Some of the hardest days are those ones where you start re-evaluating who you are and deciding what you want to change about yourself. The ones where you realize you don't like the way you've been treating people or portraying yourself. And I've been kind of scared to death lately to go to Thailand and live with a family that I can't verbally communicate with. Am I going to appear polite enough? Am I going to be personable enough? Am I going to be helpful enough? Then I started panicking about who I am and how I come off to people here, too. I've had a billion of those "Oh, crap" moments this week. You know what I'm talking about. From the real life of Mary Cook:
"Oh, crap. Did I really just post that on my blog?" (My number 1 "Oh crap" moment yesterday as I was revising my first entry)
"Oh, crap. Did I really just say that super insulting statement? I'm not a jerk, I swear."
"Oh, crap. Did I really just walk into the men's bathroom?" (Haha. Proof that "Oh crap" moments aren't always the worst thing in the world....just hilarious.)
"Oh, crap. Did I really just get offended and react that way over something that stupid?"
"Oh, crap. Did I really just give her advice that I can't even follow myself?"
"Oh, crap. Did I really just mess up that relationship?"
"Oh, crap. Did I really just blow him off because I am that mean of a person?"
"Oh, crap. Did I really just act that way around a guy that I like?"
"Oh, crap. Did I really just send that text in a moment of anger and hurt?"
"Oh, crap. Did I really just sound that emotional and over dramatic?"
And the list goes on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on, reaching back to my awkward early teenage years when I couldn't bring myself to talk to a boy without turning tomato red. Or when I decided in 10th grade that my life would be easier if I just didn't talk at all. Or back to my childhood when I treated my siblings and parents like they were so dispensable The truth is, I know that to some people, I'm that sad, quiet girl in Young Women's who was overly painfully shy (which people who know me now would never believe). Or that girl who said something really stupid and ignorant at work the other day. Or that girl who tries too hard to be outgoing and funny. The truth is, I'm still trying to figure out who I am, and I'm still trying to get comfortable in my own skin. I vividly remember back to about a year and a half ago, when I sat behind a door in the dorm hallway, called my dad, and started sobbing, asking him when I would get over my shyness. Asking him when I would be pretty and thin enough to catch a guy's attention. Asking him when I would stop caring so much about what people thought of me. So I moved into an apartment when the summer started and forced myself to be outgoing. And now that I am 97% confident with who I am and 95% not shy, and now that I have roommates who can attest that I am not the same person now as I was growing up, I still am not satisfied with the person I have become. And I ate a huge, fat slice of humble pie this week. In fact, it was probably just as good as the pie that Minnie made in "The Help."
I think my resolve to become a "new" person since about a year and a half ago has gone a little overboard. In the changes I've made, I've become a little less sensitive toward other people. I've become a little bit less caring, and a little bit more hypocritical. I've become a little bit too hyper and attention-seeking at times, a little bit arrogant, and "a lot of bit" of a person who tries way too hard to be liked and who has made this matter entirely too much about herself. In trying to stop caring about what people thought of me, I started caring about it in a different way. I started to wonder if I was becoming one of those people I hated in high school, someone who I didn't consider "genuine" or sincere. And I sincerely apologize to anyone who I may have offended or brushed aside.
The truth is, I'm terrified to commit to someone because I know how easily I can mess things up. I know how overly emotional I can get and how dramatic I can be, and what a toll that can take on them. Thank goodness my parents will always love me no matter what, because I would hate to listen to myself sometimes the way they listen to me worry and fret and go over possibilities a billion times through. I have been anything but perfect. I draw comfort from the fact that I have always tried to do my best, though.
I just realized it sounds a lot like I'm beating myself up right now, and I don't want to give you the impression (since I'm making this post about humility) that humility is about beating yourself up. It's not. I probably also sound like I really dislike myself. Haha, I don't. In fact, in the past year and a half, I've gained a huge amount of appreciation for the person that I am becoming and the potential that I have. I'm just taking a step back and realizing that there are so many ways that I need to improve. I'm trying to take control of my blind spots and figure out how I need to change.
