Alberto YELMO BRAVO
6. Lecciones aprendidas para el futuro del movimiento mundial antidopaje
actions of the wider social surroundings of the HHs. This section will further discuss and analyse the fourth and effectively the most important component of the decision process for taking out a loan, namely reactions and attitudes within the immediate family circle, especially of men towards women’s MFI membership.
As already mentioned, NEED’s lending policy is that loans can and will be only issued
conditional to a male nominee for the loan. This is considered legitimate on the grounds that in a patrilineal society like (North) India, the consent of the family head not only safeguards family harmony and ensures the timely return of the loan, but in case the women should default, also holds the head of the HH accountable. However, this does not change the fact that women aspiring to greater economic independence via investments in their small enterprises will have no recourse should their male guardians refuse their desire to access credit. In addition, as per NEED’s policy, only married women are considered for a loan, because if the woman were to marry and move in with the husband’s family, the in-laws might object and hinder the women from paying open instalments. Thus single women are also discriminated against, while without male consent, even a married woman is not able to take out a loan for an enterprise that she might want to run, independently or jointly.
Take for example the case of the young daughter of one of NEED’s clients in Bihar, whose statement was quoted in the introduction of this thesis. The young woman (in her early twenties with two small daughters) whose mother was a client with NEED, had been sent back to her parents’ home in Bihar after the birth of her second daughter, due to the desire for a male child by her husband and in-laws. Although young, healthy and able-bodied, a skilled bangle maker working in her parents’ bangle making micro business from home and willing
110
to expand with a loan of her own, she did not qualify for a loan from NEED. Although her father and brother in the HH were willing to pledge as a male nominee for her, she did not qualify for a loan, as her husband was not around to support her loan application. A loan from an MFI would help her expand the family business and earn more, yet not only NEED, but all local MFIs, would not consider her as an eligible loan candidate.
Table 4.7 lists some statistics regarding male nomination and domestic disharmony due to MFI membership. Though by now established, still the table lists the male nominee obligatory condition along with the relationship of the male nominee with the MFI client.
Table 4.7; Male nomination, domestic violence/ conflicts and MFI membership
Borrower HHs Control Group Difference in sample means
(p-value of t-test)1
N 39 35 16 13
Reported by women Men women men
Male nominee condition obligatory by the MFI
for issuance of loan 39 35 - - -
Husband male nominee for MFI loan 35 - - - -
Physical and verbal violence common in
household 14 8 9 3 (0.26) 0 .11
Conflict/ domestic disharmony in household
due to (desire for) MFI membership 8 6 7 7 0 .34 *** (0.00) Relationship between the respondents has
deteriorated due to (desire for) MFI membership
6 3 5 2 0.14 *
(0.08) MFI membership (perceived) as means to more
economic strength and way to deal with marital
violence 5 - 4 - (0.27) 0.12
HHs where violence was already present before MFI membership and the level of violence/ HH disharmony has gone up post MFI membership
9 2 - - - -
Physical/ verbal violence from family members other than the male guardian due to (desire for)
MFI membership 5 - 4 -
0.12 (0.27) 1. The p-value refers to a t-test of the difference in the means for borrower HHs – non-borrower HHs);
*p<0.1, **p<0.05 and ***p<0.01 (two-tailed).
2. Note that about half of the HHs in this category where violence was reported to have gone up was due to
the husband’s excessive alcohol consumption. With the income from the MFI loan, the main point of
conflict was the husband’s demands of wanting to spend more of the HHs income on alcohol.
Responses from both sample sub-groups reveal that there is conflict and domestic disharmony due to MFI membership or a desire for it. Women respondents from both sample sub-groups also reported that their relationships with their male guardians had deteriorated due to the loan or expressing the wish to take out a loan, and that they had encountered violence from family members other than their male guardian. Some respondents, from both the sample groups, also saw their (potential) MFI membership as a means to more economic strength and way to deal with marital violence. For this, a combination of questions were put
111
to the respondents. The respondent was asked if a (potential) MFI membership would help them deal with marital violence basically because the women would be less dependent on husband economically. According to one respondent in Bihar:
“I had to force my husband into signing the loan application after he sold 3 bighas out of the 8 bighas ancestral land that we had for alcohol consumption,...I wanted to use the loan for cultivating parwal on the land to feed my five children and us before he sold off the rest of it as well....my husband gave in because we were starving and because I had had enough; but he is very upset at my attitude of putting up a fight with every liquor vendor in the village not to sell alcohol to him and overpowering him...and even now I am afraid at night that he will beat me up, so I always have a male relative staying over to avoid such a fate”12 (interview
with female borrower, Bihar).
Another borrower explained her husband’s ambivalent stand on her MFI borrower status:
“...he is quite aware that the additional income we have due to the loan investment in cattle is helping us meet ends, but he is still very unhappy about the fact that now I have started to take decisions on how and what to spend and do not ask him constantly for money for the HH’s expenses the way I did before” (interview with
female borrower, Lucknow, UP).
