Gender-Based Entitlements: The Intra-Household Arena
Kynch's (1998) analysis of gender and malnutrition in the
north-west Indian village of Palanpur raises questions about how food
entitlements (or command over food) are determined, and how men's and women's
ascribed roles as producers, provisioners and reproducers affect their claims on
each other, and in turn explain particular patterns of nutritional outcomes. Her
contribution draws on the existing scholarship on gender-based entitlements
(Sen, 1984; 1987; Agarwal, 1992), qualifying it in two significant ways.
First, as was noted earlier, the "gender reversal" in the
nutritional status of adults versus their children that is thrown up by her
evidence highlights the importance of having a dynamic perspective over the life
cycles of men and women, and the well-being risks that men occasionally face.
Second, in order to explain these contradictory outcomes, a tripartite division
of food-related activities is introduced (producing, provisioning, reproducing)
as opposed to the usual bipartite one (producing, reproducing). This helps
clarify the complex motivations underpinning both men's and women's
interests in provisioning and reproducing - altruistic concern for others, a
concern for social status, as well as economic calculation and pursuit of self
interest. It thereby avoids the simple dichotomy between female altruism versus
male pursuit of self-interest which has been characteristic of some economistic
models of the household. It also provides a better understanding of the nature
of intra-household claims by drawing attention to, first, the interdependence
and complementarities between the three spheres of activity (going beyond the
simple "trade-offs"), and second, the ways in which moral claims and obligations
can be structured by exclusive gendering of each sphere, and the detrimental
impacts of this constraint on household food entitlement.
In terms of provisioning, women in this Indian community are
ideologically, economically and socially excluded from the public sphere, and
therefore from both some of the energy expenditure that a provisioner bears, and
the reciprocity that provisioning offers. The argument of the paper is that
while adult women may have been able to maintain an energy balance more easily
than adult men who are burdened with energy-demanding agricultural tasks, the
most devastating part of the rules of entitlement in this community is the
effect on little girls who suffer severe setbacks in their growth process.
Future provisioners (boys) are protected more than future reproducers (girls),
even though current provisioners (men) may suffer more thinness than the current
reproducers (women), probably because of the effort involved in meeting
provisioning obligations. This helps to guarantee the continuity of the
household, the patriline and its assets.
This argument has resonances with Sudha and Rajan's (1998)
reading of the demographic trends in India. They argue that in the context of a
patrilineal kinship system where marriages are arranged on principles of dowry
and exogamy15 such as the one characterizing the northern plains of
India, family strategies for amassing wealth, and transferring wealth
intergenerationally, work through mobilizing kinship networks and manipulating
the marriage of their sons and daughters in ways that pose survival threats for
their female offspring. Although they provide evidence of women's collective
activism and resistance against these practices, the conclusion that can be
drawn from their analysis of sex ratios, and also from Kynch's (1998)
village-level evidence on daughter disfavour, is that despite such forms of
collective action the constraints on women at the household level remain very
severe and their status is tied up with conforming to the social norms that deny
them (and their daughters) agency.
15 Dowry is a transfer, in the form of
money, gold and consumer goods, from the bride's parents to those of the groom.
Exogamy is the practice whereby women are expected to marry into a family that
lives in a different village from their natal one.
Gender-based entitlements in this context may fall in the realm
of what Bourdieu refers to as "doxa" - that which is accepted as natural
and self evident beyond discourse or argumentation - rather than being actively
contested and negotiated (Agarwal, 1992). As Kabeer (1998) explains, in these
circumstances it is not just difficult, but also dangerous, for individual
women, isolated within their families, often cut off from the communities in
which they grew up, to challenge the social norms that define them as lesser
beings. Collective action in the public arena makes the project of social
transformation an act of solidarity rather than individual self interest and is
therefore likely to be effective in the long run - but the interlinkages between
collective action and transformations at the individual level are complex,
diffuse and unpredictable.
For Kynch (1998) too, gaining recognition as either a
provisioner or reproducer can be part of individual strategy in building up
bargaining strength within the household (what Kabeer refers to as "status"),
and part of the argument of her paper is that over-specialization in reproducing
can be a very risky strategy. Jackson and Palmer-Jones (1998) probe further the
question of why gender divisions of labour take the particular forms they do,
focusing on the effort-intensity of work as an important, but generally
neglected, dimension. They argue that the energy-intensity of work has
significant implications for gendered well-being, is central to women's and
men's subjectivities, and therefore relevant to the moral claims they make on
each other through processes of intra-household negotiation and bargaining.
Drawing on a number of different disciplines and sub-disciplines
that address the issue of work intensity, they show that heavy work is likely to
be objectively more burdensome to many women than men, in the sense that
relatively small size and a female constitution can mean that the burden of
effort intensive work is greater for women (i.e., it feels more burdensome), and
an aversion to some forms of such labour may be expected. It may very well be
that a woman, faced with such onerous and well-being threatening work, employs
economic strategies (hire labour for the task), relational strategies (persuade
a daughter-in-law, husband or child to do it) or technological strategies to
reduce drudgery. Relationships are resources which can be deployed in this way,
and ideologies of work such as discourses about strength and masculinity, or
about endurance and femininity, may have real value to women in processes of
negotiation and bargaining. The interesting observation made by Kynch (1998),
that women in Palanpur were concerned that a metalled road could result in their
being "pressured into petty trading" (p. 15, our emphasis) may indeed be
indicative of what Jackson and Palmer-Jones (1998) refer to as women's aversion
to work, and their strategies for building up "body capital". But even though
women in this community may have been successful in reducing drudgery and
thereby maintaining energy balance more easily than men, this seems to have been
achieved at the cost of childhood under-nutrition, which may have harmed women
in other ways.
For Kynch (1998), as well as for Jackson and Palmer-Jones
(1998), the household is a central terrain where the gendered rules of
entitlement (to work, rest and food) are negotiated and enforced, even though
the implications of their analysis extend to other institutional arenas (labour
markets in particular). One of the important contributions of Gore's (1993)
critique of entitlement analysis was to highlight the fact that these moral
rules are by no means limited to domestic institutions (family, household), as
Sen's original formulation of "extended entitlements" would have it. "Sen's
entitlement analysis", he argues, "marginalises non-governmental sites of
rule-making and rule-enforcing which affect entitlement by either downplaying
the role of socially enforced moral rules, or compartmentalising them to the
domestic sphere. As a consequence, the interplay between the working of socially
enforced moral rules and the working of state-enforced legal rules in
determining a person's entitlement is ignored" (Gore, 1993:444). This is an
important and useful observation not only for poverty analyses, but also for the
gender analysis of poverty alleviation policies. It is arguable that some of the
more interesting questions that a gender analysis of poverty would raise hinge
precisely on this interplay between state-enforced legal rules and socially
enforced moral rules, which extend beyond the domestic
arena.