So back to Thailand? I just got way off track, but it all relates, I promise. I'm going to admit now that the biggest reason I've been looking forward to Thailand is because I know it will be a growing experience. I'm excited to see what kind of person it shapes me to be, and what kind of new perspectives about the world it will give me. I want to come back and think less about myself. I want to come back more comfortable with myself
because I think less about myself. And I want to come back knowing what it's like to put myself in the shoes of someone different from me in order to experience true empathy.
And so I decided that the best way to approach this journey, as well as life, is with the attitude of humility. I'll be entering a culture as a complete outsider, who doesn't speak the language, who doesn't know Hmong etiquette or customs very well, and who just wants to make a difference somehow. This is a humbling realization within itself, but then I realized that this applies to life in general so well. How often do I interact with people and assume that I know their situation? And that I know what "type" of person they are? Pretty often. How often do I have a complete understanding of someone else's "language" or "customs" who I interact with on a daily basis? Never. And so I will choose to start living more fully by Elder Busche's advice: "Never judge anyone. When you have accepted this, you will be freed."
I'm finally understanding how to be confident and humble at the same time. These attributes aren't mutually exclusive. True confidence comes from the acknowledgement that you are a divine son or daughter of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother and that you are entitled to their love and blessings. True humility comes from the realization that without God, you would be nothing. All that you have and are, He has lent you (except for your agency, which is freely yours). Compared to God, we are mere infants. What do we really know about the mysteries of eternity and the universe? Our perspective on earth is so limited by a billion factors. Next to God, I know practically nothing. But I know the important things that will help me get back to Him. And even if you aren't religious, what do we, as humans, really know anyway? From our limited sociocultural perspective and filter through which we live our lives?
Humility is not about dwelling on all of your flaws, which we do all too often anyway. As you start caring about others more, you will realize that you don't know all that much, and you will stop caring about yourself quite so much. You will become more confident in your identity. Here are my latest words of advice, mostly to myself:
*Look for blind spots in your behavior that may be harming others. As you do so, you will understand what areas need change and how you can start treating people better.
*Look for people around you who need a friendly smile or word. As you care about other people more, your own problems become less important and less debilitating.
*Acknowledge the flaws that you have. BUT. Realize that we are given weaknesses to become strong. What would be the point of life if you had no weaknesses? There would be no moments of triumph in overcoming hard things.
*Avoid rush and haste (again, in the words of Elder Busche). Consider carefully what actions you are planning to take and how they will affect the people around you. (This includes the words that are about to come out of your mouth!)
*Don't beat yourself up. I have a tendency to ruminate on my weaknesses and faults, and sometimes I feel like my future is hopeless because I'm going to keep messing up anyway, so what's the point of going on? I feel destined to recreate the circumstances that I've come from. Yep. You'll keep messing up. You're human. You have weaknesses. Life is really going to stink sometimes. But you will only keep improving if you set your mind to it.
*Never speak an unkind word. In your moments of humility, you will
always regret speaking in such a way, even if you don't feel bad about it at the time.
*Be patient with others. We are all at different points in our lives. We are our own worst critics. The fact of the matter is, someone that you dislike may dislike themselves as well. They may not like the same things that you dislike about them, and they are trying desperately to change. Give people the benefit of the doubt. They are inwardly pleading for you to be patient with them and to forgive them for their pasts. I know that the one thing I would ask of all my family members is to realize that I know how stupid I've been and that I'm sorry.
*Be patient with yourself. Remember how I said we're pretty much all infants in this universe? Well, I'm never going to shout at a baby for falling down while he's learning to walk. So treat yourself similarly.
*Just. Relax. Don't worry so much about everything. Adopt an attitude of peace and confidence. This will, again, come more easily as you focus on treating others kindly.
