Unveiling Power: How Imperialism Exacerbated Gender-Based Violence
Imperialism occurs when an empire extends it authoritative dominion over its colonies. Amina Mama analyses violence through the lens of imperialism because it is the common historical factor which allows a comprehensive study of an area as vast as Africa. Furthermore, she argues that violence against women is a colonial model which had “exploited pre-existing social divisions within African cultures.” Mama suggests that the rape of colonised women is inextricably linked with European power and the fantasy of penetrating foreign lands. Partha Chatterjee on the other hand, explores India’s focus on protecting its culture and tradition from complete European domination. Both theorists identify the role of imperialism in complicating the position and treatment of women in the colonies.
African and Indian nationalist groups have long used the metaphor of women as the nation. The view of the land and home as feminised functions to suggest that women are responsible for protecting tradition, culture, and the nation. Partha Chatterjee, in an earlier essay, tells us that “[b]y assuming a position of sympathy with the unfree and oppressed womanhood of India, the colonial mind was able to transform this figure of the Indian woman into a sign of the inherently oppressive and unfree nature of the entire cultural tradition of the country.” This mentality served to justify the colonisation of India under the pretence of saving Indian women with a false sense of compassion. In comparison, Mama reminds us that black women’s bodies became a metaphor for Africa and functioned as a sexual fantasy for white men. She goes on to say that Africa became “the dark and unknown continent, waiting to be penetrated, conquered, and despoiled.” The language used in this instance, specifically ‘conquered’ and ‘despoiled’, hold connotations of war and battle. Moreover, ‘penetrated’ links directly to sexualisation and rape, suggesting that black women’s bodies existed to be dominated and were regarded as the spoils of war.
Furthermore, the hyper-sexualisation of colonised women was rationalised through a racialised and gendered lens of viewing the native woman as other. Mama reminds us of historical instances of gender violence in Europe, referring to the systematic witch hunts that were practiced in the Middle Ages. These acts of violence saw European women drowned, beaten, disfigured, and burnt alive. It is not surprising then that these misogynistic displays of masculinity were exercised in the colonies. Franz Fanon forwarded this idea by discussing the relationship between women and colonialism. He stated that imperialists recognised that to successfully destroy nations it was imperative to first dominate native women. The sexual violence aimed at colonised women destabilising the nation, because although the acts of rape were endured by women, they functioned as a display of dominance over colonised men. Sexual violence, therefore, shattered the relationships between the natives. In this way, imperialism was gender-specific in its violence.
Native women have often been used to justify the British governing foreign lands. Britain has for long adopted a ‘white saviour’ narrative, particularly in the case of women. We can analyse this notion by comparing Britain’s influence on sati and matrilineal laws. Britain introduced several laws to ‘liberate’ women in colonial India, including widow remarriage, improved inheritance rights, forbidding child marriage, and sati. Sati is the act of widow immolation. Theorist Ania Loomba in her work titled ‘Dead Women Tell No Tales,’ stated that sati is, “one of the most spectacular forms of patriarchal violence,” and she was right. Sati has no religious bounds to Hinduism and emerged as a custom in which a widow was burned alive alongside her dead husband. Sati was practiced mainly by the Kshatriyas, the noble and princely caste, with whom the British had formed their political ties. This is significant when we consider that, for years, many criticisms towards sati were brought before the government in the years prior to its outlaw, but they were ignored on the premise of not offending the Kshatriya class. Loomba notes that the British held contradictory feelings towards sati, as it was viewed “as a powerful male fantasy of female devotion, [as well as] an instance of Hindu barbarism.” Although many acknowledged the cruelty of the act, the image of sati as an act of intense female loyalty penetrated the sexual fantasies of the white male psyche.
