Doing gender

 Doing gender

"Doing gender" is relatively new word for old concept of gendering or gender typing which Indian  authors once used. However our sociological study on gender is still entrenched in antecedent, hermetic and deceptive traps of caste and religion. "Doing Gender" is action oriented concept establishing authority and use of power. It does question the very nature of how all systems like state,religion,literature,knowledge; institutions like family,kinship, marriage; and How individual participate in "Doing Gender". It includes how institutions are planned, buildings are planned, power structures are planned in order to keep women out of authority and power. 
Best example of this is: 

Example 1: Lack of toilets in the building plan, in school and workplace, which in long term reduces women work force. 
Example 2: Using husband name as surname or using Mrs in place of her own name.  even today in Indian military , wife of officers are addressed as Mrs Edward(If Guy is Edward) etc. 
Another example of doing gender is separate sex based toilets and their planning. 

uniforms in school is another curious example . Its funny why not to allow girls to wear shirt and trousers instead of shirt and skirt. 

There is another curious historical example. Its related to jeans. 

1950s and 1960s jeans were called mens' dress but with time that notion changed due to change in design of clothing. Result was 70s saw jeans pant for women. During 50s and 60s there was a ridiculous argument that jeans is mens' wear not women; this kind of argument still goes on in India (we are engulfed in mythological thought of sari being women ware). 

Another example that goes unnoticed is weapons in military. These weapons are made  from heavier material not because there is  no light material and technology but designer never felt that women are also the customer and would be the part of fighting force. Never there has been much research to have weapons made up of lighter materials. Or never there has been research design aspects that suits women in combat.

Indian sociologist are less likely to using  term doing gender. As this concept gets to core by  a questioning power and design structure of existing sysyem, I get feeling that it attacks basic structure of hyped family and kinship values of tribal continuum society like that of modern India. Sociologist like M N Srinivas has in my view glorified the fossilised Indian society, though criticising very little. Srinivas doesn't having leaning towards this kind of revolutionary concept.

Srinivas's theory has invariably helped in what is called "Structuration" (by Antony Gibbens) i.e reimposing what we never wanted women to suffer.  Structural ion is system and agency theory (agency being we). Statments like "Boys are Boys" are best example of structuration. "Right to touch women","right to pass eve comment","right to have sex with wife" etc are some of the typical examples of structuration. Structuration systematise and legitimise the process that re-enforces ideological belief. This structuration is at both micro and macro level. Some of abyssal 

Structuration example are as follows : "Raksh bandan","Duty to protect women(as she is weaker sex)","sati system", "arrange marriage which also include marriage related laws". Latest concepts like "concept of love jihad","Nymphomania" are some of best example of structuration . Nymphomania  with respect to women is considered to be clinical problem as if she doesn't have right to enjoy sex). Structration is time and again reinforced by hollywood and bollywood films . 

Lady With Lamp

Sleeping Beauty

Structuration also include concept Idealisation of sexes. Structuration brings whole question of sexes into  either "0 or 1" question ie either explicitly men or women character. It would never bring sexual choice as a continuous distribution of variations. This idealization is best protested by Indian serials, best example being is "Kusum " character in one of the hindi serial . Another example is Ravi varmas painting using "Lady with Lamp" painting to idealise women rather than using " Sleeping Beauty" even though both painting are from same person (Ravivarma has drawn some of the most artictic nudism of time. No one knows it as an art, even a year back i didn't,  until i came across Gibbens theory).

(Given  2 paintings are of Ravi Varma)

Below are some of the argument put to me in recent time so here is the argument and counter argument of the same. 

Argument : India is still not tolerant and matured enough to accept such kind of ideas, in this conservative society. It is also necessary to know, how women of this country, expect them to be treated? or want to live? or want to dress?

Concept of "Right to Question"

Yes that argument may be to an extent a valid one . I have seen many others using this as base to oppose the idea in itself. I want idea to start; engagement is important, conversation is important. It might offend some people but this must not stop the discussion all together. Even government has used this argument. Countries like Australia, England , USA, Canada did use this bogey not to tell ethnic minorities, Hispanic people  and conservative majority to mend their rules with the idea that it would hurt the sentiment of people. Recently there were cases of honour killing in UK and Canada. A country with such a liberal view like Britian must not have registered such cases.  Even in France, Britain and Canada sikh and muslim councils dont allow women in discussion; dowry is common among south asians in UK,Canada,US. So if liberalism was agenda then this Honor killing would not have happened. Government of liberal countries must tell the conservative minority to get integrated with liberal culture. These type of discussion is not to bring radical change but to engage, question, converse about unwarranted, detrimental, irrational and institutionalised social behaviours. Women exclusion revolves around power and authority. Power to control resource. All societies in the world according to various (almost all) anthropologist is patriarchal and patrilineal. Even European society followed this, but thing changed , irrationality changed. Reference of "Madame" went, culture of calling with Mrs went Ms came. It take time, but we must never stop questioning. 


If Nehru had bowed down to Karpatri Maharaj massive rallies after independence then Hindu code bill could have been a dream. Even people like Rajendra prasad, Kripalani, shyam prasad mukerji,Ramnarayan opposed these bill which world now considered as Primary gender revolution by law. Value of irrationality towards gender is embedded in the most society whether its south asian, muslims ,sikh,  hindus , all should be removed.

We must mark that conservative voice historically till today enjoyed authority and power. Hence they will be much vocal. If modernist doesnt raise voice it will not effect those who are moving on but it will effect who are left behind under conservative forces. World will not stop whether you come along with it or not. We never asked women in India to wear bikinis and tight jeans but they did, right! that beauty of Individuality (not to get confused with individualism). Certain section invariably will move forward, even though society approve it or not. Struggle is about doing whats right, whats right to my consciousness, if it against right consciousness then it should be questioned. struggle is about this; "the right to question". To develop this, environment has to be provided. Patriarchal society's basic tenet opposes this very idea of "Right to question". We have been raised not to question; In sociology Indian sociologist emphasise on "relationships of avoidance" ie daughter in law must avoid questioning both in laws and sister in law. But son in law has right to question. This is not only prb of hinduism; such quote and quote examples are present in islam,Christianity etc. When we develop environment and idea and attitude of "Right to Question" then we could ask them your questions

 "how women of this country, expect them to be treated? or want to live? or dress?". 

According to my knowledge no organisation has conducted country survey on what women want ? what they want to wear? whether they want to love stranger or of other religion? whats their though about pre-marital sex? what about have partner? what about dates and sex? what about property?their design or army? their design of sports? their design mm mi jjy society? their views on property and success? what about living single? etc . These questions are the best way to start a survey organisation dedicated to "Women empowerment and Women wants" .