*Resolve to use your God-given talents in the areas in which He directs you to use them, to bless the lives of other people.
*Turn over your will to God. He knows what you need. And when you can't see the light at the end of the tunnel, keep in mind that He can. Sometimes we reach the end of something hard and realize we were supposed to go through it in that way so that we could help someone else through our experiences, or so that we could grow in a particular way.
*Remember that there is something profoundly wonderful about every human being. -Michael Wesch.
With all of this being realized on my part, I'll "segue" (not so smoothly) into the paper I wrote as a literature review of the theories behind my choice of topic - power and agency in Hmong women.
The general gist of my project is in sections A and B. Feel free to keep reading if you want to learn about the theory behind this topic. I left out my methods section, but basically I'll be conducting extensive interviews, surveys, participant observation, etc.
A. Statement of Intent
This proposed research aims to evaluate the extent to which Hmong women
in Thailand experience gender-based oppression and in what areas of their lives
they exhibit power and agency. As part
of this, I will evaluate women’s attitudes toward the patrilineal structure of
Hmong society. In doing so, I will add
to the academic literature speaking to multicultural women’s issues and
gender-based violence.
B. Background and Significance
Often, as members of Western culture, we make
automatic assumptions concerning the happiness and welfare of women in other
nations. White western feminism has
taught us to view other cultures as perpetually oppressive of their women. We have also generally grown to believe that
any progressive women’s movements in “developing” cultures are merely western
imports and not implicit parts of the culture’s progression. While instances of gender-based oppression do
exist in multicultural settings, this research aims to examine whether or not
Hmong women really do feel “under the thumb” of their husbands and the
patriarchal/patrilineal system. In what
areas of life do these women feel the most powerful and agentive? Do they struggle to feel valued and important
as women? What actions do they take in
their personal lives to combat gender-based insecurities, if they do indeed
exist? As an integral part of this
project, I aim to scope out women involved in some of the Hmong gendered cultural
practices for extensive interviews as part of case studies. These women may include a newly married bride
living in her in-laws’ home under the supervision of her mother-in-law, a first
or second wife of a polygynous family, and possibly a victim of some form of
gender-based violence. By delving deeply
into a few women’s lived experiences with cultural gender-based structures, I
will gain significant insight into these women’s feelings about patriarchy and
gender-based equality. In consequence, I
will be able to better understand and communicate what elements of progressive
women’s ideologies may be implicit in Hmong culture.
F. Preliminary Research
Power and Agency in
Hmong Women
No
matter what culture one belongs to, gender holds enormous implications for cultural
behaviors, occupations, family roles, social roles, education, and religious
beliefs. Simon de Beauvoir infamously
suggests that “one is not born, but rather becomes a woman” (Butler, 1986, p. 35). This assertion presents the issue that gender
is culturally acquired. If a woman is
born in the United States, for example, she has little choice but to be
identified as a woman because of her anatomy.
Because she is born with a female’s body, she grows up in a culture
which treats her as a woman and determines her gender roles as a woman. Butler (1986) explains that the “distinction
between sex and gender has been crucial to the long-standing feminist effort to
debunk the claim that anatomy is destiny; sex
is understood to be the invariant, anatomically distinct, and factic aspects of
the female body, whereas gender is
the cultural meaning and form that body acquires, the variable modes of that
body’s accumulation” (p. 35). Many
feminist theories arise from the supposed injustice that physiology should
determine what an individual can and cannot do and who an individual should or
should not marry along with a multitude of other social behaviors.
In such cultures where
physiology serves as the main determinant of gender roles, women theoretically
react to patriarchy in ways influenced by their culture and upbringing. Such patriarchy is often viewed by
researchers as a ruling power. Ortner
(1974) asserts that this “secondary status of women in society is one of the
true universals, a pan-cultural fact” (p. 5).
