are called combined capabilities. Those provide an environment in which a person can achieve and exercise her rights.
Capabilities approach provides a better measure for the rights that women are able to access. For Example, Castillo points out in her piece the irony with regards to indigenous women's rights. Castillo explains that while the Mexican powers were signing the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Mexican leader, Felipe Calderon also increased the militarized regime against indigenous people in which, like previously explained, women were particular targets of rape. By understanding the woman's ability to access rights, rather than measure according to promised rights, provides a better understanding of the status of women in that country.
When discussing women's integrity through negative and affirmative rights as well as through the capabilities approach, it becomes clear that rape violates a woman's autonomy based on all those aspects. Castillo and Nowrojee have demonstrated how women's bodies have been used as a political weapon in patriarchal societies through systematized rape. Therefore, because a woman's body is shaped through both law and politics, the recognition of rape as a war crime is an important step at the international level in order to eliminate the use of rape of women as a weapon to devastate a community. Consequently, the recognition of rape as a war crime at the international level will provide a language of local grassroots organizations to pressure governments for the recognition of rape as a war crime.
References
Castillo Hernandez, A. (2008). Gendered violence and Neocolonialism: Indigenous women confronting counterinsurgency violence. Latin American perspectives. 35, 151-154
Nowrojee, B. (2005). Making invisible war crimes visible: Post conflict justice for Sierra Leone's rape victims. Harvard human rights journal. 18, 85-105
Nussbaum, M. (1999). Women and equality: The capabilities approach. International labour review. 138.3, 227-243
Petchesky, R. (2005). Rights of the body and perversions of war: Sexual rights and wrongs ten years past Beijing. International social science journal. 57.22,301-318.
In her essay, Aida Hernandez Castillo explains that indigenous women in Mexico have been targets of Mexico's militarized regime. She points out that Mexico's racist powers silence acts of rape of indigenous women that have been committed by the military. She further explains that women's bodies are particularly targeted by the militarized forces during such conflict in order to weaken not only the the women who were raped but also but also to weaken the men as well as the rest of the community. She explains that rape strips women of their autonomy. Rape, according to Castillo, is an act that violates bodily integrity by invading the most intimate part of a human. She also attributes the use of women's body to weaken men in the indigenous communities to the traditional believes of patriarchy. She explains that traditional beliefs of patriarchal systems consider men as 'protectors' and 'guards' of women and children. Therefore, by raping an indigenous woman (or child), indigenous men are seen as 'unable to protect' a women in need and therefore the men of that community are feminized. By feminizing the men of the indigenous communities, indigenous communities as a whole are then feminized, they are seen as superior to the Mexican dominance that is imposed through the masculinized militarized regime. The second role of rape, according to Castillo, is to silence women. Rape is a form of control whether it is used during a conflict, or absence of. It is used as a warning to other women who speak up in public. This is better described by Castillo as she notes that rape “is a message for all women” (p. 153). A message of control and power that could be exercised by Mexican authorities when they think is needed.
As Castillo demonstrates power relations between indigenous groups and Mexican authorities, Binaifer Noworojee extends similar bodily integrity violations to the conflict of Sierra Leone. Unlike in the case of Castillo where indigenous women were the target of the Mexican government, the women of Sierra Leone were a target of a different number of opposing groups. According to Nowrojee, women in Sierra Leone were targets for the “rebel forces of the RUF, the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) and the West Side Boys.” (p. 90). Women's bodies were literally serving as, what Castillo defined as, a “battleground” of political struggle between the government's militarized groups as well as different counter-military groups (Castillo, p. 154). Like Castillo, Nowrojee also recognizes that women's bodies were particularly targeted to devastate not only the women but also to devastate communities by feminizing the men as they were forced to watch the victim while she was being raped. However, Nowrojee further points out that in Sierre Leone, the rape of pregnant women were disturbingly high. Particularly she notes that 23% of all women who were raped, were pregnant (p. 90). The staggering number of pregnant women who were raped in Sierra Leone clearly indicates that those women were particularly targeted during the conflict. The perpetrators marked their culture by “planting a seen” in the woman and her potential child as they violated and degraded her body (Petchesky, p. 312). A woman who is pregnant is also presumed to be the sole protector of her child while it is still in the womb. Therefore her rape also sent a clear message of weakening the woman's role as a mother of being a 'protector of her child' and therefore discredit her position as a woman in her own culture.
