“Gender and Command Over Property” A Feminist Take
Feminism is a largely thrown around word in this day and age. It is almost always accused of being “attention seeking” and “man-hating”. A very common word circulating around feminist conversations is “patriarchy”, and not in a good way. Patriarchy refers to the leadership and power of men in a way that demeans, excludes and to a large part, harms women. Bina Agarwal, a renowned development economist from India, addresses in her paper the deeply rooted patriarchy in two lesser talked about concepts in women empowerment, one is the post colonialist state of women empowerment, and the other is their relationship with “lands”. Her paper is entitled, “Gender and command over property: A critical gap in economic analysis and policy in South Asia”. (Agarwal, 1994)
In this essay, I will look through the differences between household property and women’s property, the importance of women owning property. I will also look into how this may contribute to women empowerment, especially in South Asian rural areas.
Land ownership and women’s empowerment
Agarwal talks about Friedrich Engels’ take on gender relations. Engels took an example from the bourgeois- proletariat class division, suggesting that the working class family is deemed to be propertyless and involved only with wage labor and the gender inequality is only seen in the bourgeois families where the man owns a property and a woman is only propertyless and out of labor force. (Agarwal, 1994) According to Agarwal, Engels neglected and signified less about gender oppression, even though he mentioned that gender oppression in land ownership stems from the economic dependency of women. Engels dissolved the acknowledgement of gender oppression in the idea of abolishing private property, and made it more of a class system issue than gender issue.
Agarwal challenges Engels' idea that a woman being included in the workforce will empower herself. She argues that land ownership would contribute to a woman’s empowerment more, and the reasons for it are plenty. One example is economic control, as a woman with land ownership can use the land to rent, to sell and to carry out different agricultural practices and business practices. This gives a certain advantage and empowerment rather than entering into the labor force. In addition, the decision making opportunity is availed through land ownership than women in the labor force, because it brings more leadership than working in a labor force, which is often exploitative. It also avails a long term security which the working in labor force will not avail, as the ownership written down in a contract is much more durable.
Household property vs women’s property
As for the differences in household property and women’s property, household property is considered to be a familial property. This is owned by the people in the household, commonly the spouses. While women’s property is centered around the idea of individualism, meaning that the property is clearly classified as a woman’s, and the rights only belong to that woman. It, however, may often overlap with each other, considering how a communal property system exists.
In certain cases, such as in South Asia, it is often seen that a woman with ownership of the property is not given the right to own and use it. Funnily enough, there is a common scenario that in a South Asian Muslim household where a father, when distributing property among children, distributes the property to the sons of the family according to the Islamic law, and for the daughters, who very clearly have property rights from their father and husband, are asked by their father to give up the property for their dear brothers, and in exchange, their father will pray for their well being. It is indeed a spiritual abuse of property rights as nowhere is it said in Islamic law that one is allowed to do this. (Ellis et al., 2022)
Ownership may be written down as the woman’s, but the legal rights are often not implemented, creating a conflict in the term “women’s property” that often is considered household property.
Land ownership in South Asia
The uprising and feminism movements stem from a more Western system. No doubt, there are stark differences in culture, religion, and social system between Western and Eastern systems. (Funk, 2018) We are often orientalists when it comes to analyzing gender relations, often missing out how different women empowerment would look in South Asia. Land ownership is more of an importance in determining the empowerment of South Asian women, as by religion, caste, the dynamics in a household etc. are differently implemented and are often abused to deprive women from their rights, which is a different look of gender oppression than it is in the West. (Agarwal, 1994)
Gender-based violence is often a topic of issue in South Asia, which is also used to take over property rights. Dowry and child marriage practice can also contribute to the gender inequality. The grooming of an underage individual while psychologically and emotionally manipulating them to give up property is witnessed in rural areas. The law that abolishes child marriage is barely implemented. The implementation of land ownership looks a lot more empowering for South Asian women in particular, considering these factors.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the intersectionality of feminism is not only interesting, but a much needed awareness that the social systems need. Land ownership is not always empowering for women everywhere, however it in itself goes often unimplemented. Command over property is interestingly the driving force behind Bina Agarwal’s article, as it addresses and grieves over the reality of women empowerment beyond what is written in legal documents and rights that are only reduced to words.
Bibliography:
Agarwal, Bina. (1994). Gender and command over property: A critical gap in economic analysis and policy in South Asia. World Development, 22:1455-1478 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0305750X94900310
Ellis, H. M., Hook, J. N., Zuniga, S., Ford, K. M., Davis, D. E., & Van Tongeren, D. R. (2022, December). Religious/spiritual abuse and trauma: A systematic review of the empirical literature. Spirituality in Clinical Practice, 9(4):213-231https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2022-92433-001.html
Funk, Nanette. (2018). Feminism East and West. Gender politics and post-Communism, 318-330
About the author:
With an intense passion for gender politics, Zaheera Khandker is pursuing a degree in Global Studies and Governance. She teaches, reads, writes, draws and analyzes for a living. She is currently working on my Bachelor's thesis in the related field.
