Women and Alternative Futures
by Ivana Milojević
Written for Berkshire Encyclopedia of the 21st
Century, forthcoming (2008)
Dividing humans into groups based on their
sex/gender is one of the oldest practices in organizing human affairs.
While one’s sex/gender is most commonly taken for granted within
societies or social groups, the meanings attached to this term
historically and spatially vary significantly, and current social and
scientific developments and futures trends are further destabilizing
the common approach to dividing humans into men and women. That is, a
human individual becomes a part of social group called ‘women’
based on either certain biological characteristics (of being a woman)
or social practices (of ‘doing’ femaleness). Various contemporary
social movements are challenging both.
Developments in medical science have enabled
gender to be more fluid than ever before. One’s ‘lived’ gender
is today much less grounded in what nature ‘intended’ and biology
thus becomes less of a destiny. Indeed gender can be invented. While
gender ambivalence did exist in earlier human societies – as seen
through the construction of mythological figures that are
transgressive of gender-bi-polarities and are gender fluid – it is
now possible to change one’s sexual physiology later in life. The
sexual physiology with which we are born is modifiable – one can
choose to become a woman or to stop being a woman. Thus, the natural
characteristic of the sexes can be transformed and changed, women
becoming men and vice versa. Other criteria, related not to being a
woman but to practicing femaleness or doing gender, have become even
more unstable. For example, the appearance criterion is challenged by
transdressers and transvestites. The sexual orientation criterion has
been problematic for much longer, given that homosexuality among
humans has (probably) always been present. The social category of
women (or men) is also problematic since any universalist statement
about women/men can be questioned from the position of epistemological
(and) group minorities and their differing perspectives. That is, in
organizing their societies, humans have introduced additional ways of
dividing themselves: women/men are further divided based on their age,
race, ethnicity, religion, physical and mental ability and class.
Hence, whichever individual and social group is prescribing ‘women’s’
or ‘men’s’ essence is inevitably going to do so under the
influence of these other social signifiers.
Feminists have insisted that it is crucial to
differentiate between the social category of women and the social
mythology attached to it. The former refers to a class of human beings
identifiable through their sexual physiology, the latter to a
mythology that exists in each society and is most significantly
constructed by more powerful individuals/social groups. This mythology
is instrumental in making sense of our lives and societies and in
orienting our thinking and behaviour. Feminists have also insisted
that due to the patriarchal character of most contemporary societies,
women are currently disadvantaged both as a social category and as
mythological persons. The following section of this entry focuses on
some crucial global trends that are impacting upon a social group and
a class of human beings identified as women.
Trends for women
Given the unevenness of global statistical
analysis and reporting in general and in relation to gender issues in
particular, the analysis of world-wide trends for women can not be but
indicative. As well, the diversity of societies and various social
group experiences within them ensures that there are a multitude of
options (rather than a clear and universal global trend) for today’s
and for future women. For example, economic globalization has opened
up many new possibilities for younger, professional women to enhance
their living experience. At the same time, this same trend is related
to more hardship for poorer, less educated and older women. Likewise,
scientific developments that benefit human lives are still not fairly
shared amongst people/women globally, and neither are the effects of
environmental degradation. For example, while women in the more
economically developed world are on average having fewer children and
are experiencing fewer risks associated with childbirth and pregnancy,
women in the economically poorer areas of the world have qualitatively
different experiences during their reproductive years. UNICEF
estimates that a woman’s lifetime risk of dying from maternal causes
is 1 in 16 in Africa, while this risk in Europe is 1 in 1,400.
Negative consequences of climate change are also likely to impact on
women in certain geographical areas (i.e. areas already poorer and
prone to drought and/or flooding) much more than on women living
elsewhere. To complicate matters further, women who actively
participate in consumer societies and are gaining the benefits of
modern life’s luxuries are themselves contributing to the
deterioration of living conditions of women and girls living in other
societies.
This diversity of women’s experiences globally
may be an additional factor influencing the general absence of global
future projections for women. At the same time, there is data that
confirms the continuation of general global disadvantage of women’s
sex/gender, relative to men. For example, the Encyclopedia of the
Future (1996) forecasts an increase in the global female
population to 4.2 billion in 2025 and to 5.790 billion in 2200. Of
these women, 1.8 billion and 100 million respectively are still to be
denied ‘full rights of equality’. This is, however, an improvement
from data for 1995. Then, of 2.859 billion women, 2.500 billion are
estimated to have been denied those rights. Data in other areas also
forecasts progress, although women are to continue outnumbering men as
poor, illiterate, refugees and for illness in both 2025 and 2200:
women as a percentage of all poor (in 1995: 70%; 2025: 60%; 2200:
55%); women as a percentage of all illiterates (in 1995: 66%, 2025:
55%, 2200: 52%); women as a percentage of all refugees (in 1995: 80%,
2025: 70%, 2200: 60%) and women as a percentage of all ill/sick (in
1995: 75%, 2025: 57%, 2200: 52%). On the other hand, world income and
property ownership data position men as continuing to earn/own more:
the percentage of world income received by women is predicted to
remain low (1995: 10%, 2025: 20%, 2200: 40%), as is the percentage of
world property owned by women (1995: 3%, 2025: 10%, 2200: 20%).