Another case of British intervention is seen through the treatment of Matriliny, which was a family structure in opposition to the patriarchal family organisation. Matriliny encouraged the sexual freedom of a woman’s body by allowing her to have sexual encounters through polygamy. The British along with members from the upper caste Brahmins viewed the sexual freedom of women in the matriliny as promiscuous and as a result, introduced land and regulation laws that would breakdown the structure of matrilineal families. Women’s sexuality became an entity that men wanted to monitor and through imperial power; men were able to maintain a system of control. Forcing women into a traditionally patriarchal family structure put many women in danger of domestic violence. This is because attitudes to matrilineal structures painted women in a seductive and promiscuous light, an image which angered many conservative men. British intervention on sati and matriliny reveals their apparent bias towards the women’s question. Their involvement rested heavily on the inner politics surrounding the issues, rather than on the intention of liberating women.
Within the discourse of feminism and violence, Western feminist thought has long been known to neglect black and brown women’s experiences. Mama argues that this was partially due to radical feminism which permeated mainstream media and study. She states that radical feminism considers gender, “as the most fundamental social division, and men are viewed as being inherently and irredeemably aggressive.” But this simply is not true. The main issue with Western radical feminism is that it holds a Eurocentric bias as categorising all women as one homogenous group, and therefore neglect the racial and social contexts which further subjugate black and brown women. Western feminism often assumes that one solution, namely a Eurocentric one, will combat the oppression of women. Moreover, when discussing women in the third world, western feminists can be found to adopt a ‘saviour complex’ much like colonising males, which mainly functions to pity marginalised women rather than provide solutions. Much of the work from black feminist theorists emerged as a response to the gaps in radical western feminist ideology. Leading feminist scholar, Kimberle Crenshaw, argued that feminist and anti-racist thinkers attempted to individually politicise their movements, and have “frequently proceeded as though the issues and experiences they each detail occur on mutually exclusive terrain.” However, the gaps in the representations of women and people of colour expose the flaws in their politics. I agree, as race and gender cannot be separated for the women in Mama and Chatterjee’s essays. Therefore, although gender functions to unite women, issues of race and class complicate the concept of women as a homogenous group. Colonised women face a specific kind of racially charged gender violence. Postcolonialism and gender relate by doubly oppressing colonised women. This is because they suffer racism and sexism simultaneously both during and after imperial rule.
References :
Chatterjee, Partha, ‘The Nationalist Resolution to the Women’s Question’, in Postcolonial Discourses: An Anthology, ed. Gregory Castle, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2001), pp. 151-65
Mama, Amina, ‘Sheroes and Villains: Conceptualising Colonial and Contemporary Violence Against Women in Africa’, in Postcolonial Discourses: An Anthology, ed. by Gregory Castle, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2001), pp. 251-65
Bannerji, Himani. ‘Projects of Hegemony: Towards a Critique of Subaltern Studies' 'Resolution of the Women's Question'.” Economic and Political Weekly, 35.11 (2000), pp. 902–920. JSTOR
Chatterjee, Partha, ‘Colonialism, Nationalism, and Colonialized Women: The Contest in India’, American Ethnologist, 16.4 (1989), pp.622-633.
Crenshaw, Kimberle, ‘Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity, Politics and Violence against Women of Colour’, Standford Law Review, 43.6 (1991), pp.1241-1299
Fanon, Frantz, A Dying Colonialism, ed. Haakon Chevalier, (New York: Grove Press, 1965)
Loomba, Ania, ‘Dead Women Tell No Tales: Issues of Female Subjectivity, Subaltern Agency and Tradition in Colonial and Post-Colonial Writings on Widow Immolation in India’, in History Workshop Journal, 36.1 (1993), pp. 209-227,
About the author :
Rhia Danis is a Communications Specialist with a demonstrated history of working with grassroots and international NGOs. Since joining organisations such as SolidariTee and EarthRefuge, Rhia has worked directly with people facing forced displacement and draws on this to successfully implement and develop strategies. She is currently working at WWF-UK supporting two Directors within Philanthropy, and Nature Based Solutions.