Just like pregnant women were targeted in order to symbolize a victory, according to Nowrojee, raping virgin women also served a way to declare dominance. Unlike the rape of a woman, rape of a virgin was “perceived as a serious crime” by the international justice bodies (p. 88). The notion of who is a victim of rape during a conflict was therefore framed by the international justice bodies through imposing a set of values regarding women's bodies as well as measuring the worth of a body according to previous sexual activity of a woman: “the rape of married women or a non-virgin is often not considered a crime at all” (p. 88). Also the rape of a virgin, perhaps created a competition; whichever group was able to reach the 'target' first would win. Although one may not agree with the particular attention that the international justice bodies stigmatized virgin women as 'worthy' of trial, nevertheless, the rape of a virgin within many cultures themselves is characterized as the only sexual crime that could be committed towards a woman. Although I would argue that the reason for rape of a virgin is often punished in a community not because of the personal violation of the woman (or the girl) but because of its larger disturbance of the community as a whole- this was clearly illustrated by Castillo. Nonetheless, the value of a woman's body as it was perceived by the community on the grassroots level was therefore reflected on an international level.
Nowrojee admits that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Special Court had some negative ramifications, but she explains that through the establishment of both courts, the case of Sierra Leone was able to re-frame the concept of women's bodily integrity at the international level. All women that were raped during the Sierra Leone war were recognized as victims, and for the first time the “invisible war crimes [became] visible” (p. 85). It was no longer that virgin women or pregnant women were the only ones that were considered as victims of politicized rape, but women of different sexual backgrounds were now 'worthy' of trial. Nowrojee demonstrates that “the experience of the Special Court illustrates that sexual crimes can be effectively addressed if the appropriate political will exists” (p. 99). Therefore, as Castillo writes in her piece, bodily integrity of indigenous women will be attained partly when the Mexican powers will cease using indigenous women's bodies as a political tool of the civil conflict. Although women's mass rape was recognized by the international justice bodies as a war crime, it may still be disregarded at the national- domestic level. Nevertheless, Nowrojee acknowledges that the top down process is important as it provides local grassroots organizations with tools to pressure their governments and bring public awareness to the crimes committed.
Like Nowrojee, Rosalind Petchesky also thinks that law, in particular human rights law, provides local movements with tools for “holding governments, private corporations, and international agencies accountable” for violations against women (as well as against men) (p. 303). Petchesky notes that rights come in two different forms, negative and affirmative. Negative rights, according to Petchesky, are a “duty to avoid needless inflicting of harm” while affirmative rights are a “duty to provide essential care and services” (p. 303). She points out that both types of rights are needed for women to achieve bodily integrity. For example, a woman should be protected by the government against rape (this can be through laws), and also the government should provide services for victims to recover, including abortion and health clinics for women affected by rape (p. 303). Additionally, Petchesky points out the importance of the recognition of rape as a “crime against humanity” at the international level. She says that it is a necessary step “toward incorporation of sexuality as a basic domain of human ethics and affirmative rights” through which women can come a step closer to achieve full autonomy by recognizing the devastating effects on the woman herself (p. 304).
Martha Nussbaum also acknowledges the different types of rights that can be either enforced or ignored by the state. She discusses human rights (such as bodily integrity) as capabilities. She explains that capabilities and human rights “have a very close relationship” because rights should be measured as capabilities rather then as transcendent entity (p. 239). The capabilities approach literally measures a woman's capability to access resources that are basic necessities of life as well as necessities for intellectual and spiritual growth. Nussbaum explains that instead of asking “how much in the way of resources is she able to command” the capabilities approach asks “what is she actually able to do and be” with both resources and rights that she is able to access (p. 233). Nussbaum explains the capabilities approach is divided into two categories. Basic capabilities are the ones that are necessary to meet basic needs of a person, such as food, clothing and shelter, those serve as a base for internal capabilities. Internal capabilities are ones that allow “the exercise of requisite function” (p. 237). Together the two different kinds of capabilities are called combined capabilities. Those provide an environment in which a person can achieve and exercise her rights.
Capabilities approach provides a better measure for the rights that women are able to access. For Example, Castillo points out in her piece the irony with regards to indigenous women's rights. Castillo explains that while the Mexican powers were signing the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Mexican leader, Felipe Calderon also increased the militarized regime against indigenous people in which, like previously explained, women were particular targets of rape. By understanding the woman's ability to access rights, rather than measure according to promised rights, provides a better understanding of the status of women in that country.