Another of the (rare) documents that outlines
main global trends for women is a publication by the UN, The World’s
Women: Trends and Statistics 2000. This report outlines several
main global trends for women. First, it records a closing but
persistent gender gap in education. For example, UNESCO projects show
no decline in the gap in literacy between women and men over the age
15 by the year 2025 and a continuation of current levels (that
two-thirds of the illiterates in the world are women). Secondly, the
report notes changes in reproduction and family structure. Some of the
trends in this area include a decline in early marriage and early
childbearing in most regions of the world (with the exceptions of
Southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa), a decline in the desired number
of children expressed by women in the developing world and an increase
in the use of contraceptives with a subsequent decline in fertility
rates in almost all countries, and a significant increase in births
outside marriage and single-parent families in developed regions.
Thirdly, the UN sees no significant increase in women’s
participation in the top levels of government and business, globally
(with the exception of 1990s Sweden wherein 55% of government
ministers were women). Fourthly, changes in work patterns are noted.
For example, women’s economic activity rates have increased in most
regions of the world, with the exception of sub-Saharan Africa,
Eastern Europe and Central Asia and Oceania. But even though the
gender gap in rates of formal economic activity is diminishing, women
still engage in informal, unpaid work of ‘sweet equity’ or the ‘love
economy’ much more than men. In addition to this gendered division
of labour, the reality of women receiving less pay than men is also
continuing. On the other hand, one promising trend in the opposite
direction is the overall increase in women-owned businesses and women’s
self-employment, especially in OECD countries. Finally, the report
discusses health issues and concerns. In particular, it expresses
concern over the toll of HIV/AIDS on the world’s women. Not only are
women being impacted more than men by the work of caring for ill
family members, but they themselves now make up almost half of the
32.4 million adults living with the disease and half of the 12.7
million adults who have died from it. In 1999 women represented 52% of
those that died from AIDS worldwide. The situation for women is the
worst in sub-Saharan Africa where a woman’s risk of becoming
infected is considered to be two to four times higher than that for a
man.
Other significant trends negatively impacting
women globally are the decline of the welfare state; an aging
population in the industrially developed world; casualisation of the
workforce; selective abortion of female fetuses; continuation of
global wars and violence; the increased influence of fundamentalist,
right-wing thinking; and the continuous representation of women in
global media through patriarchal lenses. Indeed, global patriarchy
supports the present manifestation and extension of global capitalism.
Thus it is women who are expected to provide services that buffer the
negative aspects of economic restructuring, mostly in so-called
transitional economies but also elsewhere. The push to part time and
casualisation of the workforce deprives women more than men of
benefits such as superannuation and sick leave entitlements.
Patriarchal, right-wing and fundamentalist thinking is especially
detrimental to women: from impacting on their self-esteem and view of
self worth (i.e. objectification of women in contemporary global
culture), to decreasing opportunities in the public sphere and even
reducing the chances of survival for many women (i.e. women and girls
as casualties of ‘honour’ killings, acid burning, selective
abortion, domestic violence, as well as of terrorist attacks and
wars).
Fortunately, despite this gloomy picture, some
parallel trends have more positive impacts for women globally, both at
the moment and in terms of helping create more gender balanced
societies in the future. The emergence of a unified global network
society is also facilitating more participatory, democratic and
network based styles of communicating. Women are capitalizing on this
via, for example, using UN human rights instruments to address women’s
economic inequality in different parts of the world, and also by using
new technologies (the Internet) for electronic inclusion, campaigning,
commerce and consultation. Rather than being seen as only the passive
recipients of global changes, women are now more commonly perceived as
active participants in the creation of our common futures. Women’s
voices and demands for inclusion are now at least heard at the global
level. And so are women’s demands for global interconnections that
are more inclusive and more fully human(e). Due to demographic trends
of migration many societies have by now become much more
multicultural; this increase in cultural diversity will most likely
increase the inclusive principle of respecting and valuing all our
differences. Expansive (rather than token or pragmatic)
multiculturalism is likely to positively impact on women, as is the
continuing influence of ecological and peace movements. The move
towards the creation of a more sustainable future cannot afford the
continuation of discrimination against either one gender or indeed any
other social group. This awareness of the world as being
interconnected and interdependent will result in the realization that
sustainable betterment of one group cannot occur at the expense of any
other.
Scenarios for women
Given the multiple and opposing effects of the
above mention trends it is useful to briefly outline some key
scenarios for women’s as well as global futures (that have gender
issues at their core). These archetypal scenarios include: (1)
continuation of status quo/global patriarchy/hyper expansionist (HE)
futures; and (2) emergence of global equity based gender balanced
futures. The outlining of these two scenarios is not limited to
so-called ‘women’s issues’, but investigates the broader social
and planetary impacts of each. By developing such scenarios, it is
possible to take into account factors impacting on women as a social
category as well as those aspects which are impacting on the social
mythology attached to this notion.
1. Global Patriarchy
In the 1970s Mary Daly asserted that
patriarchy appeared to be everywhere: even outer space and the future
seemed to have been colonised. The first decade of the twenty-first
century is already marked (mostly in the west but also communicated
through global media) by ‘post-feminism’, ‘raunch’ culture,
the ‘global war against terror’, ‘new surveillance methods and
technologies’ – arguably all manifestations of a patriarchal
project for our present and our (global) future. The continuation of
this scenario is facilitated by those trends that are negatively
impacting on women (discussed in the previous section). The Global
Patriarchy scenario puts women’s liberation on permanent hold: there
will always be more important causes to work toward. Thus global
patriarchy heavily invests in, among other causes, contemporary
Fortress OECD and Vengeance Forever scenarios of war and direct and
structural violence. Both of these scenarios depend on a strong
military, on domination, force and strong masculinist engagement. The
Fortress scenario cannot succeed if any signs of 'weakness' or empathy
towards the other appear or develop. It depends on othering – us and
them – the dominant feature of patriarchal discourse, where women
are usually the first ones upon which the process of othering is
practiced. The Fortress scenario will in general increase insecurity,
both among those that are ‘in’ and those that are ‘out’.
Anxieties will spill over and result in an increase in violence
against women, children, and nature. In the Vengeance Forever
scenario, women will be seen as valuable commodities; after all they
are the ones that give birth to the nation.
In general then, Global Patriarchy
works towards creating a future that is (even) more competitive,
challenging, and basically insecure. In this future world there is
little space for alternative ways of living and doing things, given
the victory of economic globalization. Other important features of the
Global Patriarchy scenario include: (1) society is profit and growth
oriented, hierarchical; (2) the world is populated by the ‘global
consumer’; (3) the free flow of capital is not accompanied by the
free flow of people; (4) poverty remains higher among women, racial
and ethnic minorities, and other marginalized social groups; (5) the
nuclear family is still seen as the most desirable family form because
it is best at fostering individualism; (6) among the elites and the
wealthy, population is controlled in terms of ‘quality’ (search
for perfection), while among poor populations it is controlled in
terms of ‘quantity’; and (7) dominant values in the global society
are the admiration of individualism, competition, and success, and
breaking the boundaries of the physical world in terms of appearance,
youth, abundance and excess.
Of course, the Global Patriarchy
scenario does yield some benefits. These include the positive impacts
of new technologies such as flexibility of work, an increase in
communication across the world, increased human longevity, the wiping
out of certain genetically inherited diseases and higher security in
some areas (though provided by global monitoring and surveillance).
Still, these positive occurrences will likely be reserved for the most
dominant social groups. But in the world in which the majority of
human inhabitants are ‘deprived of basics and promise, there will
not be any peace and security’ [Udayakumar, 1995]; thus, the Global
Patriarchy scenario cannot but result in a major collapse. Despite all
its efforts to the contrary, this scenario is not life- and social
order- sustaining in the long term.
2. Gender Balanced Equitable Futures
This scenario requires an end to
polarization not only between female and male but also on any other
grounds – race, class, age, ability, worldview, religion. Various
social movements such as ecological, spiritual, peace and women’s/feminist
ones work together to bring out ‘feminine’ principles of
embracing, empathy, connectivity, compassion and caring. The Gender
Balanced Equitable Futuresscenario requires and is based on balancing
our need for expansion (inventing/creating more with less) with our
need for conservation (sustainability and security). National and
religious identities are also balanced with terrestrial identity. This
includes work on Global Ethics, an Earth Charter, global governance,
strengthening of local communities – not only a Gaia of
civilisations but also a Gaia of balanced and strong localities in an
interconnected and interrelated world. Any equity based futures
scenario has to be founded on principles of economic justice and
fairness; that is, a ‘win-win world’ of multiple economies rather
than global capitalism’s singular dominant. Economic development is,
in this scenario, seen as important but is defined in broader terms.
