CENTRE for POLICY ANALYSIS

CENTRE for POLICY ANALYSIS

“Social progress can be measured by the social position of the female sex” - Karl Marx

OPINION


Thomas Reuters Foundation Survey: Measuring Safety, Generating Outrage


 When the 2011 Thomson Reuters Foundation survey results were announced, I had misgivings that remain seven years later. But let's start with what is good about this survey.

As someone who works year-round to start conversations about gender-based violence, how to recognise, respond to and report it, I am delighted when anything is able to get people talking.

Anything that has us asking-Is it really this bad? Why do they say this? -and reading the results (which too few do) is a good thing. From the point of view of advocacy, dramatic findings like 'most dangerous place for women' are gold, because they draw the kind of attention to an issue that tempered statements with statutory cautions do not.

I appreciate too how they have tried to arrive at a measure of safety. They have asked questions about health, about discrimination, about cultural and religious practices, about sexual and gender-based violence (including conflict-related violence) and about trafficking. There are still not many large-scale attempts to do this. Every attempt to define an abstract and necessarily relative idea (like safety or welfare) deepens our practical understanding of how it can be improved.

The 2018 survey is billed as a 'perception poll.' That is, 548 experts were asked to answer six questions and their answers were analysed to come up with these overall scores.

In a world of almost 8 billion, one does not have to be trained in statistics to see that this is not more thorough than a friends-and-cabbies analysis of a place one visits for a few weeks. One returns with good hunches that may well be correct, but hunches are not what we now consider sound knowledge. This was my issue in 2011 and it remains so now.

With India moving up from fourth place to first, winning the title of 'most dangerous country for women' ahead of Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Saudi Arabia and horror of horrors, Pakistan, the report has attracted a great deal of opprobrium.

It would after all, given the way we now think, be dishonourable and anti-national to accept such an honour-far more so than to countenance the escalating levels of everyday violence in our society. "How dare you say this about India?" seems to be the most common reaction of those who must instantly react.

Politicians are quick to seize opportunities that come their way. In 2011, Narendra Modi pointed to the same survey and lamented the fate of Indian women. In 2018, Congress politicians have pointed to it and held the present government responsible.

Neither has the courage to face up to the reality-Indian patriarchy is a hardy beast, protected fiercely by government and nurtured lovingly by family. A sense of entitlement is buttressed by the culture of impunity. It would be too much to expect political parties in India, led and funded mainly by men, to adopt good gender equality practices. The blame game is easier.

In the circumstances, for many Indian feminists, the report poses a challenge. To challenge its findings on the grounds that its methodology leaves something to be desired is to place oneself on the same side as those who might point to the number of good Indian men who take care of their wives and daughters-a point of view that is naïve at best.

After all, we have been trying to say to anyone who would listen that the life of an Indian girl or woman is a Hobbesian reality- "nasty, poor, brutish and short." How could we repudiate a report which says the same thing, and how petty must our qualms about methodology sound?

As I reflect, I think my misgivings arise from the ranking. "Most dangerou"s or "least dangerous" are in fact, meaningless terms for the Indian girl whose path to school is an obstacle course or the Swedish woman who has been raped by her date. Each woman's security assessment is unique and absolute.

One may be safer in a mob than in her own bedroom; another may be protected and privileged but still insecure in her workplace. What difference does the label make to any of their lives or their prospects of greater safety or security? If anything, defensive governments and outraged patriarchal social elders are likely to dig in their heels, refuse to engage and reinforce the kinds of protection that in fact place women and girls at risk-dress codes, curfews, moral policing and paternalistic speech.

It is also hard to ignore the whiff of something neocolonial in a report by a UK-US based charity that lists ten countries, nine of which are non-western and the tenth, Trump's America. Responding to the label 'most dangerous' leaves us with few middle options. Did we need a foreign study to tell us how bad things are? Are they telling us this because we may not be smart enough to notice or political enough to change it? What will we gain or lose with this label with reference to our own older-than-a-century efforts to transform our society? Is there any productive use to which I can put this ranking? It is not clear to me.

Moreover, the Poll website lists only the ten most dangerous; we do not know how the other 183 countries fare. This is one of the differences between the Reuters Foundation poll and the Women, Peace and Security Index which was the subject of an earlier article.

The Poll site tells us who fares worst but there does not appear to be enough information from the poll in the public sphere to put this in any context, local or comparative. The Index lists all countries studied and so you can understand where and why one fares better and one worse.

The Poll rightly points to the lack of reliable and consistent data on safety and substitutes for this, expert interviews. This weakens the enterprise. The Index operationalises well-being and empowerment along three dimensions, inclusion, justice and security, each of which are made up of three measures. These measures are drawn from public domain databases, national and international. This data may be flawed but we could make the case that they are less subjective than a relatively small number of interviews.

