“What social and economic reasons caused this major shift (voting rights to women)?” was the question that you left us with at the end of the last class. “Has there been a shift at all?” is the question that I have always asked and have repeatedly failed in getting a definite response to due to many reasons: different cultural and social contexts have different understanding of rights of women which includes the right to vote; there are various interpretations of what we consider a “shift,” and a “shift” in opinion has a different value than a “shift” in practice, where the former can either be symbolic (an end to itself) and therefore serve no practical purpose or have practical value attached to it (means to a greater end). This reading response is an enquiry into three possible answers to this question: Yes, No, it is still an ongoing process, in the context of two countries, the US and Afghanistan.
The 19th Amendment granted the right to vote to American women on August 26, 1920. Contrary to Carole Pateman’s argument, World War I played as a catalyst towards women enfranchisement exactly in the same way that Cold War played a significant role in pushing for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 as argued by Mary Dudziak in “Cold War and Global Racial Policies.” It must be noted though that the emphasis on the role of War as a transnational phenomenon does not discount for the national women movement in case of voting rights for women or the national civil rights movement in case of civil rights act. However, both wars led to shifts in policy only in the beginning.
Women were given the right to vote under King Mohammad Zahir Shah somewhere by mid 1960s; some believe that he deserves to be called the “Father of the Nation” at least for this reason.
When it comes to women empowerment, pro-women legislation is one key element indeed. However, for it to render effective results, legislative reform must not be an end to itself, but a mean to an end, where the end is women empowerment towards equal rights for all irrespective of sex. This is what can be called the “shift” in real sense. But has it happened? No. Is it on its way? Yes and I hope so.
According to a women’s rights organization named after the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) the US constitution does not explicitly guarantee equal rights for women still. Though Congress passed ERA in 1972, the arbitrary time limit expired in 1982 and ERA could not secure 38 votes as a requirement for ratification by all states; it fell short of 3 votes only. The right to vote is the first and the only right guaranteed equally for men and women in the US Constitution which demonstrates that women suffrage became an end to itself and not means to an end that we could call a “shift.”
I was amazed to know that in a country like the US, women continue to be treated as secondary despite the apparent liberty that they enjoy. Women continue to sacrifice their educational and professional career for the sake of family; I met 39 women in Hinsdale, Illinois of which 34 had given up their jobs to support their husbands’ professional career and help raise children; I am yet to meet a man on this planet who has done so in support of his wife’s professional career. Women are still considered unfit for PhD programs in math and are subjected to harassment as was the case of Gioia De Cari at MIT. Women in the US make 51% of the population but make less than 1.2% of Fortune 500 CEOs (www.catalystwomen.org), still receive lower compensation as compared to men (www.census.gov ) and continue to be positioned on female occupations such as administration. Women are still victims of violence: a woman was beaten by her husband or partner every 15 seconds in 1991, this figure went to every 9 seconds in 2001(www.aidv-usa.com/Statistics.htm). According to Family Violence Prevention Fund an average of 3 women per day is murdered by their husbands or boyfriends in the US and 1/6 American women have been raped -or attempted at- in her life (www.rainn.org). This list is lengthy and the existence of such facts demonstrate the secondary status that women have though one might argue that these are extremes and therefore do not represent averages.
The case of women in Afghanistan is a lot more obvious. Women have the right to vote, but they cannot vote and do not vote for security, political, traditional/cultural/ social and religious reasons. Men vote on their behalf, which is one of factors leading to electoral violations and facilitating fraud. They have reserved seats at national and sub national elected councils with a condition: if women candidates fail in filling those seats, they will be made open to male candidates, a condition that opens doors for political manipulation. In the name of women empowerment, political parties establish women branches where women members of party are marginalized by having them focus on women related issues only, thus depriving them of any role in mainstream politics. The democratic parliament of a democratic government passes a bill, the Shia Personal Status Law applicable on Shia women which among other discriminatory articles, legalizes marital rape in the name of obedience to husband’s sexual desires as ordered by God. (The same parliament also passed the Elimination of Violence against Women and the National Action Plan for Women of Afghanistan. The problem is that pro-women laws remain on paper while anti-women laws are acted upon immediately.) I won’t begin with facts and figures on violence against women because that list is too long to be even outlined here.
To come back to the main question, there seems to be no shift in the practical life of women, some shift in general opinion about women and their role and major shifts in on-paper approvals and confirmations of women’s rights. One feels content to see that we have taken the initiative towards the greatest end, but what we must not forget is that “I” also stands for implementation.