GLOBALIZATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE THIRD WORLD A Feminist Perspective By Elsa Tamez From a biblical-theological stand-point, we affirm

that human beings have been created after the likeness and in the image of God, and that before God "there is no longer male or female, free or slave, Jew or Greek" . For us women these statements concerning the very foundation of our faith, provide basic criteria for judging the realities of the world., both at macroand micro-structural levels. All what we see and feel day after day in the world, in nature, in our countries, at work, at school, in commerce, in the family, as a couple, and within ourselves, constitute manifestations showing to us whether the face of the people and the cosmos truly reflect the face of the God of Life and God's will that there should exist relationships of equality between all, men and women. On the one hand, we find the dominant discourse of the ideologists of globalization and free market, while on the other hand we are confronted with the facts of what we observe, live and feel. The gap is obvious. We are then vis--vis a globalization which is asymmetrical in character, as pointed out by Samir Amin. For the women and men of the Third World, the actual referents are what really matters, namely, that there be justice and life for all - women and men. I shall briefly address four topics: (1) The impact of asymmetric globalization on women (2) Criticism of neo-liberal ideology from a gender perspective (3) A contesting theological framework (4) Some challenges. The impact of asymmetric globalization on women Samir has analyzed the tremendous polarization taking place with globalization to the detriment of the poor countries. The inequalities between the poor and the rich keep growing and poverty has become one of the greatest challenges of the world. We are now just in the year declared by the UN as The Year of Eradication of Poverty. If we stop to look at the face of poverty, we will finally come to the realization that it is that of a woman. 1. The Feminization of Poverty Reference to the feminization of poverty started only a few years ago. Apart from women, I dont know how serious this alarming reality has been taken by international organizations. In the first World Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen in March 95, on the basis of dramatic facts, it was acknowledged that poverty has the face of a woman. Statistics are alarming. According to studies presented during the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijin, we find the following facts1: a) 70% of the 1,300 million of the poor in the world are women. b) Out of every 100 illiterates, 66 are women. In Asia and Africa the figure
1 The statistics are taken from the abstract written by Mara Arcelia Gonzlez Butrn on Twelve Worked Points in the Action Platform of the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijin, China, in September 1995.

may reach 70. c) 80% of the 23 millions of refugees in the world are women. d) In 1990 it was estimated that women constituted less than 32% of the available labor force, as part of which they always have undervalued positions and badly paid jobs. e) Then again, as far as violence is concerned, the examples that follow are worth considering. In India 5 women are burned alive because of quarrels about command; in New Guinea, 67% are the victims of domestic violence, in USA women suffer physical abuse every 8 seconds and a women is raped every six minutes. These are only some of the facts. In addition, it must be pointed out by way of contrast, that one third of the families of the world are headed by women, whereas the number of women taking part in high level governmental decision-making amounts to 6,2%, only 3,6% having positions in ministries of economy in 144 countries members of UN there are no women at all in those areas. If this is admitted, the feminization of poverty as well as the feminization of decision-making to fight back such realities, will have to be taken very seriously. 2. Consequences of Economic Neo-liberalism Within the context of society with neo-liberal economy and asymmetric globalization, women count among the most affected sectors. The reason for this lies in the establishment of economic policies within a patriarchal culture. The combination of such policies and patriarchal society reinforces the oppression and marginalization of women in all sectors. The problem can be easily brought into prominence through three aspects: exclusion, consumption and competition. Turning to the issue of exclusion. We know through the daily news, that unemployment represents one of the greatest problems of the present system. Even through the economy of a given country may grow, unemployment increases two or three times as much as this economic growth. Unemployment is one of the causes leading to the worsening of poverty. The lack of basic resources often leads to delinquency and domestic violence. Women and children suffer more than anyone else the consequence of exclusion. Women are the first to lose their jobs, they are the ones who administer poverty at home (it is said that men administer wealth and women administer poverty), because they have to manage with whatever little they get from their husband or from their work, and they are the ones who suffer physical and psychological violence as a result of the frustration of their husbands. So, among the excluded, women are always worse off, their dignity not being recognized by the established system of by their partners of by themselves. Consumption. It is also a well-known fact that the advertisement machinery for commodity consumption is aimed at women. It has been said that women, children and teenagers rank first as victims of consumption. Spending one hour watching TV or visiting a shopping center would suffice to see how true this statement is. The law of consumption is one of the most dangerous weapons which inflicts harm on womens subjectivity and prevents us from going deeper into the construction of their identity as free and worthy persons. Poor women remain totally excluded due to their lack of solvency to buy.
2