When discussing women's integrity through negative and affirmative rights as well as through the capabilities approach, it becomes clear that rape violates a woman's autonomy based on all those aspects. Castillo and Nowrojee have demonstrated how women's bodies have been used as a political weapon in patriarchal societies through systematized rape. Therefore, because a woman's body is shaped through both law and politics, the recognition of rape as a war crime is an important step at the international level in order to eliminate the use of rape of women as a weapon to devastate a community. Consequently, the recognition of rape as a war crime at the international level will provide a language of local grassroots organizations to pressure governments for the recognition of rape as a war crime.
Women's bodily integrity has been contested for a long time. The debate over reproductive rights, forced sterilization, domestic violence, wartime rape and forced marriage have reflected a political struggle over a woman's autonomy of her body. Bodily integrity can be, and has been, defined in many ways. Particularly in this essay I will discuss how women's bodies are used as a weapon during war (or civil conflict) by expanding on Castillo's proposition that “feminine sexuality tends to become a symbolic space for political struggle” (p. 153). Although it is not the only way to define a woman's violation of bodily integrity it certainly is one way that has been used for countless years yet it has been disregarded as a war crime by international justice bodies. I will further discuss how the state can impose or ignore rights that result in the violation of women's bodily integrity as well as the advantage of using capabilities approach to measure women's access to such rights.
In her essay, Aida Hernandez Castillo explains that indigenous women in Mexico have been targets of Mexico's militarized regime. She points out that Mexico's racist powers silence acts of rape of indigenous women that have been committed by the military. She further explains that women's bodies are particularly targeted by the militarized forces during such conflict in order to weaken not only the the women who were raped but also but also to weaken the men as well as the rest of the community. She explains that rape strips women of their autonomy. Rape, according to Castillo, is an act that violates bodily integrity by invading the most intimate part of a human. She also attributes the use of women's body to weaken men in the indigenous communities to the traditional believes of patriarchy. She explains that traditional beliefs of patriarchal systems consider men as 'protectors' and 'guards' of women and children. Therefore, by raping an indigenous woman (or child), indigenous men are seen as 'unable to protect' a women in need and therefore the men of that community are feminized. By feminizing the men of the indigenous communities, indigenous communities as a whole are then feminized, they are seen as superior to the Mexican dominance that is imposed through the masculinized militarized regime. The second role of rape, according to Castillo, is to silence women. Rape is a form of control whether it is used during a conflict, or absence of. It is used as a warning to other women who speak up in public. This is better described by Castillo as she notes that rape “is a message for all women” (p. 153). A message of control and power that could be exercised by Mexican authorities when they think is needed.
As Castillo demonstrates power relations between indigenous groups and Mexican authorities, Binaifer Noworojee extends similar bodily integrity violations to the conflict of Sierra Leone. Unlike in the case of Castillo where indigenous women were the target of the Mexican government, the women of Sierra Leone were a target of a different number of opposing groups. According to Nowrojee, women in Sierra Leone were targets for the “rebel forces of the RUF, the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) and the West Side Boys.” (p. 90). Women's bodies were literally serving as, what Castillo defined as, a “battleground” of political struggle between the government's militarized groups as well as different counter-military groups (Castillo, p. 154). Like Castillo, Nowrojee also recognizes that women's bodies were particularly targeted to devastate not only the women but also to devastate communities by feminizing the men as they were forced to watch the victim while she was being raped. However, Nowrojee further points out that in Sierre Leone, the rape of pregnant women were disturbingly high. Particularly she notes that 23% of all women who were raped, were pregnant (p. 90). The staggering number of pregnant women who were raped in Sierra Leone clearly indicates that those women were particularly targeted during the conflict. The perpetrators marked their culture by “planting a seen” in the woman and her potential child as they violated and degraded her body (Petchesky, p. 312). A woman who is pregnant is also presumed to be the sole protector of her child while it is still in the womb. Therefore her rape also sent a clear message of weakening the woman's role as a mother of being a 'protector of her child' and therefore discredit her position as a woman in her own culture.