Thus even when men give their consent to their wives to take out a loan, they are not always content with this decision, even though the extra income generation from the loan is helping the family. This discontentment is demonstrated by bouts of quarrelsome or vexed behaviour towards their wives, mostly for wanting to share decision-making on financial issues in the house (among others, spending less on alcohol) or enjoying small freedoms that they did not have before. This would also explain why the number of HHs where the level of violence has gone up after taking out a loan is higher than the number of HHs where women saw MFI membership as a means to more economic strength and a possible way to deal with marital violence. The following statement from one respondent in Lucknow helps demonstrate the point further:
“....he [husband] used to get upset and abusive before [the NEED loan] when I asked him for money for the households expenses, but now that I do not ask him for money because I earn enough to run the house with the provision store [set up with
12 Bhiga is a traditional unit of measurement of area of a land commonly used in several parts of India, and varies in size from one part to another. In Bihar, 1 bigha is equivalent to approximately: 27232 sq. ft or 0.625 acres of land (Land Zone 2012). Parwal is a local vegetable produced in North India and commonly sold on the
112
the help of loan], he gets upset and angry [violent] because he feels that we [wife
and children] do not respect him enough” (interview with female
borrower, Lucknow, UP).
The respondent above refers to her husband’s inability to provide financially for the family before the loan was taken out for her small provisions store. The earlier bouts of violence were due to his helplessness, pressure or inability to look after his family. The more recent violence after the loan and financial support for the family due to his wife’s income, however, seems to be a result of his frustration, insecurity and failure to stand up to his responsibilities as head of the household in the wake of his wife shouldering what he should have.
The scenario for several such HHs was very similar. Men seemed very insecure in their traditional roles as heads of the HHs. Due to the change in the income status of their wives, men were probably not being asked or waited upon to take all important and petty decisions the way they expected their wives and families to do, and therefore resorted to aggressive behaviour towards their wives and families. A differentiated pattern, however, is worth mentioning here. Most respondents from the borrower HHs who were clients with NEED longer than a year or two, admitted that over time this attitude of men towards their wives had eventually improved. This may have occurred because the men realised that women assuming a decision-making role does not necessarily lead them to revolt against the traditional societal status of the men.
The same could not be said for the non-borrower HHs. Note that the differences in the two sample means for responses regarding conflict and domestic disharmony and eventual deterioration in marital relationship are statistically significant (see Table 4.7). This shows that the attitude of men from the control group HHs were more rigid than was observed in borrower HHs. One could well argue that the change in the attitude of men towards women’s decisions and choices of MFI membership were also a result of the women having realised their desire to attain a loan and start a business. Thus for the women from control group HHs who had not been allowed to realise their desire of opting for a loan, the attitudes of the men remained unchanged and rigid.
The incidents where women from both sample sub-groups faced violence from family members other than their husbands or male guardians were women in HHs where the male guardian or the husband was not necessarily the head of the HH and families were extended and living jointly. The perpetrators of the violence inflicted on women were senior members within the family, usually in-laws, both male and female. Table 4.8 lists statistics on the disposition of power positions within the HHs. The frequency of control group women living
113
in joint family set ups where their husbands were not the head of the HHs is much higher (see also table 4.1 on joint family figures for both sub groups). This meant that these women (and their husbands) had to take into account the opinions of further family members, who were much higher in the familial hierarchy and living under the same roof, regarding MFI membership.
In general, responses from the interviews indicate that women in the borrower HHs had relatively more freedom of self-determination, were subject to fewer restrictions from their husbands and families, were less intimidated by their spouses and were more mobile compared to their counterparts from the non-borrower HHs. For all these categories, the differences in the sample means were also statistically highly significant, as shown in Table 4.8. For example, three quarters of borrower women reported that their male guardians would allow them to improve their education in comparison to just over half of the women from the control group.
Table 4.8; Power positions, interpersonal attitudes and intra-household dynamics
Borrower HHs Control Group Difference in sample means (p-value of t- test) 1
N 39 35 16 13
Reported by women men women men
Male guardian is the head of household 34 - 10 - -0.25 ** (0.03) Respondent has a say in how earnings are
to be spent 36 28 8 11 -0.15 ** (0.04)
Respondent is afraid to disagree with
male guardian 18 - 12 - 0 .30 ** (0.04)
Male guardian would permit the female
protégé to improve education 29 30 9 9 -0.18 ** (0.04)
Male guardian has a restrictive attitude
towards women 2 11 9 6 8 0.22 ** (0.03)
Mobility of female respondents is
restricted due to family confinements 11 12 9 8
0.28 *** (0.00) Male guardian finds derogatory
behaviour/ physical violence towards
women normal/ commonplace 11 9 7 7
0.22** (0.03)
Male guardian finds women’s
independence of choice normal/ commonplace
15 25 3 5 -0.39 *** (0.00)
1. The p-value refers to a t-test of the difference in the means for borrower HHs – non-borrower HHs); *p<0.1, **p<0.05 and ***p<0.01 (two-tailed).
2. See Appendix 7 for an explanation.
Similarly, significantly more men from the control group had a tendency to have a restrictive attitude toward women in their HHs. Much of the information on the “restrictive attitude of men towards women” were gathered from responses of both men and women respondents via a number of questions that relate to general sentiments and attitudes among the men as they see themselves and as this is perceived by the women. The questions ranged
114
from attitudes to women making their own decisions, to humiliating behaviour and violence (physical, verbal and emotional) against women within the HHs, and also in their communities. They also addressed how this behaviour was perceived or seen by men and how it eventually influenced their own attitude towards women in their own HHs. There were also questions on the freedoms of movement that the women enjoyed in general and within their communities in particular, like seeing friends and family or talking to male acquaintances. Men and women from both HHs were quite open in admitting that such freedoms were restricted, without much sense of having to justify these restrictions when they were there.
Similarly, the inclination of men from borrower HHs to support women’s independence of choice concerning their education, working status and self-determination was higher than for their counterparts from the control group. The crucial point is whether the attitudes of men from borrower HHs were “better” towards women earlier on, or whether this change come about after the women had become MFI members. From what I could gather from interactions with the women from borrower HHs, their male counterparts were less possessive or controlling in their attitudes towards women in general. Still there were many cases where these women had encountered violence, hardships and opposition regarding their personal choices, freedoms and space. However, even for the women from borrower HHs where there was opposition and restrictions regarding their decision-making on issues such as MFI membership, it is possible that the women’s persistence, together with the relative flexibility of the male counterpart in comparison to men from non-borrower HHs, had eased the path to loan take up. Furthermore for those reporting violence in HHs, there were issues of excessive alcohol consumption that might explain for this. For example, half of the HHs reported some violence before taking out a loan and higher levels after taking out the loan (see Table 4.7). Husbands were reported to consume excessive alcohol and the resulting violence after loan take up was mostly due to expenses regarding alcohol.
Those reporting violence before loan take up, particularly women from borrower HHs who were borrowers over a longer period of time, reported that the attitudes of men had improved over time. Some even reported that the level of violence had stopped over time since taking out a loan. Most of the long-time borrowers admitted that even when there was opposition from the immediate or extended family, if the husband backed the decision to take out a loan, the women had in most cases managed to take up the loan. This was the case even when micro-lending was not so common in their villages or areas.
115
“...there were many in the family and community who were very angry when I first started with NEED 6 years ago... mostly because there were few who had opted for a loan... [My] husband was also scared of how the people might react in the long run, but he still supported the loan application, as he was sure that I would never do something which would harm my children or him” (interview with female
borrower, Sitapur, UP).
Even though such first movers within the communities were confronted with much opposition and scepticism regarding association with an MFI, they supported their wives’ loan application. This indicates that men from borrower HHs were probably not only more adaptable, but also more accommodating and open in their attitudes compared to others within their communities, who showed scepticism regarding borrowing from or membership with an MFI. It is possible that these individuals helped to open paths within their communities for the others to follow in their footsteps. This indicates a positive correlation between more open attitudes of men within the community and MFI outreach. In other words, loan take up by the HHs depends on how the men within the communities deal with various pressures or opposition within their families or communities at large. First movers play an important role in this context.
Further evidence that the non-liberal stance of men decreases women’s self-determination and financial leeway in their affairs, hindering them from opting for a loan, was provided by the control group HHs. Table 4.9 presents statistics for the control group HHs only, focusing on their attitudes toward MFI association.
Table 4.9: Selected characteristics of non-borrower HHs regarding MFI association
N 16 13
Reported by Women Men
Awareness of credit possibilities on the market ranging from formal banks to
informal credit associations (ROSCA/ ASCAs) 16 13
Income situation of the household
Earn enough to make savings
Income only just enough to meet expenses Income not sufficient to cover all living expenses
7 7 2 5 8 - Female respondent has considered taking a loan from an MFI 13 7
Reasons for not opting for a loan from an MFI 1
Husband/ family oppose There is no need for a loan
Community shuns it/ religion forbids it
Other means of cheaper credit like ROSCAs/ ASCAs preferred MFI would not lend/ husband male nominee a hindrance
10 3 3 3 1 9 4 2 1 -
Opinion of husband/ family on loans from MFI
Negative/ oppose MFIs Indifferent Positive 11 4 1 10 2 1 1. More than one reason could be provided for not opting for a loan from an MFI
116
Out of every five, four of the female respondents from the control group HHs had