Cotización y cómputo de los periodos de cotización de los

because we are brought up with different tasks. Our lives are divided as man and woman. A man is supposed to hunt and

themselves know how much they suffer. I think for many people [i.e. men] it isn’t a problem. It’s important for young women to know/learn their position in the family.

do hard work while a woman is expected to do all the domestic work.

(FGD: Beira, 06/04/09)

In the beginning of the focus group discussion I became aware that the participants found it difficult approaching the subject matter. The women were not willing to start presenting and the discussion was initiated by the men chatting among themselves about what they thought the female role should be and what they should be doing. Interestingly this provoked the women to talk about lack of respect for their hard work and commitment to the family. Whilst listening to the discussion I observed complex dynamics among the participants. Although there were not significant age differences between the participants, I could observe the hierarchies of age (seniority) among the participants; younger women seemed to be shy or even intimidated by the other participants and maybe by the situation. Following Arnfred’s (1995) argument about age and status hierarchies in matrilineal communities; relations between women change during a life cycle. Older women use their seniority to ‘oppress’ young women. Other relations between women, however, are more stable and not just oppressive (Arnfred, 1995). For example, the relations between polygamous wives were often seen by the women themselves as a relation between sisters (ibid). As research from Mozambique shows, relations of seniority, however, are not well investigated and conceptualised. It is, therefore, important to note lacking representation of elders that are a significant group in the social stratification.

The table above shows that both female and male participants linked learning with women’s role in the domestic sphere. Following Arnfred’s theorisation of gendered worlds and borderlines in the northern parts of Mozambique, women’s and men’s lives are separated. As she describes: “women go off together hauling water and fetching firewood” and “men spend time with men” (1995: 6). Females’ and males’ lives in the fieldwork setting are socially and spatially separated for much of the day; women typically spend more time in and around the household doing domestic chores while men engage in other work outside the home (Arnfred, 1995). Although the research took place in central Mozambique, the there were strong similarities between what I observed and experienced, and what Arnfred reported from the north of Mozambique. For example, a clear division of gender lives (see Table 5.1 above) observed by the participants who prescribed the role of ‘caretaker’ for women and ‘hunter’

130 for men. These symbolic characteristics assigned to females and males explicitly resonate with the adults’ expectations of their children. Central to understanding how gender and sexual identities are formed is the transformations that individual undergoes in the course of participation in activity in terms of a trajectory of ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ (Lave and Wenger, 1991). This theory describes the idea that a young person (newcomer) learns through a process of integration from the periphery of the community of practice into the centre, to full participation in the social organism. This type of ‘apprenticeship’ to expected behaviour shows how adults’ expectations and understandings of gender roles shape young people’s identities through their participation in social life and community activities. Alternatively, we may understand the process as one of subjectification; the ‘production’ through a series of actions of a constitutive body such as rites of passage explored in Chapter 6.

In the context of changing gender relations in Mozambique, however, space and activities that used to be gendered have been under transition too (see section 2.1). Clearly, the participants of the focus group represented one of the views upon gender - the binary approach to gender – and the views explored by the group did not leave much room for new forms and restructuring of gender relations.

Returning to the perceptions of the focus group, the structure of power in the gender order is based on assumptions of what it means to be a woman and a man. The institutions of family and marriage embody relations of power that operate through local ideologies and beliefs. Power in this framework, as suggested by Kabeer, governs “the unequal distribution of resources and responsibilities” (1999: 15). In the focus group the women talked about how they are assigned a certain position in the family, which young women should learn to assume. The unequal power relations, seen by the women as their ‘low position in society’, underpin their role and (financial) dependence on their husbands. I felt that the comment about women’s ‘low position in society’ made some of the men uneasy or even defensive in the case of Man 3. It seemed to me that they were not pleased to hear how the women felt about their status in society. As some men attempted to explain, women and men are brought up to perform different tasks: Man 3 referred to the ‘division of lives’: ‘A man is supposed to

hunt and do hard work while a woman is expected to do all the domestic work’. This rapid

when I asked the other two women how they felt about their status, they did not give a clear answer and started to talk about a different issue.

I felt that Man 3 tried to apologise for this order of things. He seemed to genuinely appreciate the effort that women put into domestic work. He explained that he did not expect his wife to work professionally and acknowledged that he was ‘satisfied with her taking care of our

house and children’. I became aware that Man 3 felt embarrassed and I could hear

awkwardness in his voice. It was not clear to me how he was ‘satisfied’ with his wife’s domestic role. Looking through Ardener’s (1975) lens, men represent the dominant voice in a society. To become respected members of society women must transform their perceptions and models of perceiving into the terms – the language, expressions and genre – of the dominant male groups (ibid). As Man 3 maintained, he did not require his wife to get a professional job and was happy with the domestic arrangements. It seemed to me as if he did not noticed the changes happening in the society or he did not want to see the changes to happen?

Reflecting on the data from this focus group discussion it would have been interesting to investigate the changes that have happened in the community in past years. Participation of older people in the discussion could have given more in-depth insights into how gender relations have been changing and from the perspective of time they could recognise individuals’ ‘creative’ response to remodelling of identity (McNay, 2000). Following the idea of generative framework (McNay, 2000) this could also bring more information about women’s autonomous behaviour in the past and how they may act now within the context of social changes occurring in the country.

After I learned what adults considered ‘the right knowledge’ about gender relations I wanted to find out how young people understood the idea about ‘learning the right knowledge’ and how they experienced it.

Workshops with the students at the IFP provided interesting insights about gender relations and gender roles in social interactions with focus on the family. I organised four workshops with two groups of students, as described in Chapter 3: one group with 35 (12 female and 23 male) and the other with 32 participants (6 female and 26 male). For the activities they were divided into smaller, female and male groups, with 6-8 participants. I conducted similar activities with both groups and I draw here from the data from all the workshops.