Just like pregnant women were targeted in order to symbolize a victory, according to Nowrojee, raping virgin women also served a way to declare dominance. Unlike the rape of a woman, rape of a virgin was “perceived as a serious crime” by the international justice bodies (p. 88). The notion of who is a victim of rape during a conflict was therefore framed by the international justice bodies through imposing a set of values regarding women's bodies as well as measuring the worth of a body according to previous sexual activity of a woman: “the rape of married women or a non-virgin is often not considered a crime at all” (p. 88). Also the rape of a virgin, perhaps created a competition; whichever group was able to reach the 'target' first would win. Although one may not agree with the particular attention that the international justice bodies stigmatized virgin women as 'worthy' of trial, nevertheless, the rape of a virgin within many cultures themselves is characterized as the only sexual crime that could be committed towards a woman. Although I would argue that the reason for rape of a virgin is often punished in a community not because of the personal violation of the woman (or the girl) but because of its larger disturbance of the community as a whole- this was clearly illustrated by Castillo. Nonetheless, the value of a woman's body as it was perceived by the community on the grassroots level was therefore reflected on an international level.
Nowrojee admits that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Special Court had some negative ramifications, but she explains that through the establishment of both courts, the case of Sierra Leone was able to re-frame the concept of women's bodily integrity at the international level. All women that were raped during the Sierra Leone war were recognized as victims, and for the first time the “invisible war crimes [became] visible” (p. 85). It was no longer that virgin women or pregnant women were the only ones that were considered as victims of politicized rape, but women of different sexual backgrounds were now 'worthy' of trial. Nowrojee demonstrates that “the experience of the Special Court illustrates that sexual crimes can be effectively addressed if the appropriate political will exists” (p. 99). Therefore, as Castillo writes in her piece, bodily integrity of indigenous women will be attained partly when the Mexican powers will cease using indigenous women's bodies as a political tool of the civil conflict. Although women's mass rape was recognized by the international justice bodies as a war crime, it may still be disregarded at the national- domestic level. Nevertheless, Nowrojee acknowledges that the top down process is important as it provides local grassroots organizations with tools to pressure their governments and bring public awareness to the crimes committed.
Like Nowrojee, Rosalind Petchesky also thinks that law, in particular human rights law, provides local movements with tools for “holding governments, private corporations, and international agencies accountable” for violations against women (as well as against men) (p. 303). Petchesky notes that rights come in two different forms, negative and affirmative. Negative rights, according to Petchesky, are a “duty to avoid needless inflicting of harm” while affirmative rights are a “duty to provide essential care and services” (p. 303). She points out that both types of rights are needed for women to achieve bodily integrity. For example, a woman should be protected by the government against rape (this can be through laws), and also the government should provide services for victims to recover, including abortion and health clinics for women affected by rape (p. 303). Additionally, Petchesky points out the importance of the recognition of rape as a “crime against humanity” at the international level. She says that it is a necessary step “toward incorporation of sexuality as a basic domain of human ethics and affirmative rights” through which women can come a step closer to achieve full autonomy by recognizing the devastating effects on the woman herself (p. 304).
Martha Nussbaum also acknowledges the different types of rights that can be either enforced or ignored by the state. She discusses human rights (such as bodily integrity) as capabilities. She explains that capabilities and human rights “have a very close relationship” because rights should be measured as capabilities rather then as transcendent entity (p. 239). The capabilities approach literally measures a woman's capability to access resources that are basic necessities of life as well as necessities for intellectual and spiritual growth. Nussbaum explains that instead of asking “how much in the way of resources is she able to command” the capabilities approach asks “what is she actually able to do and be” with both resources and rights that she is able to access (p. 233). Nussbaum explains the capabilities approach is divided into two categories. Basic capabilities are the ones that are necessary to meet basic needs of a person, such as food, clothing and shelter, those serve as a base for internal capabilities. Internal capabilities are ones that allow “the exercise of requisite function” (p. 237). Together the two different kinds of capabilities are called combined capabilities. Those provide an environment in which a person can achieve and exercise her rights.
Capabilities approach provides a better measure for the rights that women are able to access. For Example, Castillo points out in her piece the irony with regards to indigenous women's rights. Castillo explains that while the Mexican powers were signing the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the Mexican leader, Felipe Calderon also increased the militarized regime against indigenous people in which, like previously explained, women were particular targets of rape. By understanding the woman's ability to access rights, rather than measure according to promised rights, provides a better understanding of the status of women in that country.
