Sri Lankan women have made significant contributions to politics, but their treatment in parliament has deteriorated over time. The recent incidents have been putrid, but it’s better to avoid mentioning names at this juncture. Issues of parliamentary privilege can be suffocating.
One of the most prominent aspects of this deterioration is the way in which women politicians are often objectified. In 2019, for example, a male MP commented on the appearance of a female parliamentary colleague, saying she was “looking very sexy” in her dress and adding that he was blown away, the innuendo sexually suggestive to the core. Definitely it’s a hostile environment for women in politics, but it’s these days par for the course it seems.
Another way in which women politicians are mistreated is through double-shaming. This is when women are blamed for the negative consequences of their own actions, even when those actions are justified. For example, a female MP was criticized for speaking out against sexual harassment in parliament. She was privately accused of being “too aggressive” and of “ruining the atmosphere” of the house even though she was being sensitive to the harassment meted out to female staff of parliament.
Double-shaming is particularly dangerous and could serve to cow down even those such as Sudarshini Fernadopulle who is not exactly a spring chicken. She figured in that incident highlighted above.
There are a number of reasons the general treatment of women in Sri Lankan politics has deteriorated over time. One is that the country has become more conservative in recent years. This has led to a rise in sexism and misogyny, which has had a negative impact on women in all spheres of life, including politics.
The mistreatment of women in Sri Lankan politics is more serious than most men in politics would admit. It is deterring women from entering politics and is creating a hostile environment for those who do. Pity that this is a country in which in 1960, Sirimavo Bandaranaike became the world’s first female prime minister. She was called the only man in her cabinet, and this was a comment borne out of respect.
MISOGYNY
In the 1970s and 1980s, a number of women politicians played prominent roles in matters related to administration and governance. These included those as diverse as Vivienne Goonewardena, who gave as good as she got, and Chandrika Kumaratunga, who went on to become president and generally brooked no nonsense.
Historically, Sri Lankan women have enjoyed a relatively high degree of equality with male counterparts. In fact, Sri Lanka has a long history of more or less matriarchal societies, where women held positions of power and authority.
For example, in the ancient kingdom of Anuradhapura, women held positions in government. In the 13th century, Queen Lilavati ruled Sri Lanka for 12 years and Queen Anula ruled rather murderously before that. You could say that she was Chandrika Bandaranaike on steroids.
However, this type of gender neutral climate of upward mobility began to erode in the 19th century, when Sri Lanka was colonized by the British. The British introduced a number of Victorian values and practices, including, simply put, the idea that women should be subordinate.
This Victorian culture had a negative impact on Sri Lankan women in a number of ways. For example, it led to a decline in the number of women in education and employment. It also led to an increase in domestic violence and other forms of gender-based violence, undoubtedly.
SEQUESTERED
The post-colonial period has seen some improvements in the status of women in Sri Lanka. However, women still face a number of challenges, including discrimination in the workplace and in public life.
But who is protecting women from sexism and misogyny in politics? Not the politicians if you’d ask me.
The government should work toward promoting a more respectful and inclusive political culture. According to a 2019 study by the World Health Organization, one in three women in Sri Lanka has experienced physical or sexual violence by an intimate partner. So much for progress, even though we have more women working and sharing the burden of keeping the home-economies ticking.
Another challenge facing Sri Lankan women is the issue of economic inequality. In a 2021 report by the World Economic Forum, Sri Lanka ranks 119th out of 156 countries on the Global Gender Gap Index. Women are more likely than men to be employed in low-paying and insecure jobs. They are also more likely to live in poverty.
This means that Sri Lanka has a significant gender gap in terms of economic opportunity, educational attainment, health and political empowerment. These are substantial challenges women face, though in paper they have made progress.
If we go back to our culture and shed the Victorian hangover, we can get somewhere in terms of gender equality.
But in the meanwhile, rather than aspire to elected office, females migrate to a more sequestered type of social activism. Swastika Arulingam, on 13 July 2021, became the first female member to participate in the National Labour Advisory Council meeting after being nominated by the United Federation of Labour. She was appointed as the Deputy Secretary General of the Commercial and Industrial Workers Union.
The Aragalaya spawned some female activists whose light shone briefly meteor-like and then went out as soon as it had appeared. Of those remembered, one is actress Damitha Abeyratne.
But it’s as if some of these people who probably want to avoid the ill-tempered exchanges in the Sri Lankan parliament do not still, as lone wolves in civil society spaces, know exactly how to negotiate the perils of Sri Lankan political jousting.
Some politicians of Sri Lankan origin such as Rathika Sithsabeisan began doing their politics abroad. Their views and opinions may have been totally opposed to the standard line of the governing elite in Sri Lanka.
But at least it has to be said, the Sithsabeisans etc. could do politics where they are without being called names by their fellow male chauvinist-pig colleagues.
So it seems Sri Lankan female politicians are seeking some sort of psychological exile to do their politics. It’s either an ‘exile’ into the territory of politics out of elected office, or a politics of permanent exile as with the Sithsabeisans.
Certainly, agree with her or not, even those such as MIA have established a more respectable activist life even as rap artistes as opposed to being politicians, than they could ever do in Sri Lanka. MIA became the enfant terrible of world rap and had an image as a fire-breather and scene stealer.
MATRIARCHAL
It’s much more than artistes let alone activists in Sri Lanka can ever aspire to.
So we have a brain drain of female talent too perhaps, even though it can be argued that MIA was never Sri Lankan. But what if she was? She would have probably migrated if she wanted to excel at the kind of ‘up-yours’ rap that she was famous for.
A country that was not sexist at all, and had vibrant matriarchal culture and respected female renegades such as Gajaman Nona has deteriorated to a point where females are repulsed by the treatment they have to endure in parliament.
We need more female activism as it comes from a different place than male activism. Female activism is necessarily from a fresher perspective. There aren’t that many female activists and that has to be a reason, to put it rather pointedly.
The last thing we want is for our female firebrands to go into a form of self-imposed mental exile. But it’s what they seemed to be forced to do these days. They are much more easily harassed in any sort of community spaces, be it political spaces such as parliament, or activist spaces such as the Aragalaya. At some point, the floodgates have to beak and the rampant male chauvinism will have to fade away.
Rajpal Abeynayake