http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/21/world/asia/21gender.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
This is the article that I brought up in class today about Afghan girls growing up as boys. The difference between these girls and the David Reimer story is that these girls know that they are girls and just act as boys in public. Their families also begin to treat them as boys at home as well. It is still very important for Afghan women to give birth to a boy and when this doesn't happen their status in society decreases. The women and men are both affected by not having a boy, so they revert to having a girl act as a boy to increase their family's standing in society. Throughout the article though it looks like it can actually be somewhat of an advantage for the girls to dress and act as boys. They are given more freedom to leave the house, escort their sisters in public, participate in sports, more educational opportunities, and are able work outside of their home. The girls only act as boys until they are old enough to marry and then have to change back to being a girl. The article mentions that this can be problematic for some of the girls because their freedoms are drastically limited and they have to return to a burqa. The psychological effects that this would have on the little girls is not nearly as dramatic as it would be if they never knew that they were born a girl, but I think that going from having a lot of freedoms to very few freedoms very quickly could definitely have a negative impact on them.
Do you think this practice is harmful for the girls who have to act as boys growing up or could it be an advantage to grow up without the societal constraints put on Afghan girls?
How do you think this affects the girls' self-image and self-worth as a girl?
The Afghan practice of switching girls to boys seems to be entrenched in the fabric of society, is socially accepted, and is done for familial (only boys inherit wealth and pass down a name), communal (families without boys are the object of pity), and economic/political (as a member of parliament, Mrs. Rafaat believed that without a son she'd be seen by her constituents as a failed woman) reasons. The girls/women interviewed, saw life as a boy in a positive light - they could 'do more fun things,' and were 'never constricted by any of the rules that applied to women in Afghanistan.' Mrs. Rafaat fondly recalled her time as a boy as the 'best time' and says it made her more energetic and stronger while also making it easier for her to relate to and communicate with men. Perhaps she will be able to use these strengths to increase the freedoms for Afghan girls and women in general.
ReplyDeleteThe families gain so much 'social and economic currency' from having a boy but I wonder what happens to the families when the girls become women and revert back to their original roles?
The article portrays this practice in a positive light. The girls enjoyed their time as boys and the women look back on the experience fondly. I would think that some, like Zahara who never wanted to change back, would be frustrated with the constrictions imposed by being a woman.