The Tribune

By DR IAN BETHELL-BENNETT

The other day, driving along West Bay Street, a young man seemingly got out of a car and slapped a young woman down in the street. People stood around. We were on the main road and the assault occurred on the coastal road. He seemed assured in his ability to inflict violence on whomever he saw as less than himself. This is only one example of such behaviour.

It is sad that society sees women and their welfare as unimportant. Indeed, the idea that a man can own a woman leads some religious leaders to speak out against women 'over-exposing' their bodies and thinking that they should be able to speak at the same time as men.

In fact, when speaking to young people, young women in particular, one of their biggest restraints to success, self-expression, self-realisation has been the teaching that they should not be heard. 'Society' has removed the voice from much of the population. This silence has resulted from either politics or religion, or often the intersections of both. This work responds to the idea that some churches argue that they do not condone marital rape, but they do not support a woman's ability to have the voice to cry rape as this sullies the sanctity of marriage.

Taken from this statement, a man owns a woman and can do as he wishes with her. Though we do not condone violence when used in relationships, we do understand it, apparently. Is this really what those reverends and pastors mean? They seem to encourage inequality and discrimination. This concept really speaks to renowned sociologist Johan Galtung's cultural violence - cultural violence that promotes inequality as normal.

'Cultural violence' is defined here as any aspect of a culture that can be used to legitimise violence in its direct or structural form. Symbolic violence built into a culture does not kill or maim like direct violence or the violence built into the structure. However, it is used to legitimise either or both, as for instance in the theory of a "Herrenvolk", or a superior race.

Significantly, historical racism has been 'removed', but the concept of a master race, or deep inequality, has remained entrenched in the culture and psychology of the country. So many Bahamians are happy to treat women as less than, as can be seen in the House with female opposition members. So there are two levels that are clear. There is cultural violence and there is discrimination.

Violence = inequality

M Caprioli, of the University of Minnesota-Duluth, asks: "Should issues of gender equality be limited to issues of social justice, or does societal-level discrimination and violence against women have a far more deleterious effect on society in increasing the likelihood of internal conflict."

The Bahamas is now a country that demonstrates levels of violence and conflict similar to countries that experienced arm conflict. Yet we are paradise, though only for tourists. There is little if any real work being done to change this psycho-social dilemma. In fact, the structural violence being imposed on the country by the government is only deepening the problem. After Caprioli asks her question she demonstrates in the paper that there is indeed alignment. Her statement is:

"Examining issues of discrimination and inequality is inherently tied to issues of wealth, as GDP per capita is found to be a significant predictor of civil war. Higher income per capita raises education levels and improves public health."

Yet leaders seem happy to continue, and in fact to deepen the inequalities already operating in the country. By encouraging men to see women as less than, we are encouraging a public health problem with which the Princess Margaret Hospital cannot cope, and no one really talks about. We are also deepening the levels of interpersonal violence we experience everyday. Micro aggressions increase.

Some argue that it is OK for men to beat up each other, or we excuse this by arguing that these are violent people. The reality is much more troubling than this. We are breeding violence in homes and schools.

We do not teach acceptance, reason or equality. We only ever teach concepts that redraw lines of power inequality. Women, like children, should be seen and not heard. Poor people, are poor because they make themselves poor, not because the system is unequal or because they hold deeply inscribed markers of generational poverty. Generational poverty, unless actively attacked and changed, cannot be broken by simply sending a child to school.

The internal messages that have been passed down from parent to child, and messages transferred from leadership to underling, insist on the justifiable reason for this poverty and inequality). Interestingly, anger, violence and crime are more apparent in poorer homes. According to author Maia Szalavitz: "Inequality predicts homicide rates 'better than any other variable', says an expert - and it is linked to a highly developed concern for one's own status."

According to Bahamian officials, murder rates are down, though armed robberies are up. The structural and cultural violence being imposed on society will only result in deeper inequalities and increased violence.

The other day, a student complained that society has become a very dark place, with little hope of healing, when faced with the social realities that we choose not to see. We have a horribly high rate of sexual violence and an insultingly high rate of incest, yet people deny both, often while practicing both. The drug pandemic of the 1980s and 1990s has evolved into a society wounded and scarred with deep and wide disease. We do little to heal, except through private groups. Why do we encourage deepening violence through inequality deepening governmental polices when it is clear these will only increase violence and crime? The proof is all around us.