This literature review investigates some of the possible multicultural factors
involved in developing certain reactions and attitudes toward patriarchal
gender practices, especially concerning the context of Hmong society. Concerning women’s “secondary status,” this
research will also aim to discover whether or not Hmong women suffer from such
a hierarchy, how their gender helps create identity through their interactions
with others (Schein, 2000), and how they view themselves in such a patriarchal
context.
Cultural gender
practices directly influence an individual’s daily tasks and actions. Anthropologist Victor Turner suggests that
social behavior arises out of these repetitious acts (Butler, 1988, p. 526). An individual is not merely a blank page written on and pre-determined by culture; his or her complete
agency is also altered by the influence of setting and social norms. Gender then becomes a product of individual
actions influenced both by culture and individual
repetitious acts. The resulting power
and agency among women in any culture is determined by complex interactions
between social norms, individual and collective reactions to such norms,
resistance, and acceptance. This literature review focuses on an approach to
studying elements of power and agency of Hmong women in a Thai village from a
cross-cultural viewpoint. In
understanding the theories behind studying these so-called elements of feminism
in another cultural context, there will be a greater level of preparation to
study how Hmong women experience patriarchy and react to it.
Feminism and Multiculturalism
Over time, the word
“feminism” has slowly evolved into a collage of inconclusive definitions, partly due to a focus on multicultural tolerance and ending
oppressive practices all over the world.
Okin (1999), however, explores the idea that
multiculturalism and feminism often clash in a liberal culture. While liberal settings embrace the idea of
cultural acceptance and often provide exceptions to the rule concerning group
rights, this notion can threaten feminist ideals. For example, sometimes a first-degree
murderer will receive a lowered charge to second-degree murder because he will
use a cultural defense in that it was “culturally acceptable” for him to kill
his wife because of her disloyalty. Or
take, for example, the “kidnap and rape by Hmong men who claim that their
actions are part of their cultural practice of zij poj niam, or ‘marriage by capture’” (p. 18). Advocates of group rights and
multiculturalism involving similar practices can thus harm feminist ideals and
the universal protection of women.
While Okin’s article
points out current threats to modern feminism, others see holes in her
arguments. Pollitt (1999) disagrees with
Okin’s dire assessment of multiculturalism and its harmful effects on feminism. In Pollitt’s view, Okin’s arguments can
hardly be seen as controversial. Feminism
lays in contrast to the moral relativism promoted by multiculturalism. Feminists often disagree about how to act,
when to act, what actions are appropriate to take, and what true equality even
means. The issue of implementing group
rights brings up an important question: what is culture, how do you define it,
and essentially how and under what circumstances do you protect it? Also, in terms of cultural defense, it is
important to call into question the legitimacy of such cultural claims. A husband from China may say it was
culturally acceptable to kill his wife because of disloyalty, but does this
legality really exist in China? We must
take a closer look at the defense such people create and seriously call into
question the value of multiculturalism and tolerance. Perhaps when administrations allow girls to
maintain traditional cultural dress in schools and believe they are
demonstrating tolerance, they are in fact (on a subjective basis) ignoring
their desires to rid themselves of family oppression. Al-Hibri (1999) also responds to Okin
critically in identifying three important flaws in her article: “stereotypical
view of the ‘Other,’ a conflation of distinct belief systems, and conflict with
American constitutional principles” (41).
According to Al-Hibri, Okin’s discourse is actually fairly condescending
and looks at some cultures as requiring Western intervention. Okin relies heavily on secondary sources and
thus misinforms her readers, especially about matters of religion and gender
views. Al-Hibri believes that Okin
treats culture and religion as interchangeable and in effect disregards the
American constitutional principle of the separation of church and state and the
premise that as reformists, we should not be interfering in others’ religions. In other words, by stating that religious
tolerance and multiculturalism may in fact be harming feminist ideals, Okin
seeks to interfere with other cultures’ religious practices.