132 During one of the initial sessions I asked everybody to reflect on gender identities in their families and then to analyse them in their groups. I indicated that I was interested to hear about their own experience of the interfamilial relationships; relations between their parents or other caregivers and other members of the family. The groups were asked to compile lists of characteristics of men and women from their discussions (see Figure 5.1 and 5.2).

Figure 5.1 Female group working on female and male characteristics

Figure 5.2 A male student presenting group work

The lists (see Table 5.2) were used as the starting point for debates which I discuss below. This exercise shows how I involved the students in reflecting upon their own situation and how they engaged with the process.

Table 5.2 Summary of female and male characteristics presented by the groups

Characteristics of a female Characteristics of a male

Domestic worker; educator; sensible; submissive; takes good care of her husband and children; takes care of her husband’s extended family, of the old and the sick; sensitive; creative (taking care of the house); sentimental; patient; obedient; needs to listen not only to her husband but also to the elders of the family; ‘pode

ser loboloda’ (she can be

married off); she needs to go through initiation rites; she usually cannot study; she suffers; she is beautiful.

Cabeça da família (head of the family); he gives

orders; he is proud and always right; he is a politician in the house; he is the one to take decisions at home; he is sexually more active (often exercises polygamy); he maintains the hierarchy in the family/society; he is aggressive; he is responsible financially and socially for creating a family and protecting it; a man always gets the most in the family (food, attention, space); he does not work in the kitchen and he does not wash his clothes; he has authority (woman depends financially on her husband therefore she accepts everything); he is independent; he is better educated than a woman; he does not need to explain himself; he can choose the woman he wants; the initiation rites encourage a man to ‘try’ as many women as possible before he marries.

When discussing the lists with the participants a very important point was made to start with: to them it seemed that the female attributes were about ‘limitations’ in life as opposed to those reflecting ‘freedom’ in the male list. It was a valuable observation, however, a few statements on the lists puzzled me and I asked the students whether this polarised view about women’s and men’s lives could not be challenged. A very controversial debate started with the girls arguing that women have less access to resources such as knowledge and networks to accomplish their work. Some of the girls argued further that women still find themselves

‘trapped in a submissive position’ because their husbands have paid the lobolo and therefore

they have to obey them: ‘man is chefe da família [head of the family] and he is superior. He

is the last one to return home without being questioned (Workshop: Beira, 13/08/09). The

perceptions about this tradition were divided between those who supported it as a form of agreement and security for the girl, and those who thought it was an unnecessary and outdated custom. While some of the female students considered lobolo as reinforcement of male power and superiority, others argued that it was a good way of assurance and ‘security money’ for the couple. I think that the discrepancies could reflect the multiple cultures and differences in traditional practices represented by the participants. As I mentioned in Chapter 3, the participants came from different parts of the country, hence they represented a range of different beliefs and ideas.

Some of the male students observed the responsibility of keeping a woman ‘fed’ and ‘happy’ otherwise she would find another man. Lack of money can bring a marriage to an end: ‘A

man without money who can no longer support his family risks his woman leaving him for somebody else’ (Workshop: Beira, 13/08/09). According to the male students a man is proud

to be the only bread winner in the family: ‘It’s a huge responsibility which needs to be

handled by a man: our grandfathers and our fathers have managed it, so can we!’

(Workshop: Beira, 13/08/09). Some of the male participants, however, expressed anxiety about the material demands put upon them by their girlfriends/wives and their families. Some of the male participants acknowledged that they will never get married as they simply did not have money to pay lobolo and because they cannot guarantee a decent life for their future family, they cannot be considered trustworthy among the members of their community. Consequently, the social construction of what a man should represent might hinder some of those young people to start their own family.

134 Nevertheless, some of the trainee teachers suggested that often family expectations and social pressure (regardless of the area they came from) influenced their choices and the way they acted. In the process of their identity formation they seemed to undergo physical, symbolic and discursive influence from their respective communities. As I explored Bourdieu’s theorisation the body is a public object although experienced as private, it is formed through social practices in formal and informal sites of learning.

Likewise some of the young men pointed to social expectations that also had an impact on sexuality and sexual identity: ‘If you don’t have a lot of sex the community thinks something

is wrong with you’ (Workshop: Beira, 13/08/09). Sexuality seemed to be an important issue

that the young people brought up. As some of the female participants assured me, man’s ability to satisfy a woman sexually was sometimes as important as his abilities to support her and the children economically. Thus, men’s sexual performance preserved a male domination through the sexual satisfaction of the female partner and fulfilling her needs.

Some of the female students also explained that husbands are not usually faithful and that it is culturally acceptable for them to have as many women as they want. This suggested to me that affairs must be ‘common knowledge’, and the more people know about them, the higher the man’s status in the community. This is in line with Bourdieu’s (2001) observation that sexual intercourse in many cultures is represented as an act of domination and as a symbol of male possession of a woman. When economic means are out of reach, young men seem to develop sexual capital (Groes-Green, 2009) that ensures respect among young women and community. Changing social organisation (see Chapter 2), allowed new negotiations between genders to emerge and not only men, but also women seem to be able negotiate multiple relations with men (see below).

Similarly to the focus group discussions with adults, the findings from the workshop reflect Foucault’s work on micro-mechanisms whereby power and power dynamics can be observed in everyday life. As a few of the participants put forward the idea of sharing financial and domestic responsibilities, questions about ‘men’s power’ were raised. According to both female and male participants, men do not do domestic work and it was ‘unthinkable for a

man to cook’. And even if men wanted to help: