Why So Much Sexual Violence Against Women In Globalized India?

• Authors: HARASANKAR ADHIKARI
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This paper attempts to discuss the causes of violence against women in India in relation to their body-revealing dress and conditional consent to sexual relations. Historically, women in Indian society have been victims of gender practices under the typical patriarchy. Culturally, women are treated as sex objects and their status is bounded within the periphery of feminine role-relations as housekeepers and pro-creators of generation. Women's education and participation in the workforce are not bringing with them the expected changes in gender stereotyped-ness. Even the work done on gender justice and women's human rights has failed to establish their status as anything more than sex objects. The rampant sexual violence against women is a reminder that the problem is deeply rooted in Indian society. In such a situation we may not be able to avoid considering the responsibility of women. Their body-revealing clothing and conditional consent to sexual relation are significant in provoking men into treating them as sex objects. So we should think about how to bring about a change in gender practices and this should start in each and every family. The family as a correctional institution should teach its offspring about gender equality and their behavior and attitude towards gender should regard the physical and physiological differences between the sexes as minor. This might perhaps be a step towards reducing violence against women.

Keywords

EN

body-revealing dress; gender practice; sexual relation; violence against women

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Gender Studies
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 201-207

Dates

published

2014-12-01

online

2015-03-25

Contributors

author

HARASANKAR ADHIKARI

• Monihar Co-operative Housing Society, Flat No.-7/2. 1050/2, Survey Park, Kolkata-700075, West Bengal, India.

References

• Adhikari, Harasankar.2013. “Book Review: Vagina: A New Biography”. Journal of International Women's Studies, 14(1): 354-355.
• Aubrey, Jennifer Stevens. 2006. “Exposure to Sexually Objectifying Media and Body Self-Perceptions among College Women: An Examination of the Selective Exposure Hypothesis and the Role of Moderating Variables”. Sex Roles, 55:158-172.
• Berger, John. 1972. Ways of Seeing. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
• Engeln-Maddox, Renee. 2006. “Buying a Beauty Standard or Dreaming of a New Life? Expectations Associated with Media Ideals.” Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30:258–266.[Crossref]
• Fletchen, George P. 1996. Basic Concepts of Legal Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Fredrickson, Barbara L. & Tomi-Ann Roberts, 1997. “Objectification Theory: Toward Understanding Women's Lived Experiences and Mental Health Risks.” Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21:173-206.[Crossref]
• Goel, Aruna.2004. Violence and Protective Measures for Women Development and Empowerment. New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications.
• Jolly, Susie; Cornwall, Andrea and Kate Hawkins. 2013. The Power of Pleasure: Sex, Pleasure and Empowerment. London: Zed Books.
• Kleinig, John. 2001. “Consent” in Lawrence Becker and Charlotte Becker (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Ethics. New York: Routledge.
• LeMoncheck, Linda. (1985). Dehumanizing Women: Treating Persons as Sex Objects. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld Publishers
• Muehlenkamp, J. J. & Saris-Baglama, R. N. 2002. “Self Objectification and its Consequences for College Women”. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26:371-379.[WoS][Crossref]
• Peter, Jochen & Patti M. Valkenburg. 2007. “Adolescents’ Exposure to a Sexualized Media Environment and Their Notions of Women as Sex Objects”. Sex Roles, 56:381-395.[Crossref]
• Singh, Awadhesh Kumar and Jayanta Choudhury. 2012. Violence against Women and Children – Issue and Concerns. New Delhi: Serial Publications.
• Spitzack, Carole. 1990. Confessing Excitement: Women and the Politics of Body Reduction. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
• Wertheimer, Alan. 2003. Consent to Sexual Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.1515/genst-2015-0014