On a similar vein,
Gilman (1999) offers a sarcastic response to Okin’s essay and interprets Okin’s
argument in that all people would be happy if they abandoned barbaric
practices, especially those similar to “those horrible Jews” who performed male
circumcision. In Gilman’s view,
according to Okin, women become free through ridding themselves of all ritual
activity that is “different” from others.
In terms of female genital mutilation, Gilman basically poses that
Westerners have no place in judging the detriments of the practice because we
have a different view and perception of pleasure than others. As such, Okin represents a narrow view and
fails to recognize the rituals in her own world that impact her view of others. Gunning (1992) would agree with this
assessment as she uses the example of female genital surgeries to question what
right a Western feminist has to criticize another culture’s gender-related
practices and whether or not law should be used to eradicate such practices. She argues that such laws can be enforced
only if the process is a multicultural effort to come to a consensus. Gunning approaches her argument through a
three-pronged process that includes understanding historical context of one’s
own interests, understanding how one impacts the “other’s” world (being able to
see oneself through the other woman’s eyes), and trying to understand a woman
through her own eyes. Arrogant
ethnocentrism pervades the study of gender-based practices in the academic
world; we must learn how to understand culture while studying it. Disgust with another culture’s practices is
not necessarily wrong within itself; as humans, we learn to ascribe to a set of
moral values. However, it is essential
to at least temporarily set aside these personal assumptions of morality to
understand another culture’s practices. In
attempting to study feminism from a multicultural viewpoint, then, it will be
necessary to remove underlying assumptions of either extreme tolerance or
intervention and find a middle-ground from where no judgments are immediately
made. The first area of research will
focus on basic attitudes toward Hmong patriarchy rather than the gender
practices themselves. From attitudes,
research will move toward gender roles and ritual practices, keeping in mind
attitudes toward the gender system as a whole for the duration of the research. Then attitudes toward specific gender
practices will be assessed.
Feminism from a Cultural Viewpoint
The
word “feminism” originally appeared in a western context. As such, many theorists continue to believe
that feminism is an inherently Western concept.
Through investigating the presence of power and agency in Hmong women, this
research aims to overturn this Westernized notion. Chanda and Owen (2001) explore the question
of whether or not feminism truly exists in Asia. They ultimately assert that the idea of
feminism is merely a western import and thus not a legitimate focus of study in
Asia. Typically, the word ‘feminism’
holds a connotation of the white, middle-class struggle for equality and even
lesbianism (p. 90). According to Chanda
and Owen, we often see other cultures maintaining the typical tradition of keeping
women in the home, and, in consequence, we feel the need to change the system. As such, feminists are often labeled as
aggressive and “man-hating,” not only by fellow Americans but by Asians as well. Asian men often feel uncomfortable labeling
themselves as feminists even while sympathetic to the cause of feminism (Chanda
and Owen, 2001). Should we instead use
the term “womanist” to avoid Western and white bias? Chanda and Owen further explain the hopeless
persistence of Western influence on Eastern culture and consequentially
conclude that Eastern feminism is not a legitimate concept because of Western
influence.
Even while feminism may
not exist cross-culturally as the same root concept, implicit beliefs about
gender roles exist in more than Western society. Instead of labeling these beliefs as the
complicated and often ambiguous concept of feminism, this research will center
on how Hmong women exhibit power and agency in a patriarchal society. In looking at how to approach such power and
agency, one must carefully consider and leave behind strong, preconceived
notions of feminism and patriarchy. According
to the McDonaldization theory, globalization (for example, concerning the
global expansion of a fast-food restaurant such as McDonald’s) spreads Western
culture to “underdeveloped” nations and inevitably leads to the progression of
such countries toward a more Western atmosphere (Hickman, personal
communication, February 5, 2013). However,
Western influence in one country holds a completely different set of meanings
than the origin of such influence. For
example, McDonald’s in some places in South America can be a high-end,
unaffordable place to eat. Thus, Western
perception of its own influence is skewed because other areas of the world are
not merely adopting Western practices and adapting to Western culture as one
would suppose. Rather, they are
maintaining and adding to current culture and creating a whole new set of
meanings separate from Western thinking.
