Gender-based Violence

Source: GenderTrust.org.uk.​

​

Gender-based violence is a big issue in the UK and around the world and is often an act of power or control. It is used to humiliate and dominate a person so that the perpetrators can continue to have undue influence over the individual or individuals who are being targeted. Acts such as rape in war are also used as a way to dehumanize subjects.

Gender-based violence is sometimes referred to as Violence against Women, as these types of crimes have historically occurred against women. In recent years, the definition has been expanded to cover anyone who is experiencing crime due to their gender. As transgender issues have become more mainstream in recent years, there has been an increase in trans individuals reporting incidents of gender-based violence. The increase in reporting may suggest that trans individuals feel more confident about reporting gender-based crimes to the police which also helps when a victim wants to start legal action for criminal injury compensation.

Trans rights activists have previously argued that trans people under-reported gender-based incidents to the police due to a lack of acceptance within the law enforcement community. Although the situation is starting to improve, prejudices still lead to underreporting.

On a global scale, gender-based violence can be categorized in two ways:

1. Violence by an individual (or group).

2. The violence is committed by the state (or sanctioned by the ruling bodies).

Examples of violence committed by individuals include;

• rape,

• sexual harassment,

• sexual coercion,

• forced prostitution,

• domestic violence,

• prenatal selection,

• female infanticide.

In some places, the state (or ruling group) may allow (or fail to control) acts of gender-based violence. Examples of these acts of violence include;

• female genital mutilation (also known as female circumcision),

• forced abortion,

• forced sterilisation,

• forced marriage,

• forced pregnancy,

• honor-based killings,

• sexual slavery,

• war rape.

​

China’s One Child policy could be considered a form of state-enabled gender-based violence because evidence shows that citizens are more likely to abandon or commit infanticide of female children.

There are many other examples of gender-based violence, including examples where women are subject to practices that force them to alter their appearance so that they conform to pre-determined beauty standards. Examples include; force-feeding and genital mutilation. Alternatively, acts of gender-based violence may be committed with the intention of disfiguring women, so that they no longer conform to societal beauty standards. These are acts of power and control.

Marital rape is an example of gender-based violence which was outlawed in the United Kingdom in 1991. Before that, men were permitted to have sex with their wives without their explicit permission. The marriage license was considered to be adequate consent in these situations. Although women could technically commit spousal rape against their husbands, the issue was primarily faced by women who struggled to defend themselves against people who were physically stronger than they were. In most cases, it would be easier for men to prevent unwanted sex acts within marriage due to physiological differences.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

Social Impacts of Gender-Based Violence

In areas where gender-based violence is prevalent, the groups that are being targeted may completely lack a voice. For example, women are effectively silenced in many areas because they are routinely affected by gender-based violence. In these areas, it is much harder for women to get positions of power or high-paying job roles. Groups that are victimized are unable to contribute socially, politically, and economically to their community. This can make it even harder for these groups to change the system and end the cycle of violence.

Gender-based violence may also increase the strain on health resources. For example, HIV/AIDS rates are much higher in areas with high levels of gender-based violence against women. It is difficult to prevent the spread of these diseases when women are regularly infected as part of the cycle of violence. Children who are born as a result of gender-based violence may also be neglected or may subsequently be harmed by the abuser.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Gender Pay Gap in the UK

​

This Christmas, a group of people is lobbying major retailers to remove overt gendering from the toys that they sell. The Let Toys Be Toys campaign hopes to stop retailers from grouping products as “Boy’s Toys” and “Girl’s Toys,” as they believe that these labels help to reinforce gender stereotypes. They also hope to reduce the prevalence of pink and blue color schemes being used to market toys for specific genders.

Some parents do not agree with the campaign, as they feel that it is a trivial issue that is taking attention away from bigger problems. However, learning development experts continue to promote the idea that the toys that a child plays with before the age of 5 will help to shape their development. For example, building block toys help children develop problem-solving and spatial awareness skills which are useful for practical tasks and jobs in later life. On the other hand, toy kitchens are ideal for helping children to build their cognitive skills. It is, therefore, important that children are able to play with a wide range of different toys.

Many adults also argue that the campaign is irrelevant because their male child will always choose the toy truck, whilst their daughter will always choose the doll. Nonetheless, a large number of studies have been carried out which suggest that children do not show a gender preference for toys until they have been in a position to learn about the gendered ideas of society.

When children accompany their parents to the shops and see that toys are divided into two distinct aisles, they understand the cues that are being given to them. Following an experience like this, the child is then more likely to choose a toy that they believe is right for their gender. In one experiment, researchers placed a selection of miscellaneous toys into “girl boxes” and “boy boxes”, before letting children pick which toys they wanted to play with. Girls predominantly choose toys from the “girl box”, whilst boys choose items from the “boy box”.

