History, corporal punishment and gender-based violence in Jamaica
SOME sociologists, clinical psychologists, political activists, media commentators and members of the wider public suggest that factors such as Jamaica’s genesis in the heinous brutality of colonial occupation that resulted in genocide against the Tainos, the enslavement of Africans and the indentureship of Asians, is the root cause of the current expressions of violence against women and girls.
Undoubtedly, the past is linked to the present. History is replete with examples of the exercise of male power over women’s and children’s bodies — rape, verbal and physical abuse, threats, inhumane and brutish treatment — unfettered access, whenever and wherever he (and often his friends and acquaintances) desired. Whether it is human trafficking, forced marriages, abortions, sex work, sterilisation and contraceptive use and psychological warfare, history shows that gender-based violence is grounded mainly in unequal power relations between women and men. A relationship based on the power of men to rule (patriarchy), their unfair treatment of women (sexism), hegemonic masculinity (tall, dark, handsome, educated, having a car, money, and many women, etc), and inequities based on class, race and ethnicity. These inequities have been stronger at some time than at others and they are often expressed as violence and domination over the female body. On these manifestations few will disagree.
Yet, the discerning thinker may qualify their agreement by suggesting that the society’s refusal to admit, confront and make appropriate amends to heal its historical hurt as well as additional factors are the real culprits. They may also argue that the society cannot remain satisfied with the violent outcome of the psychological conditioning which results from our historical trauma. The most common form of disciplining children is corporal punishment (90 per cent) in schools and homes. Such punishment is reinforced by cultural practices and tradition such as the dominant Christian belief that the rod must be used to enforce obedience and respect for authority. Children who comply are admired and cited as examples to emulate.
While we agree that successful peers can be the best examples for others, we are also cautious about some children whose normalising of compliance extend to accepting abuse from others — their peers and unscrupulous adults. Data from the Child Protection and Family Services Agency shows that only two per cent of reported cases of child abuse are from affected children. This implies the need for children to be trained to become their own advocates. We wonder the extent to which their exposure to abuse, whether at home, in school and/or their communities predispose them to accepting abuse.
The process of ending this violence must include understanding that it is grounded in relationships of inequality and the need and desire to exercise power over others. Each human being has the inalienable right — is born with the right — to be free from violence. The responsibility for our security is both personal and social — the government has a duty to protect its citizens and we as citizens have a responsibility to protect one another and to stop the carnage.
We invite you to partner with us to build a social movement as champions of zero-tolerance for violence against women and girls. Raise the issue in your place of worship, schools and community organisations. Report it to the police and encourage young people to talk up when they are abused. Let us end violence now.
Dr Imani Tafari-Ama is a research fellow in the Institute for Gender & Development Studies Regional Coordinating Office, at The University of the West Indies and is the project manager on the Jamaica Spotlight Country Project, the EU and UN-funded Spotlight Initiative programme in Jamaica. E-mail her at imani.tafariama@uwimona.edu.jm.