In a similar fashion, many Westerners may incorrectly tend to believe
that without progressive Western influence, such “underdeveloped” nations would
have no inherent concept of feminist issues.
Throughout the years of gender research in the social sciences, the
concept of feminism has become blurred and lost most of its meaning. Because of the myriad of connotations
feminism holds in multicultural settings, it is difficult to look at any other
culture and approach a topic in women’s studies by labeling it as feminism. Instead, the terms “power” and “agency” will
refer to the study of Hmong women’s reactions to and attitudes toward a
patriarchal setup.
When
studying women’s issues in a multicultural setting, one must consider the
common misconceptions that occur regarding certain cultural practices and the
assumed resulting oppression. Mahmood
(2001) takes a look at the meaning of ritual in culture and how it relates to informal
activity and socially constructed behavior.
She specifically analyzes the women in Egypt who practice salat (prayer)
and how it enhances their sense of piety and will for constant religious
improvement. These women have had a
comparatively large role in establishing mosque practices and pedagogical
methods. Mahmood approaches the question
of how it is that these women have come to value piety above all else and focus
on their moral capacities as women. With
a background in progressive politics, Mahmood (2005) admits that a viewpoint on
these women in Cairo must be carefully considered. She strives to remove her progressive bias
and understand the motivation of these women to increase piety. Feminists tend to look at Islamic women as
ignorant pawns who bend to the will of patriarchy. Mahmood dismisses such ignorance and urges readers
to consider a broader scope of possibilities and truth. Consider that perhaps the common perception
of oppression of women in Islamic culture is skewed. Rather, it may be beneficial to look at
women’s piety as a religious movement rather than gender oppression: “Choice is
understood not to be an expression of one’s will but something one exercises in
following the prescribed path to becoming a better Muslim” (Mahmood, 2005, p. 85). If closely inspected, this becomes a similar
pattern in many religions across the globe.
Devoted members of a faith often explain that many religious practices
which appear oppressive on the outside (such as withholding the Priesthood from
women within the Latter-day Saint faith) are in fact based upon religious
principles and require an act of faith on the part of its members.
Loving Ignorance in the Face of Multicultural
Women’s Issues
Part of this Hmong
research aims to look at some implicit elements of “feminism” (or rather, power
and agency) that may exist in Hmong culture.
In addressing such an issue, Ortega (2006) attempts to tackle the issue
of “loving, knowing ignorance” in assessing the positions of women of color. She analyzes other women’s work concerning
this inherent state of arrogance. These
authors look at instances in which a male-dominated society places women in a low
status as well as situations in which women demean other women (especially
those of color). Perceiving their
situations with an arrogant eye serves as a sort of protection and ensures a
higher place “on the totem pole.” Ortega
then goes on to explain possible reasons why this phenomenon may exist,
including the idea that white women have become accustomed to the
indoctrination of racism and sexism inherent in Western culture. While some of these claims rest on
assumptions themselves, there is something to be said for the general trend of
white women (especially in middle-class America) viewing other cultures’ women
as perpetually oppressed and lower in station.