When discussing women's integrity through negative and affirmative rights as well as through the capabilities approach, it becomes clear that rape violates a woman's autonomy based on all those aspects. Castillo and Nowrojee have demonstrated how women's bodies have been used as a political weapon in patriarchal societies through systematized rape. Therefore, because a woman's body is shaped through both law and politics, the recognition of rape as a war crime is an important step at the international level in order to eliminate the use of rape of women as a weapon to devastate a community. Consequently, the recognition of rape as a war crime at the international level will provide a language of local grassroots organizations to pressure governments for the recognition of rape as a war crime.
References
Castillo Hernandez, A. (2008). Gendered violence and Neocolonialism: Indigenous women confronting counterinsurgency violence. Latin American perspectives. 35, 151-154
Nowrojee, B. (2005). Making invisible war crimes visible: Post conflict justice for Sierra Leone's rape victims. Harvard human rights journal. 18, 85-105
Nussbaum, M. (1999). Women and equality: The capabilities approach. International labour review. 138.3, 227-243
Petchesky, R. (2005). Rights of the body and perversions of war: Sexual rights and wrongs ten years past Beijing. International social science journal. 57.22,301-318.
Jan 12, 2010
Are Women Human?
"If women were human, would we be a cash crop shipped from Thailand in containers into New York's brothels? Would we have our genitals sliced out to purify us (of what?) and to bid and define our cultures? Would we be used as breeders, made to work without pay our whole lives, burned when our dowry money wasn't enough or when men tired of us, starved as widows when our husbands died if we survived his funeral pyre, forced to sell ourselves sexually because men won't value us for anything else? Would we be sold into marriage to priests to atone for our family's sins or to improve our family's earthly prospects? Would be we sexually and reproductively enslaved? Would we, when allowed to work for pay, be made to work at the most menial jobs and exploited at barely starvation level? Would we be trafficked for sexual use and entertainment worldwide in whatever form current technology makes possible? Would we be kept from learning to read and write?"
Catherine MacKinnon
excerpt from her book. Here's the link
Catherine MacKinnon
excerpt from her book. Here's the link
Apr 13, 2009
Feminazi
In one of our recent conversations, my mother used the body metaphor to describe gender relations. She said that women are the neck and men are the head of the body. When I tried to resist bringing in my Third Wave feminist views, she shut me down by saying “the feminists are pushing too hard, and this is why the divorce rates are so high.” I choked. This was coming from my own mother, who I never considered would have such conservative views about gender relations and the negative perception of the feminist movement fed by the media. Why you ask? Because my mother is an educated female in the medical practice, a divorced single mother who supports abortion and of course, choice.
I came to realize after that incident that generally there are two types of anti- feminists. The first type are generally the conservative religious people who discard all feminist achievements because those are against the patriarchal structure within and outside the family that remained somewhat static over more than 2000 years of its existence. These women I excuse for expressing negativity towards the feminist movement because they take on the traditional values and roles within the family and generally do not poke around outside their preset boundaries. The wife, in many instances is a stay at home mother, or if working, she is in peace being on the bottom of the hierarchy because she agrees that she is a secondary income- extra pocket money come Christmas time. But this is another story in itself saved for some other time.
The second type is my mother. Those women do not have any excuse to be anti-feminist because they are the ones who take the advantage of all our fights and battles yet they disapprove our existence. Perhaps once Second Waivers themselves without knowing it, they take advantage and scratch on the surface of our achievements but do not realize there's a whole other “behind the scene” world... just like back in the day.
Those are the women who go to vote but don't thank a feminist named Dr. Emily Stowe who started a long lasting campaign that would take a fundamental step in 1878 towards a progress in a woman's world1. Women's vote perhaps could be considered the most important step towards independence in the long lasting patriarchal society. From the time the idea was accepted and implemented by each Canadian province, it lasted from 1916 starting with the province of Manitoba by giving a vote to the white middle class women, and recently ending with indigenous women who (not surprisingly) were the last ones to gain the right to vote in 1967.
Those are the women who pursue secondary education and (to some extent) enjoy their right for a stable workplace as well as their wages. Yet no gratitude for for this feminist achievement over the last 50 years.
Those are the women who have the accessibility to birth control and do not deny it. They do not think twice of the feminist advocacy group in 1923 who pushed the right for birth control and 9 years later started the first legal clinic.
Those are the women who take the advantage of the long fought Morgantaler decision4 that legalized abortion on January 28th 1988; and come the time these women experience an unplanned pregnancy they are privileged for choice; yet no drop of appreciation for those 12 long years.
