Othering the other in Nepal

 

Of the movements that could have significant influence on the development process of the nation, that of feminist movement is reckoned high. For this could bring more than 50 percent of citizens (women) into the mainstream. And in the context of Nepal, we think, the fundamental step we need to take is to stop "othering" the female sex - i. e. to replace our patriarchal "Other" with "other".

 

Looking at the behavioral pattern of people in our societies, representation of male and female in literature, in films, in culture and tradition and even in advertisements, we see females as "Other" in the conceptual sense of the term. (In such context, the term "Other" reflects a major concept, derived from Hegel and Sartre in the philosophy of Simone de Beauvoir, which she uses in "The Second Sex" to explain the oppression of women.) Quite precisely, women have been made and regarded as "the Other" in our socio-cultural structure. But more surprisingly, they are "Other" not only to men -- who should logically be the "Other" in regard to women -- but to women themselves, who have accepted their "objectification" and play the role of "Other" as defined by men. The crux, we think, lies here. It is not hundred percent correct to insist that male is the only responsible party for this gender disparity. The females themselves are also responsible for their "othering" with capital "O". Therefore, females are still being subordinated and made passive, limited to an identification with the woman being looked at. This could be, however, rare in European society because the feminist movement had culminated to its climax as early as in the 1920s. 

But in Nepal and most of the South Asian nations, no matter if males, the females themselves are still not able to come out from their process of "self-othering". The differences between the "Other" and the "other" are still not discernible to both sexes. So, to make the media, people and all the institutions gender sensitive, understanding the overlooked difference between the capital "O" and the small "o" in the word 'other' could make some difference. Because of the lack of such understanding and knowledge, there is still a "joint consensus" in posing women as the "absolute Other" without "reciprocity" denying against all experience that she is a subject, a fellow human being. Be it male or female both fall short to the "aaimai-ko-jaat-ta-ho" like conceptions which have an "essentializing effect" on the female side.

 

While some of the orientalists laud at the tradition of most of the non-western cultures on the ground that they have positioned women in the image of Goddess and respect them, this could not be wise of them. The effect is the same if feminine virtues are mystified and worshipped which is why de Beauvoir is so critical of "essentialism", and urges women to refuse "Otherness" and strive for full equality. So the lesson, we think, in either way, for either party, is to see the difference a latter could make and behave accordingly.

 

[written by KRS in 2002 while doing Master's of Arts in Kathmandu]