Indicators of economic progress are connected with long-term
indicators of continuation/ sustainability and horizontal indicators
of stress/quality of life. The Balanced Equitable Futures scenariois
also based on principles of gender justice and balance, reflecting
Elise Boulding’s image of a gentle, androgynous society or Riane
Eisler’s image of a partnership society/gylany. No sustainable
global society, information or otherwise, can exist without economic,
social and gender justice.
Masculinist means of conflict
resolution are in this future scenario replaced by peaceful conflict
resolution, mediation and non-violent communication. Patriarchal
religions that demand blood (sacrifices pleasing to gods: firstborn
sons, animals or infidels) are replaced by life-sustaining principles
that have always existed in various religious and spiritual traditions
of the world. These ‘holy peace cultures’ keep their own
methodological diversity and uniqueness while simultaneously engaging
and respecting other traditions. Vast resources are invested in
conflict prevention and resolution, as peace is seen as the
prerequisite for progress. In such ways humans are creating the common
ground for a new planetary cosmology that emphasizes the
interconnectedness of all living beings. The desired family may take
many forms but its basic principles are of democratic
engagement/participation, respect and non-violence. This society also
respects and encourages multiple gendered identities, and this gender
diversity creates more space for individual freedom and expression. In
the Gender Balanced Equitable Futuresscenario, gender multiplicity has
been recognized as having always existed and has replaced forced
uniformity (as in unisex androgyny) as well as female–male polarity
options. Parenting is seen as one of the most important functions of a
society. Education is also given priority because of the view that
without awareness of social and natural processes, interpersonal and
group relationships, as well as the psychological and physiological
processes within the self, humanity cannot prosper.
The main values in this scenario are
justice, equity, fairness, peace, inner and outer transformation,
human/global/planetary security, and the long-term view. Dialogue and
sustainability are the new norm but this new norm is not jeopardizing
scientific and technological progress. The main organizational
principle is a network, facilitated by the development of new
information and communication technologies.
The Equitable Futures scenario may also
potentially have some detrimental impacts on global human society. One
of its main weaknesses is its predominant focus on the distribution of
wealth, which can then jeopardize the creation of wealth that is to be
distributed. As well, inner development and transformation that focus
on emotional and spiritual aspects may negatively impact on social
efficiency and punctuality. The dominance of ethics based on
inclusivity and non-violence may also slow down economic, scientific
and technological growth and development. Still, while these and some
other potential negative effects need to be taken into account,
overall this scenario is much more beneficial for the world’s women.
It is also currently our best hope for long(er)-term survival as a
species and for the creation of a healthier planet.
In conclusion, today’s and future
women are facing many challenges, both old and new. In some areas of
the world and among certain social groups women’s overall position
in society has improved while in others their position and quality of
life has deteriorated overall. Future trends and developments will
continue to have an uneven effect on the world’s women. At the same
time, based on the continuation of the status quo/business as usual
scenario, the patriarchal system of organizing human affairs is likely
to remain with us for a while longer. But Global Patriarchy is not a
sustainable futures scenario. Fortunately, there is a more sustainable
and fairer alternative. This gender balanced alternative is currently
encouraged by various social, economic, demographic and ecological
trends as well as by changes in consciousness and by social movements
that focus on equity/justice/fairness. The world’s women
collectively represent a leading force for the coming of gender
balanced, equitable futures. This is because they intimately
understand that such futures are crucial for the long-term survival of
our species and benefit not only women but ultimately all other human
and non-human living beings.
Bibliography:
Boulding, E. (1983). Women's visions of the
future. In E. Masini (Ed.), Visions of Desirable Societies (pp.
9–25). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Daly, M. (1978). Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics
of Radical Feminism. Boston: Beacon Press.
Eisler, R. (1987). The Chalice and the Blade:
Our History, Our Futures. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Henderson, H. (1999). Beyond Globalization:
Shaping a Sustainable Global Economy. West Hartford, CT: Kumarian
Press.
Hurley, K. et al. (2007). Futures
studies, feminism and shaping feminine alternatives. Futures,
forthcoming.
Inayatullah, S. (2001). World
system: After the Terror. New Renaissance, http://www.ru.org/sept11-inayatullah.html
(Accessed October, 2007).
Kurian, G. T., & Molitor, G. T. T. (Eds.).
(1996). Encyclopedia of the Future. New York: Macmillan
Library References.
Levy, A. (2005). Female
Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture. New York:
Free Press.
Milojević, I. (2001). Alternative
futures of globalization: Globotech versus Ecarmony. Journal of
Futures Studies, 5(4): 65–78.
Robertson, J. (1983). The Sane
Alternative. : the author.
Udayakumar, S.P. (1995). The futures of the
poor. Futures 27(3): 339–353.
United Nations (UN) (2000). T
he
World's Women 2000: Trends and Statistics, York:
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division.