Those are the women that know if their husband is abusive (of any degree) they have the Women's Shelter to fall back on. They do not consider the struggles two feminists underwent in order to start the first Women's Shelter in 1973.
Those are the women who take advantage of the divorce when are miserable in their marriage.
Those are the women who know if are raped, even by their husbands, they have legislation to protect them. They do not remember the case of Ewanchuk that changed the faulty perception of consent6 because of the feminist push.
Those are the women who do not remember Persons case of the famous five who challenged the Canadian legislation, yet there's always a Palin who will stab us once reached to the top in favour of votes. Hey, here's an idea, how about you gain the votes of the very own who paved your way to the top?
It is those “shameless radical” ideas that feminists proposed such as laws against gender and race discrimination which are now a nice and solid foundation for basic human rights in the country we live in; and if violated, there's somewhere to go. Those are the women who do not see past their fogged up windshields, driving.
This is why I carry the title of “a feminist, a Third Waivest” with a small victory flag, so I can point the finger and say “fuck you,” without us you would not be celebrating your sexuality and your proud existence as a woman, transsexual, transgendered and other categories yet to be titled.
But is there a reason for us to solely blame these women? Is it another trap for the fooled Second Waivers to fall into? To turn their backs onto us and even go against what they fought for? Is it just lack of knowledge, appreciation? Or perhaps avoiding the negative stigmatization of our very own culture? Is it being old, and compensating for the shattered self esteem promoted by the media? Of course as an “old, lonely” single mother, who is to blame for her doubt? Who is to blame for her regression and answer seeking in the bible? Is she “too old” to fight ageism or is she just tired of all the fights she experienced throughout her younger years? Does she simply not fit amongst the Third Wavers? Can the Third Wavers please stand up and make some room for the aging Second Waivers?
Perhaps this time it's a backlash from within we have to withstand. Riding our boogie boards onto the Fourth Wave, those are some thoughts to consider. However, they don't have an excuse to disregard us, we should have a unity within diversity.
I came to realize after that incident that generally there are two types of anti- feminists. The first type are generally the conservative religious people who discard all feminist achievements because those are against the patriarchal structure within and outside the family that remained somewhat static over more than 2000 years of its existence. These women I excuse for expressing negativity towards the feminist movement because they take on the traditional values and roles within the family and generally do not poke around outside their preset boundaries. The wife, in many instances is a stay at home mother, or if working, she is in peace being on the bottom of the hierarchy because she agrees that she is a secondary income- extra pocket money come Christmas time. But this is another story in itself saved for some other time.
The second type is my mother. Those women do not have any excuse to be anti-feminist because they are the ones who take the advantage of all our fights and battles yet they disapprove our existence. Perhaps once Second Waivers themselves without knowing it, they take advantage and scratch on the surface of our achievements but do not realize there's a whole other “behind the scene” world... just like back in the day.
Those are the women who go to vote but don't thank a feminist named Dr. Emily Stowe who started a long lasting campaign that would take a fundamental step in 1878 towards a progress in a woman's world1. Women's vote perhaps could be considered the most important step towards independence in the long lasting patriarchal society. From the time the idea was accepted and implemented by each Canadian province, it lasted from 1916 starting with the province of Manitoba by giving a vote to the white middle class women, and recently ending with indigenous women who (not surprisingly) were the last ones to gain the right to vote in 1967.
Those are the women who pursue secondary education and (to some extent) enjoy their right for a stable workplace as well as their wages. Yet no gratitude for for this feminist achievement over the last 50 years.
Those are the women who have the accessibility to birth control and do not deny it. They do not think twice of the feminist advocacy group in 1923 who pushed the right for birth control and 9 years later started the first legal clinic.
Those are the women who take the advantage of the long fought Morgantaler decision4 that legalized abortion on January 28th 1988; and come the time these women experience an unplanned pregnancy they are privileged for choice; yet no drop of appreciation for those 12 long years.
Those are the women that know if their husband is abusive (of any degree) they have the Women's Shelter to fall back on. They do not consider the struggles two feminists underwent in order to start the first Women's Shelter in 1973.
Those are the women who take advantage of the divorce when are miserable in their marriage.
Those are the women who know if are raped, even by their husbands, they have legislation to protect them. They do not remember the case of Ewanchuk that changed the faulty perception of consent6 because of the feminist push.
