Third World Feminism

Introduction
Narayan begins by explaining that she wants to draw attention to the assumption made that Third World Feminists are basing their ideas on Western values, which is not exactly the case. This assumption seems to me to be very ethnocentric, as the assumption is that these feminists are comparing their theories to the standards of feminists in the developing world. She writes that Third World Feminists are responding to their own culture, not comparing it against the Western culture.

Speech and silence in the mother-tongue
Third world feminists are viewed as opposing their culture and adopting Westernization, but Narayan stresses that this is not actually the case. Narayan is from India, so her experiences are from an Indian feminist perspective. She writes that Indian culture influences women to be silent about problems in their lives, especially the inequalities inherent in their family life. Just because they don’t talk about them doesn’t mean that they aren’t understood to exist for these women. However, the feminists who are taking about the issues are being attacked for doing so. The cultural ideal of what a woman should address does not allow her to deal with the pains of everyday life. The experiences that Narayan has seen her mother go through have shown her these inequalities, even though her mother is unable to support her feminist views. She writes, “they fail to see how much what we are is precisely a response to the very things they have taught us, how much we have become the daughters they have shaped us into becoming.” She and other feminists have become familiar with these issues because of their mothers. These mothers regard feminism as a symptom of their own failure to raise good daughters, but it is actually a response to their upbringing. Narayan writes that Third world feminism is not because of Westernization, but rather it simply was born in the same way as Western feminism. Both are response to inequality, but in India it is responding to Indian issues, not in response to Western values. Feminism around the world has developed in response to women’s issues in each of those different parts of the world. To suggest that Indian women are striving for Western values suggests that all the inequalities that they have are Indian values, which negatively reflects Indian culture in general.

The burdens of history: colonialism, nationalism, feminism, and ‘Westernization’
In this section Narayan discusses how colonialism influenced anti-Western sentiments. The two cultures saw each other as the ‘other,’ while ignoring actual similarities and differences. This anti-Western view has been used to attack feminists, whose ideas are seen as outside of Indian culture. Narayan talks about ‘totalizations,’ which she defines as “pictures that cast values and practices that pertained to specific privileged groups within the community as values of the ‘Culture’ as a whole.” These totalizations emphasize certain parts of culture and perpetuate “cultural superiority.” Also, elites justified the mistreatments of women as cultural traditions, which were then used to justify an attack on any criticisms, which were seen as siding with Western values. The emphasis was not on what is best for the women, but on which culture is better. The fact that each culture is not perfect was ignored, and served to support and perpetuate traditional gender roles. Nationalism was born out of the fight to oppose Western influence, and the issues of Indian women were trapped in the fight. Nationalist pride urged women to return to “traditional roles” and values. This attack on feminists and the accusation that they were pushing Westernization reminded me of the way that people view anything to do with Marx as communism.

Selective labeling and the myth of ‘continuity’
Here Narayan writes about the issues of hypocrisy and resisting change. She writes that the traditional way of life is being put on a pedestal. However, just because something has lasted for so long doesn’t mean that it is perfect. She also points out that the traditionalists are ignoring the fact that the culture they are admiring has not always existed, but has gone through changes to become what it is. Nationalists see “casting independence from colonialism as a recovery of this ‘ancient civilization.’” However, they are hypocritical, as they are picking and choosing what elements to keep and what ones to denounce. They use what is convenient, what perpetuates that way of life, such as using television as a medium to spread this message of anti-Westernization. Acknowledging other elements that have developed after Western influence is seen as an “unforgivable betrayal,” yet everybody, not just the feminists, have been influenced by Westernization. Some things are taken for granted as okay simply because they are defined as good, while others are accepted as bad. Narayan uses female sexuality as an example, as it is a taboo and repressed subject. She writes that “the gender of actors…seems to be one factor that determines whether a particular change is regarded as ‘Westernization that is disrespectful of our traditions.’” The masculine world can change, but not the feminine. Westernization is used as a label to justify unwanted parts of the culture. Third World feminists are unnerving because they criticize the status quo. Narayan emphasizes that the feminist point of view comes from the Indian culture itself, not from outside influences. Their perspective from inside the culture is what gives feminists their perspective on its issues.