"The Third-World Woman"

In the discussion of "Third-World Feminism," a host of new problems arise concerning Western literature and our understanding of the notion of women in these countries that we have only heard about, read little about, or seen false depictions in movies and on TV. Both the processes of colonization and decolonization have led Westerners to take on a superior role to countries that we consider "third-world." The concept of Woman versus women is a very important one. While analyzing the role of females in these different cultures, we first have to contextualize in a sociological, political, and economic way the roles of the Woman. After understanding the history of these countries and their different cultures, we can then assess the state of women in the country. I think this is a very important distinction, and a trap that we have fallen into in the discussion of feminism in the US - overgeneralization without understanding cultural and historical contexts. The concept of "the Other" is something many of us have seen, for example, in history classes when studying the US soldiers' perception of people in Vietnam. Never have I read any literature concerning the role of "the Other" in the dialogue about feminism. Ethnocentric universalism can lead us down a very dangerous path, but so can cultural relativism. I think cultural relativism is a better way to initially approach the study of the role of women in "third-world" countries. We must contextualize their roles and then link their roles back to the interrelatedness of human beings, and human and women's rights.

Mohanty talks of "women as an already constituted and coherent group with identical interests and desires, regardless of class, ethnic or racial location, implies a notion of gender or sexual difference or even patriarchy which can be applied universally and cross culturally" (64). As we have been recently discussing in class, this is a very "second wave" approach to feminism. Today, we have in fact made strides to begin to contextualize feminism in a number of ways. The article shows that it may be dated (1988). The concept of the "average third-world woman" implies all of the stereotypes we hold as Westerners as well as a type of superiority that our lifestyle and the meaning of a woman in our culture is somehow superior. All over the world, women are seen as "victims of male violence," as "universal dependents," "victims of the colonial process," and stuck within familial systems and religious ideologies. Women do not deserve to have this "subject status" (67) that lowers them to a level of being placed in a group rather than seen as a group of unique individuals from many different cultures who practice many different customs - many of which are different from the West. Mohanty correctly points out that the ORIGINS of oppression need to be put into question in order to fully understand the situation of women in different parts of the world. She is a bit rash and overly critical of Western texts that have made the effort of writing about women in the third-world, although she has some valid points, I think she discounts that magnitude of the fact that a dialogue has been opened, and from here we can expand on this, modernize this, and use it to begin understand the historical and cultural contexts of the history of women in different parts of the world.

Women of the west are in no way superior to the "third world women." We are blessed to live in such a prosperous nation, and therefore have access to many things that women in the third-world do not - the right to vote, education, etc. However, in many cultures, this does not play a relevant role. We must understand this and understand that some people do not understand the Western way of living.

Development cannot be seen as the "all-time equalizer" (71) but rather a process of educating women about their options - therefore, giving them the chance to have rights. We cannot reinforce divisions in order to make progress, rather we must understand specific cultural discrimination against women, which in turn, can begin to open up dialogue for solutions. Mohanty brings up the feminization of poverty and the impact of this in the third world. I think this rings even more true in the "third-world" than in the West because we have a generalization of these women as all impoverished and oppressed with no rights and no hope to ever gain rights. I agree with Mohanty that we must move from our binary judgments regarding females and patriarchy, always as the victim. By placing these women within different contexts of their culture, we can begin to see their roles and expose any injustices they may be facing.

Bunch's article sheds a different light on the situation of women in different parts of the world. I think she brings up a very important point that the rest of the world does not see 9/11 as a pivotal moment as people in the US do. I think her article is a bit unpatriotic and extreme when talking about different administrations, because we cannot all place ourselves in the shoes of the President of the United States, especially when a catastrophe like 9/11 occurs. She does raise some valid points. Human security versus national security is a very good distinction that we do not often make in the US. Being abroad last semester in Paris, I had the opportunity to take a human rights course. The professor focused solely on the UN and its policies and evolution since the 1950s. He placed a much greater role on human rights and UN policies like CEDAW than I have ever seen taught in a class in the US. Here, we are much more focused on the policies of the US government, which seem to center around US security. The US is seen as a role model in the world, and the national security model of defense, rather than an open model of dialogue and coexistence has subsequently taken hold in other regions of the world.

I think asking the question, Why have feminist not had a greater impact on global issues? is extremely important. Examining the answers to this question could lead down many avenues that begin to explain the new role that feminists need to take on to have an international voice concerning human rights. US feminists and women of the rest of the world need to support EACH OTHER, and by doing so, begin to understand each other, because there is power in numbers when working under a system mainly dominated by patriarchial values. However, this is more and more dissipating, and women have a role to fill on the international scene.