Dear Editor,
In the spirit of appreciation, reflection and contemplation embodying the ethos of International Women’s Day, I salute all, especially Guyanese women and other historically marginalized gender groups for their courage, perseverance and contributions to the well-being of our society. Gender issues in Guyana are extremely complex, inter-linked with cultural, social, historical and economic experiences. This is one of the reasons why our local approach to preventing and reducing instances of male on female domestic violence require a wider focus and narrower objectives and initiatives. Currently we are spreading awareness; however, practical empowering alternatives and transformative mechanisms such as clinical therapy critically lag behind. Imagine foregoing rehabilitation before taking the cast off a broken hand and then being forced to paddle a rowing boat across the Atlantic. This is what we are doing; the currents of the ocean and the wind may help us to move a bit in the direction we wish to go, but unless and until we correct the real problem, we will continue to have mixed results and not reach that tipping point that ushers in a cultural mindset which views domestic violence as intolerable, unacceptable and un-Guyanese.
One strategy to address this lag is to develop culturally and situationally specific interventions and policies across and within cultural groups, in the areas of justice, human and national security, social services, labour, health, youth and religion. For example, we often see the Christian community preaching about domestic violence; the recently established Men’s Affairs Bureau and the Men’s Empowerment Network are working to address domestic violence issues and are primarily coordinated by notable Christian leaders. Where is the public involvement of the Hindu and Muslim communities? Don’t these religious communities and their constituencies experience domestic violence? Perhaps I am under-informed but I’ve not heard of any national or regional iniatative by the latter two groups which together with existing initiatives by national and other groups could make serious inroads.
The second point is that our approach to domestic violence in Guyana is horribly one-sided. We rightly expend a great deal of energy working to protect and empower women with the hope that they’ll be able to stand up and stay no to domestic violence, or prevent themselves and other women from getting into such situations in the first place. Many gender activists and experts such Sarah Sharratt, Nadine Puechguirbal and Jacobo Schifter acknowledge that research and planning regarding male on female domestic violence should be broadened and accommodative of lessons learned from male on male violence. Male on male violence is the most pervasive, accepted and practised form of violence in Guyana, and cannot be divorced from domestic violence against women. Whether in the home, school or social circle men primarily learn violence from other men. This includes physical and verbal violence, and the relational dynamics of group and dyadic violence. A more in-depth understanding of male to male violence and efforts to promote attitudinal and behavioural transformations would address the root cause of the problem, which is the accepted levels of violence practised in Guyanese culture. Addressing and understanding male violence toward women in domestic situations is important; however, it is a narrow approach to reducing the propensity for violence in men because it often excludes understandings of male perceptions of violence which are different from male perceptions of violence against women.
It is as disempowering for a woman to perceive herself as helpless, vulnerable and inadequate, as it is for a man to perceive himself as violent, detached and incomplete regardless of social consequences (not context). The key to promoting perceptual and behavioural changes in men as these relate to violence and domestic violence is a better understanding of male on male violence, particularly its cultural and relational elements. Women do not cause men to be violent; it is culture, and spreading awareness about domestic violence does not address the fundamental and entrenched problem of perceptions and the propensity to be violent. We have countless cases of examples where government, civil service officials and non-governmental public figures have acted violently toward their spouses, and even towards other men in public.
These mixed messages indicate either of two things: 1) that at the national level the perpetuation of violence in our society and against women is under prioritized; and 2) that we have yet to fully appreciate and understand the cultural entrenchment of violence in Guyanese society. Broadening and focusing empowering experiences and opportunities for women, ceteris paribus, while transforming male perceptions of male to male violence should be the basis from which we continue to plan and develop interventions.
To conclude, I wish to fully endorse the recent call by the Gender Equality Commis-sion for a Parliamentary Women’s Caucus. I also call on all male parliamentarians to take a pledge to end and prevent domestic violence against women.
Yours faithfully,
R Small
