READING B
Reading 1. Public/private domains: Gender relations in the Central Cordillera.
Situating Gender and Difference
In all societies, women and men have always been perceived as different in their biological constitution. Behavioral
differences between women and men, however, are social constructs. These social constructs oftentimes assume a
political character. The socio-cultural construction often called gender, which results from the interaction of biology and
culture, gives rise to the cultural concepts of “femininity” and “masculinity”, and the accompanying cultural behavior
assigned to each by the society. There is, however, diversity in what constitutes “feminine” and “masculine” behavior
across cultures and at different points in time. Females and males acquire gender identity that is guided by the socially and
normatively defined notions that constitute female and male. In relation to this, some feminist theorists have suggested the
notion of two separate spheres of activity: the public and private domains. The public domain is described as the social
sphere that centers on the wider social world outside of the house and is associated with political and economic activity
above the household level. This has been described as the men’s domain. The domestic or private domain is said to be the
social sphere that centers on the home and is associated with such activities such as child rearing and food preparation for
household consumption. This is the women’s domain.
Writers have observed that women’s gender identity is largely the outcome of ideologies formed by the society. For
example, in Thailand, Buddhist notions of gender difference stress female inferiority despite the widespread participation
of women in all levels of the economy. Kirsh has argued that Theravada Buddhism views women as bound to earthly
desires, while men are more ready to give up such attachments. Kirsh refers to this image of women as constituting an
“ideology of oppression.”
Feminist anthropologists have observed from cross-cultural perspectives that to understand gender relations is to analyze
these in the context of time periods, social class, ethnicity, education, ideology, age, degree of acculturation, and other
experiences as these intersect in women’s lives. In pre-Revolutionary Vietnam, for example, Confucianism adopted by the
upper class subordinated women, whereas among the peasantry, husband and wife equality was celebrated. In Saudi
Arabia, government has declared that any mingling of the sexes is morally wrong. This ideology has been translated into
the strict segregation of the sexes such as purdah. As a result, Saudi women and men are segregated, in schools and other
institutions, in the workplace, in banks, and in public buses. Female lawyers are barred from being judges or holding
legislative authority. In this Islamic society, the patriarchal family remains the center of social organization.
What Makes the Difference: Some Theoretical Perspectives?
Evidence from cross-cultural anthropological studies informs us that women and men behave differently because more
than biological constitution, social and cultural processes make them different. There is cross-cultural evidence that male-
female variability is expressed in sexual behavior, in the division of labor, and in the performance tasks such as child
rearing. This shows that no one characteristic task and subsequent behavior is natural to males or females; however,
culture and society see the importance of differentiating women and men.
Theories to explain gender differences as basis for the subordination of women and their low status as compared to men
have often been attributed to biological differences. Simone de Beauvior (1953), for example, locates the origin of
women’s subordination in her relationship to nature and nature’s relationship to culture. She argues that men are freer than
women to pursue transcendence because they are not constrained by the tasks of reproducing and sustaining life.
Similarly, Ortner (1974) claims that the nature/culture model is a universal construction of sexual inequality, aligning
nature with woman and culture with man.
Rosaldo (1977,8) argues that an emphasis on women’s maternal role leads to a universal opposition between domestic and
public roles that are necessarily asymmetrical. Women, confined to the domestic sphere, do not have access to the sorts of
authority, prestige, and cultural value that are the prerogatives of men. Another view, offered by Sanday (1974), suggests
that reproduction, subsistence, and defense are crucial aspects of any society’s survival. However, women’s reproductive
role may limit their participation in defense.
Sanday further argues that women’s contribution to subsistence is a crucial variable in determining their status. In
societies where women are the producers, but the fruits of production are controlled by men, the status of women is low.
Women’s status is highest where the contribution to subsistence is relatively equivalent to that of men. Sacks (1974,222)
has observed that for the attainment of full social equality, men and women’s work must be of the same kind – the
production of social use values. In other words, where the sexes engage in productive activities with different ends, such
as that women engage only in production for private use while men engage in production for exchange or social use
values, women have low status.
Herstory. One of the key informants of this research was Edena Cogasi, a woman leader who has once been tagged by the
military as “Mother Cordillera” and “Commander”. At a time when Agawa women were pursuing a guerilla-style
operation against the resin-tapping activities in their forests, Philippine society