If I were asked to differentiate substantively between the Reuters Poll and the WPS Index, I would also say that the Poll looks at 'safety' while the Index looks at 'security.' There is a difference.

Safety is one dimension of security, which is also determined by food security, health, well-being, livelihoods, rights and participation. Safety is the most immediate and tangible dimension of security, but without the rest, remains always imperilled. When our discourse focuses on safety, it is still possible to ask paternalistic and patriarchal questions about keeping 'our women' safe and putting them behind protective walls. Shifting the focus to security opens up questions about justice, equality and freedom, and the walls must be dismantled in order to address them fully.

Asking about a narrow subject-safety-within a small community of anonymous experts, the Reuters Poll may be well-intentioned but it could lead our discussions in unproductive directions. Yes, the dramatic label 'most dangerous' draws our attention but it does not seem to do so in a productive manner. And when we use it, perhaps like a bright highlighter to emphasise the import of our work, we do not necessarily expand the potential of our work to make real change. We simply impress in the moment, and only those who may neither know the issue nor the places involved.

Should the Reuters Foundation cease and desist in its polling efforts because they are flawed? Of course not. Any kind of story-telling around gender-based violence can only help us raise levels of awareness and social responsibility.

The Foundation is correct in saying in defence of its methodology there is not enough consistent data that can be used reliably. Reliable empirical research is expensive and complicated; but doing nothing may be worse. For those who like numerical measures, this poll is a useful dipstick and it serves the purpose of getting us to talk about violence, how common it is, how we are doing so little about it and also, how little good data we have.

Perhaps, we are the ones who need to change our perspective and not see the Poll as a final, authoritative verdict, to be swallowed or challenged, but simply as one way to capture a story that is worth telling a hundred times till it changes. Getting angry about the Poll misses the point it tries to make. That energy is better used changing the world.  