Those are the women who do not remember Persons case of the famous five who challenged the Canadian legislation, yet there's always a Palin who will stab us once reached to the top in favour of votes. Hey, here's an idea, how about you gain the votes of the very own who paved your way to the top?
It is those “shameless radical” ideas that feminists proposed such as laws against gender and race discrimination which are now a nice and solid foundation for basic human rights in the country we live in; and if violated, there's somewhere to go. Those are the women who do not see past their fogged up windshields, driving.
This is why I carry the title of “a feminist, a Third Waivest” with a small victory flag, so I can point the finger and say “fuck you,” without us you would not be celebrating your sexuality and your proud existence as a woman, transsexual, transgendered and other categories yet to be titled.
But is there a reason for us to solely blame these women? Is it another trap for the fooled Second Waivers to fall into? To turn their backs onto us and even go against what they fought for? Is it just lack of knowledge, appreciation? Or perhaps avoiding the negative stigmatization of our very own culture? Is it being old, and compensating for the shattered self esteem promoted by the media? Of course as an “old, lonely” single mother, who is to blame for her doubt? Who is to blame for her regression and answer seeking in the bible? Is she “too old” to fight ageism or is she just tired of all the fights she experienced throughout her younger years? Does she simply not fit amongst the Third Wavers? Can the Third Wavers please stand up and make some room for the aging Second Waivers?
Perhaps this time it's a backlash from within we have to withstand. Riding our boogie boards onto the Fourth Wave, those are some thoughts to consider. However, they don't have an excuse to disregard us, we should have a unity within diversity.
Oct 29, 2008
Message to Sarah Palin
It's been said time and time again, but this is such a strong video! Hopefully people will listen.
Oct 21, 2008
Marking 20th Anniversary
On January 28th 1988 the Supreme Court of Canada has made an important decision that would change the lives of many females in the Canadian Society. On that important day, the Morgentler Decision was passes and abortion in Canada was legalized thanks to one (ironically) man, Henry Morgentaler. Giving up his family practice, he decided to openly perform safe abortions in his existing clinic at the time when those were still illegal in Canada. He was arrested by the Canadian government in 1970 after the two years of such practice.
This is when the long battle began..
It is important to give credit to the people who fought a long battle. It is not a matter of right or wrong but a matter of choice. Another step for the feminist movement which, ironically, was started by one man- supporting women.
Here is some Morgentaler's thoughts 20 years after. Click here for the interview
This is when the long battle began..
It is important to give credit to the people who fought a long battle. It is not a matter of right or wrong but a matter of choice. Another step for the feminist movement which, ironically, was started by one man- supporting women.
Here is some Morgentaler's thoughts 20 years after. Click here for the interview
Oct 16, 2008
Caramel
Caramel is a film directed by Nadine Labaki who is also one of the central characters in the movie. The movie is set in Beirut Lebanon. it does not touch on the politics of the country, but rather It touches on the issues of 'modern women' in that society. It is great movie that is not directed by Hollywood... (that speaks for itself).
Oct 9, 2008
EGALE Canada
For all of you who don't know, one of our very local organizations is asking for help in the upcoming elections.
This is the very own Egale Canada.
Egale Canada is a "national organization committed to advancing equality and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-identified people, and their families, across Canada." They have been threatened with the gradual public regression and the dropping public awareness and support.
You can fill up a survey they have online regarding your safety as a gay/lesbian/bi/trans sexualetc... and those are always helpful for NGOs.
For the survey and to show your support you are welcome to visit their website, www.egale.ca
This is the very own Egale Canada.
Egale Canada is a "national organization committed to advancing equality and justice for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-identified people, and their families, across Canada." They have been threatened with the gradual public regression and the dropping public awareness and support.
You can fill up a survey they have online regarding your safety as a gay/lesbian/bi/trans sexualetc... and those are always helpful for NGOs.
For the survey and to show your support you are welcome to visit their website, www.egale.ca
Dec 1, 2007
Canada's Most Volnerable Group
Canada's most volnerable group is Native women on reserves. The issue was brought 20 years ago to the Canadian government, but until this day not much has been done. The federal laws that exist to protect women when they get divorced, such as the right for property and land ownership, do not apply to Native women living on reserves. Let alone that Natives are at a much higher risk for divorce and substance abuse. Here's the Native Women's Association website for those of you who are interested. The website frequently has updates on many issues Native women face today such as the Pickton trial.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