Many
scholars become fascinated with the tendency in Western research to consider
another culture’s gender practice and automatically assume oppression. Take, for example, Menon & Shweder’s
(1988) analysis of the lives of Oriya Hindu women, including their conceptions
of the ideal woman’s life, current Oriya women’s issues and their effects, and
doubts about previous research conducted on these women. They discuss the cycles of life that are
pertinent to a woman’s progression and their effect on status, conceptions, etc. Also, the authors explore the idea that
Western feminism makes incorrect assumptions about Oriya and other cultures’
‘oppression of women:’
The scholars who
portray Hindu women as passive victims focus on the differences that they, as
Western observers, see in the life circumstances of the female Hindu ‘other,’
and they are sensitive to (and feel great empathy for) the situations of the
most unfortunate Hindu women…For example, they blame Hindu religion (which they
interpret as mere ideology rather than as a sacred and factual explanation of
social and physical phenomena) for the ‘subordination and subjection of
women’…Such feminist writers tend to project an image of ‘the Hindu woman’ as
tame, domesticated, bound by tradition, intellectually unsophisticated, and
sexually constrained. (Menon & Shweder, 1988, pp. 151-52)
As such, Hmong female practices must be investigated
without assuming a level of oppression or any malicious resistance against such
practices. Menon (2002) describes an
instance where researchers hastily concluded that a woman who poured too much
salt into her husband’s food was revolting against the patriarchal system and
oppressive gender practices. Rather than
assuming such oppression and resistance, investigation will focus on relationship
dynamics in the home—for example, whether or not women ever feel ‘under the
thumb of their husbands’ (Hickman, personal communication). Compare this with the findings of Patricia
Symonds (2004) and her claims about the pattern of patrilineality in the
concept of “Hmongness.” She writes:
The Hmong lineage,
spiritual rituals, and public life are male.
Hmong women as well as men say that “maleness is Hmong” and believe that
even if every Hmong woman died or ran away, the patriline would continue
because Hmong men would be able to marry women from other groups, and those women
would then become Hmong. If, however,
all Hmong men were to die, Hmong society, or “Hmongness,” would cease to exist. If daughters marry non-Hmong men, they too
will become non-Hmong, as will their children.
Only by being part of the lineage of one’s father, grandfather, and
great-grandfather…can one “honor the ancestors.” (p. 8)
Symonds suggests that the very essence of
“Hmongness” relies on the men of the society.
Compare this to the Bedouin people, who strongly prefer males to females. The Bedouins have an “avowed preference for
sons” (Abu-Lughod, 1986, p. 119) and greet the birth of baby girls with
mourning. While this may not be the
exact case in a Hmong context, a patrilineal clan system is still evident. Interviews during the project will explore
the concept of Hmongness and how gender roles in the village relate to
this concept. It is therefore important
to question Symonds’ findings. She
employs Western assumptions by saying that Hmong women’s oppression will drastically
change because “as Hmong women encounter and absorb Western freedoms [such as
education and birth control], they, like Western women, both benefit and suffer
from the changes brought about as traditional protections are discarded or lost
and new freedoms are obtained” (p. 174).
Rather than assuming that the level of oppression will change because of
westernization, I will instead investigate if and to what extent these women
experience oppression separate from western influence. Main
methods of investigation revolve around semi-structured interviews and case
studies. I will avoid using
pre-constructed multicultural gender studies scales because of cultural
differences (Gibbons, Hamby & Dennis).
If any instances of gender-based violence (GBV) are evident during research,
these will be further explored as well. Lemoine
(2012) postulates that such Hmong instances of GBV are remnants of Chinese
influence and not directly related to Hmong cultural practices. However, if such adopted practices occur,
they are an implicit part of the women’s thoughts and feelings about patriarchy
and should be investigated as opponents to feelings of power and agency.
Another point of
investigation is the dynamics of polygyny in Hmong society and the situations
in which women find themselves as a first wife.
Sometimes, a man starts a family with one woman and eventually marries a
younger woman later in life (Hickman, personal communication). The first wife often lives autonomously in a
separate dwelling. While still married
to this man, she has no other financial or domestic ties to him. They simply live apart. Research will focus on the power system that
results from this relationship and how women view a system of patriarchy in
this sense. Are there feelings of
oppression and abandonment? Another
potential point of research involves Hmong women’s activities in needlework and
crafts as a part of history-recording and income (Long, 2008). I will investigate the extent to which women
in Paklang actively produced such handiwork and whether or not there is a
resulting feeling of empowerment and usefulness. The last main dynamic to be researched is the
power relationship between a newly married woman and her mother-in-law. A newly married Hmong couple typically moves
in with the husband’s parents (Hickman, personal communication), and the wife
becomes subject to the demands and scrutiny of her mother-in-law. What are the effects of this gender practice? In what domains does
the mother-in-law hold power as opposed to the father-in-law? These questions
present a few of the issues that will be covered through interviews and
participant observation over the course of the group’s research in Thailand.