OPINION

  • River in a 'Court of Law' - Legal issues pertaining to its personality
  • Syria: A Testament To International Moral Bankruptcy
  • When the State Sought to Muzzle Privacy, U-Turn Now Only to Accommodate SC Verdict
  • The Bull in A China Shop Wrecks Indian Economy
  • When Buddha Looks The Other Way: The Plight Of The Rohingya
  • A Fatal Blow to The Judiciary
  • The Dramatic Rise in Wealth Inequality
  • Wild And Baseless Speculations of Crisis in the CPI(M)
  • Budget 2018: Fantabulous Schemes With Not A Paisa Earmarked
  • Kasganj: Sankalp Foundation and the Politics of Hate
  • PM Modi Sounds the Election Bugle: Congress and Hindutva the Agenda for 2019 Polls
  • The US Game Plan in Syria
  • Both Nehru and Patel Were the Need of the Hour in 1947-48
  • The Battle of the Two Begums of Bangladesh
  • Why Bangladesh Matters
  • Kejriwal's Apology is Not What the Media Claims
  • Arrest of a '5-minute Dalits' Proves Why SC/ST Act Dilution Will Grossly Impact Real Dalits
  • The Dalits and the Law
  • Winners May Be Losers In Karnataka's Catch 22 Endgame
  • Jinnah and the BJP
  • Jawaharlal Nehru (Nov 14 1889- May 27, 1964): We Still Live In A House That Nehru Built
  • Implications of Trump-Kim Summit: Nuclear Pays!
  • Thomas Reuters Foundation Survey: Measuring Safety, Generating Outrage
  • ROADMAP TO A CEASEFIRE: AFGN - PAK
  • What Are People Voting for?
  • Foreign Policy: A Double Whammy Awaits India
  • Changing Discourse
  • Assam: The Mythology of "Immigrants"
  • Imran Time is Here
  • 71 Years on, Forsty Relations Countinue
  • To Stop Climate Change, We Need to Open Bordera
  • Make Use of Bid to Postpone Provincial Elections
  • Cringing and Fuddled at 71
  • Ensuring Strident Voice Will Not Become Majority Voice
  • Nehru, Vajpayee and Modi
  • Religious Bias Okayed
  • The Oslo Accords: A Bloody Legacy of Betrayal
  • Crushing the Campus
  • Three Stories And Task of The Office Of Missing Person
  • Drama Over Indo-Pak Meeting
  • An ill Wind
  • Symbolic Actions Alone Are Insufficient For Long Term Change To Occur
  • If Democracy Subverts Itself
  • Returning Land to Civilians is a Promise That Needs Follow Up
  • Democracy In Crisis: What we Know and What we Don't
  • Reparations Office Can Bind The Nations Together
  • Implementation Challenges Facing The Ayushman Bharat Program
  • Subverting the Central Bank
  • Under the Yoke of New-Imperialism: A Fake War of Patriotism and Treason
  • India Joins the Club
  • The Third Phase
  • President is Best Situated to Resolve Political Crisis
  • No Country for Adventure: Challenges Extreme Sports Athletes Face in India
  • Setting A Perilous Political Precedent
  • What Rahul and Modi can do in the Next Four Months
  • Finding a Win-Win Solution to Break the Deadlock
  • Temple in the Age of Colliders
  • Four Parameters of a Political Solution at This Time
  • Resolve National Question With President's Support
  • Decapitating the Leadership
  • Four Takeaways From the 2018 Election
  • Science of Words
  • The Ace up Modi's Sleeve
  • The Government Must Not Deny The TNA
  • The Prolonged Wait For Justice And For Political Leadership
  • Endgame in Afghanistan
  • Pluralist Ethos is More Relevant to National Identity
  • A Concerned Citizen's Points For Inclusion in The Manifesto of Political Parties
  • In My Own Voice: Circle of Unreason
  • RBI To The Rescue of Modi Government - It's Election Time!
  • Say No to War
  • A terrifying Fallout
  • The Type of Leadership The Country Needs
  • Death Wish as Nationalism
  • Politics on Kashmir Need Not be About Optics Alone
  • Why an Urban Job Guarantee Scheme is Not a Bad Idea
  • National Security: The New in 'New Normal'
  • Re-Promulgating an Ordinance is a Fraud on the Constitution
  • Elections 2019: India at a Crossroads
  • Peace and Inclusive Development
  • NYAY Providing Basic Income Fulfills the Vision of Mahatma Gandhi and Changed Election Narrative Based on Basic Issues
  • Advani Should Blame Himself For Promoting Modi
  • Kashmir: Tracing the Degeneration of Mainstream Politics
  • Elections and the Issue of Civil Liberties
  • Jumlanomics:Chronicles of a Post-Truth Bharat
  • BJP: Hiding Failures, Targeting Nehru
  • A Mayawati Moment
  • Godse is a Synonym of Hindu Nationalism, Agenda of the RSS Combine!
  • Development Beyond Numbers
  • A Rational Approach to Countering Extremist Violence is Needed
  • In My Own Voice: Is This the Sprit of Democracy?
  • Prevention is The Best Migration Cure
  • The Rise of Hate
  • The Right Mantras for India's Change
  • Coming Home - Where Family Overpowers All
  • Easter Sunday Bombing Used to Create a Major Rift in Sri Lankan Society
  • Hacking Humanity
  • Environmental Rule of Law in India
  • Peace is a Word That West Has Taken From Afghans
  • Trump's War Games
  • Modi & States
  • Who is an 'Outsider' in West Bengal?
  • China on Maps
  • 19th Amendment Will Correct Itself at End of President's Current Term
  • Authoritarianism and the Crisis of Public Ethics in India
  • Presidential Candidate The People Want
  • Has India's Kashmir Cape Given Pakistan Reason for War?
  • Icons and Ideology of Religious Nationalism
  • Why NRC in Assam May Create Another Kashmir