Leading sociologists and gender specialists are keen to support the campaign, arguing that imposing rigid labels on toys could be harmful to child development. Assigning gendered labels to toys can increase feelings of anxiety among children who may be worried about playing with the wrong toy. Before 3, children are likely to play with whatever toy is put in front of them. Any gender cues that they pick up on will come from their parents or others in the room. Negative cues from adults about the appropriateness of toys will be picked up by infants. Older children will start to take their cues from other things, such as the color scheme of the product. There is a strong gender development phase between the ages of 3 and 5, and interactions during this time period can have a lasting effect. Experts believe that gender anxiety during this phase may have psychological effects for years to come.

Campaigners also argue that giving toys a gendered color scheme is a trick that was invented by marketers as a way to sell more products. Color schemes were only introduced in the last 20 – 30 years to fit into gender stereotypes. Marketers realized that they could encourage families with multiple children to buy new toys if they could ascribe gender to certain objects. It is now possible to buy different versions of the same toy in both pink and blue, depending on the gender of the child that the toy is being purchased.

Regardless of whether the campaign succeeds or not, there is still a stigma that needs to be overcome. If adults cannot change their opinions about specific toys and games being right for specific genders, then it is unlikely that toys will stop holding such deep meaning to children. A male child wearing a princess dress is still likely to draw comments from people, even though it may be socially acceptable for a female child to dress up in a superhero costume. Any change in children’s toys needs to be accompanied by a widespread shift in the adult mindset in regard to gender issues.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Should Toys be Gender Specific?

 

​This Christmas, a group of people is lobbying major retailers to remove overt gendering from the toys that they sell. The Let Toys Be Toys campaign hopes to stop retailers from grouping products as “Boy’s Toys” and “Girl’s Toys,” as they believe that these labels help to reinforce gender stereotypes. They also hope to reduce the prevalence of pink and blue color schemes being used to market toys for specific genders.
Some parents do not agree with the campaign, as they feel that it is a trivial issue that is taking attention away from bigger problems. However, learning development experts continue to promote the idea that the toys that a child plays with before the age of 5 will help to shape their development. For example, building block toys help children develop problem-solving and spatial awareness skills which are useful for practical tasks and jobs in later life. On the other hand, toy kitchens are ideal for helping children to build their cognitive skills. It is, therefore, important that children are able to play with a wide range of different toys.
Many adults also argue that the campaign is irrelevant because their male child will always choose the toy truck, whilst their daughter will always choose the doll. Nonetheless, a large number of studies have been carried out which suggest that children do not show a gender preference for toys until they have been in a position to learn about the gendered ideas of society.
When children accompany their parents to the shops and see that toys are divided into two distinct aisles, they understand the cues that are being given to them. Following an experience like this, the child is then more likely to choose a toy that they believe is right for their gender. In one experiment, researchers placed a selection of miscellaneous toys into “girl boxes” and “boy boxes”, before letting children pick which toys they wanted to play with. Girls predominantly choose toys from the “girl box”, whilst boys choose items from the “boy box”.
Leading sociologists and gender specialists are keen to support the campaign, arguing that imposing rigid labels on toys could be harmful to child development. Assigning gendered labels to toys can increase feelings of anxiety among children who may be worried about playing with the wrong toy. Before 3, children are likely to play with whatever toy is put in front of them. Any gender cues that they pick up on will come from their parents or others in the room. Negative cues from adults about the appropriateness of toys will be picked up by infants. Older children will start to take their cues from other things, such as the color scheme of the product. There is a strong gender development phase between the ages of 3 and 5, and interactions during this time period can have a lasting effect. Experts believe that gender anxiety during this phase may have psychological effects for years to come.
Campaigners also argue that giving toys a gendered color scheme is a trick that was invented by marketers as a way to sell more products. Color schemes were only introduced in the last 20 – 30 years to fit into gender stereotypes. Marketers realized that they could encourage families with multiple children to buy new toys if they could ascribe gender to certain objects. It is now possible to buy different versions of the same toy in both pink and blue, depending on the gender of the child that the toy is being purchased.
Regardless of whether the campaign succeeds or not, there is still a stigma that needs to be overcome. If adults cannot change their opinions about specific toys and games being right for specific genders, then it is unlikely that toys will stop holding such deep meaning to children. A male child wearing a princess dress is still likely to draw comments from people, even though it may be socially acceptable for a female child to dress up in a superhero costume. Any change in children’s toys needs to be accompanied by a widespread shift in the adult mindset in regard to gender issues.

​

​