References
Abu-Lughod, L. (1986). Veiled sentiments: Honor and poetry
in a bedouin society. (2nd ed.).
Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Al-Hibri, A. Y. (1999). Is western patriarchal
feminism good for third world / minority women?.
In J. Cohen, M. Howard
& M. Nussaum (Eds.), Is
multiculturalism bad for women? (pp. 41-46). Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Butler, J. (1986). Sex and gender in simone de
beauvoir’s second sex. Yale French
Studies, (72),
35-49.
Butler, J. (1988). Performative acts and gender
constitution: An essay in phenomenology and
feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40(4), 519-531.
Chanda, G. S., & Owen, N. G. (2001). Tainted
goods? Western feminism and the asian
experience. Asian journal of women's studies, 7(4), 90. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.erl.lib.byu.edu/docview/197717458
Gibbons, J. L., Hamby, B. A., & Dennis, W. D.
(1997). Researching gender-role ideologies
internationally and
cross-culturally. Psychology
of women quarterly, 21(1),
151-170.
Gilman, S. L. (1999). “Barbaric” Rituals?. In J.
Cohen, M. Howard & M.
Nussaum (Eds.), Is multiculturalism bad for women? (pp.
53-58). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gunning, I. R. (1992). Arrogant perception,
world-travelling and multicultural feminism: The
case of female genital
surgeries. Columbia Human Rights Law
Review, 23(2), 189-248.
Lemoine,
J. (2012). Commentary: Gender-based violence among the hmong. Hmong Studies
Journal,
13(1), 1-27.
Long, L. A. (2008). Contemporary women’s roles
through hmong, vietnamese, and american
eyes. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 29(1),
1-36.
Mahmood, S. (2001). Rehearsed spontaneity and the
conventionality of ritual: Disciplines of
salat. American Ethnologist, 28(4), 827-853.
Mahmood, S. (2005). Politics of piety: the islamic revival
and the feminist subject. Princeton:
Princeton University
Press.
Menon, U. (2002). Neither victim nor rebel:
feminism and the morality of gender and family life
in a hindu temple town.
In U. Menon, M. Minnow & H. Markus (Eds.), Engaging
` cultural differences: The multicultural challenge in
liberal democracies (pp. 288-308). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Menon, U., & Shweder, R. A. (1998). The
return of the “white man’s burden”: The moral
discourse of
anthropology and the domestic life of hindu women. In R. Shweder (Ed.).
Welcome to middle age! (And other cultural fictions) (pp. 139-185). Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago
Press.
Okin, S. M. (1999). Is multiculturalism bad for
women?. In J. Cohen, M. Howard & M.
Nussaum (Eds.), Is multiculturalism bad for women? (pp.
7-24). Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Ortner, S. B. (1974). Is female
to male as nature is to culture?. In M. Rosaldo & L. Lamphere
(Eds.),
Woman, culture, and society (pp. 67-88). Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press.
Schein, L. (2000). Minority rules: The miao and the
feminine in china's cultural politics.
Durham: Duke University
Press.
Ortega, M. (2006). Being lovingly, knowingly
ignorant: White feminism and women of color.
Hypatia, 21, 56-74.
Pollitt, K. (1999). Whose culture?. (In J. Cohen,
M. Howard & M. Nussaum (Eds.), Is
multiculturalism bad for women? (pp.
27-30). Princton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Symonds, P. V. (2004). Calling in the soul: Gender and the cycle of life
in a hmong village.
London, England:
University of Washington Press.