  • Campaign to Abolish the Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka is a Red Herring
  • As US Tries to Isolate Iran, China Steps In
  • Of Hindi and Hierarchy
  • Why Sri Lankan Elections May Bring Far Reaching Change
  • What US Policy Tells Us About India's Growing 'Friendship' With It
  • Gandhian Philosophy is a Critique of Modernity and Power
  • Inner Party Democracy is Just as Important as Funding
  • India's Foreign Policy Has Dug Itself a Deep Hole
  • 'Broken Promises' and Politics of Hate': Is Political Autonomy The Way Forward For J&K?
  • The Ninth Betrayal: America Has Let Down Khurd, Yet Again
  • Who Benefits From The WhatsApp Hacking Case?: Pertinent Question Left Unanswered
  • State Elections Results Expose "Limits" of BJP's Nationalist Agenda
  • "Religious Belief" vs. "Rule of Law": Did SC's Ayodhya Verdict Legalise Building of a Theocratic State?
  • What Does Trump's "New Refugee Ban" Mean for America's Immigrants?
  • India Must Change Course as Rajapaksas Return on Sinhala Buddhist Wave
  • The Supreme Court's First Judgment Without an Author
  • Geopolitics in South Asia Renders Millions Stateless
  • "Shakespeare's Vision of the Improbale" Unfolds: Is Modi Today's Macbeth?
  • Sri Lanka Under Rajapaksa: Finding Areas of Mutual Agreement
  • "The Game of Religion is Played by Men": Women Speak From the Margins of Ayodhya Dispute
  • Telangana Ecounter- Failure of Local Police Poses Grave Danger to Democracy
  • The Changing Nature of War and Diplomacy
  • Sri Lanka: Government's Cooperation A "Temporary Phenomenon"?
  • The Role of Corruption in This Season of Revolts
  • New Citizenship Law to a "Brazenly Divisive Agenda"
  • Youth Agitation Against CAA Brings a Historic Generational Shift
  • "Digital Authoritarianism": With Internet Shutdowns Normalised, the Digital Space is Democracy's New Battleground
  • Sri Lanka: The Challenge of Development Amidst Devolution of Power
  • The Political Divides that Split India
  • 'Never Again': Echoes of Nazi Crimes Remain Alive 75 Years After Auschwitz
  • "Legacy of Mutual Suspicion" Plagues Opponents of the Modi Regime
  • "Toxic" India Sliding into an Environmental Abyss
  • Manufacturing Hate: From Anurag Thakur's 'Shoot the Traitors' to Pistol-Bearing Youth's 'Yeh lo Azaadi!'
  • Kejriwal Isn't Communal, But His Desire Not to be Seen Anti-Hindu May Prove Self-Defeating
  • Religion States Won't Oppose US-Taliban Deal
  • Lessons From Pathogens: Coronavirus, A wake Up Call?
  • The Geopolitics of the Covid 19 Pandemic
  • Cold War Begins As Nations Fued Over Coronavirus
  • India Fights Coronavirus...With Scriptures, Morals and Police
  • The Burden of COVID 19
  • Do Israeli Settelemnts in Occupies West Bank Constitute a War Crime ?
  • The Global Debate on COVID-19 Lockdown: Listen to Divergent Scientific Voices or Risk Manipulation by Big Businesses?
  • Sri Lanka's Easter Bombings And The Demand For Justice
  • How India Can Solve the "Catch-22 Situation" of Allowing Migrant Workers to Return Home
  • The Time for Universal Basic Income Has Arrived
  • COVID-19 Crisis Exposes Fatal Weaknesses of 'Strong' Leaders
  • The Pandemic Has Taught Us the Importance of Maintaining an Ecological Balance, Will we Remember IT?
  • The Muslim Elite Has Let Down the Muslim Poor
  • "There is Nothing Nationalist or Non-Nationalist in Reporting"
  • Why WHO Took 3 Months to Declare a Global Pandemic
  • A Political Lockdown That Silences Voices
  • The 'Relief Package' of Online Education May End up "Institutionalising Drop Outs"
  • Can Democracy Survive the Coronavirus?
  • As China Ups the Ante, This is What India Must do...
  • Tackling Racism With Compassionate Reporting-CNN Leads The Way
  • Sri Lanka: Pluralism In Governance Required In The Absence of Parliament
  • Idia's Tactical Non-Solutions To China's Incursions in Ladakh
  • "At The Brink of A New Cold War": Sino-US Ties at a Crossroads
  • In Light of Rising Conservatism, Can The Personal be Political Again?
  • India-China: The Complete Breakdown of Trust, How and Why
  • Rethinking Development After Covid-19
  • The Pandemic Must Transform Our Agriculture
  • Treacherous Road to Make Manu History
  • The 'American Way of War' Is Built On A Foundation of Racism
  • Covid -19 And The Crisis of Education-An Insight
  • Governments That Preach Non-Violence Must Lead By Example
  • New Status of Hagia Sophia Signals The Death Of Secularism
  • Covid 19 and Furthering of Sectarian Agenda in Education
  • Biden's "Conventional" Approach vs Trump's "Whimsical" Handling of Foreign Policy
  • Why Arguments Against Reservation are Flawed
  • Curfew Welcomes One Year of Abrogations in Kashmir
  • Ayodha: What is BJP's Motive For Holding Ram Temple Ceremony Amid Pandemic?
  • New Education Policies of India And Pakistan Will Further Divide, Within and Without
  • Does India's Handling of China Make Sense?
  • Return of the Rajapaksas in Sri Lanka
  • An Independent Supreme Court Is a Must for Democracy
  • Does Rule of Law Trump Tide of Public Opinion?
  • UAE-Israel Deal Accelerating Fragmentation of West Asian Politics
  • Congress And Its "Unprecedented Political Challenge""
  • Does The 20th Amendment Threaten Pluralism in Sri Lanka?
  • Digital Hate, Now A Profitable Commodity
  •