Free competition brushes women aside. Neo-liberal ideology declares that there is equality of opportunities for everyone within the context of free competition, but in practice inequalities constitute the starting point. The winners in that uncontrolled competitive struggle are the strong and the unscrupulous, driven by their profit-making interests. On the other hand, this brings about rivalry between women, everyone of them striving to work out her own salvation. Free competition jeopardizes solidarity between women. Criticism of neo-liberal market ideology from a gender stand-point. Feminization of poverty is the consequence of long existing inequalities, imposed by the patriarchal culture long ago. The declaration of free competition speeds up this feminization, the impact of which is greater on the Third World, since women have here less opportunities for education, health and employment. The polarization of globalization finds theoretical reinforcement in the tenets of liberal and neo-liberal ideologists. At this point, I would like to bring into prominence one of the most frequent neo-liberal tenets, of which the economist Friedrick Hayek is the ideologist par excellence. I am referring to the concept of freedom-law. I shall later one make a criticism from a gender perspective and from the stand-point of Christian theology, taking specially into account Saint Pauls contributions. In Hayek we find two concepts of law one negative and another positive. The law rejected by Hayek is the one that intervenes in the activities of the individuals, and regulates such activities. In connection with economy, this concerns the law according to which goals and means are planned and established. It means the regulation of what, how and when to produce, as well as the control of prices, and the distribution of wealth, etc. Such laws organizing and planning society represent obstacles which limit individual freedom. Therefore, in consonance with this way of thinking, any law promulgated in favor of women with an aim to balance the distribution of income and the equalities of opportunities, would be out of the order. For Hayek, there exist a superior law, through which individuals should guide themselves. It is a self-regulated order, in which human consciousness does not play a role. There are no goals nor explicit ends. It is an order spontaneously produced, in which individuals are guided by their own knowledge and possibilities, with no orientation other than their own personal interest. It is a general universal law, without reference to circumstances or time. It is the law created by traditions, habits, etc. According to Hayek, in following this law blindfold, individual freedom is guaranteed insofar as there is no intervention of plans of third parties, and everyone women or men has the possibility to compete. This is what is called the empire of the law. Here, in Hayeks view, it is the law that governs, not the humans. The market is the ideal order, subjected to self-regulation and does not allow any interference. It is an extensive order comprising not only mercantile relationships, but also the everyday life of all - wo/men. Free competition builds up the platform that allows to produce better and more at lower cost. Here we find a problem which is crucial from a gender perspective. Hayek
3

does not take into consideration that the ideal order of self-regulation created in the course of time by habits and traditions is pervaded by a patriarchal, hierarchical culture. As we try to follow this order, there takes place a consolidation of the patriarchal culture, which is raised to the category of immutable and imposed to be followed blindfold. So, when we speak about asymmetric globalization, we are doing more than simply referring to the existing polarization between poor and rich countries, or between the rich and the poor in just one particular country. Asymmetric globalization contains a core of hierarchical patriarchal ideology. That is to say, to obey the spontaneous order of the market is tantamount to follow the patriarchal ideology. If this is so, then it is indispensable for women to interfere with the spontaneous laws of the market through their feminist consciousness. This consciousness is in turn expressed through the laws which take feminization of poverty seriously and try to eradicate it. Contrary to the position of neoliberal ideologists, there will have to be a planning of production and reproduction, and clear objectives, ends and means, if women are not to be excluded. A contesting theological framework Saint Paul, just as Hayek does, opposes law to freedom. And we can furthermore add that he also speaks about a spontaneous order which is preferable to law, namely, the order of the Spirit or the order of faith. Nevertheless he goes as far as to affirm that there is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer free or slave, there is no longer male or female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus (Gal. 3:28). With this, Paul seems to efface the limits between inequalities. In Hayeks view polarization becomes deeper. How does this take place? In the letters to the Galatians and the Romans, we notice that Paul understands the law in two different ways. There is an understanding that is positive and another that is negative. The law that Paul rejects is that which dominates and enslaves the human being, the law that is above the human being and becomes an order in which there is no room for the intervention of human consciousness. The law must be blindly followed, without paying heed to situation, place or time. It is the empire of the law, because an obedience of the law per se is demanded. A guiding criterion as that represented by the life of the subjects, is not followed. This is the law associated with the original sin (hamartia) thus enforcing this law is the equivalent to reviving sin. The law elaborated to regulated human relations for the welfare of everyone is good, just and saintly. The moment it is placed above the human beings themselves, it is assimilated by sin an becomes negative. The other law referred to by Paul, which concerns spontaneous order, is the law of the Spirit, blowing everywhere and guided by grace. It comes from the heart of people whose conduct does not result from blind obedience of any law, but from the consciousness developed in the Spirit. This regimen also known as regimen of faith or grace, has its goals and means. The goal is the new creation (Gal.6:15). The tendencies of the Spirit as stated by Paul in Romans are peace, justice and life. Although it has the goal of a new creation, it is an order with no regulation, as it
4

follows the law which regulates human relations only when it provides security for the life of all men and women. And it goes beyond that law by showing the uselessness of it. People who guide themselves by that law, are free individuals, with their own personal consciousness, masters of their destiny, possessing a sense of identity. That law does not legitimize any excluding competition, because the individuals are guided by grace, love to their neighbors and to themselves. This spontaneous order is free from any patriarchal, racist, class-dominated or sexist ideology. It is pervaded by all kinds of culture, traditions and institutions. Now, one could also argue that in the process of globalization there is no longer Jew or Greek, male or female, rich or poor, because all of them are free to take part in the free competition. However, since the basis is inequality and the starting point is the personal interest, polarization inevitably accompanies globalization. Free market does not know of mercy or grace. Since in Pauline theology the starting point is equality by the grace of God and love of ones neighbor and oneself, the consequence of guiding oneself through this logic would lead to the establishment of new inter-human relations. Here, we would be looking not only for the same quality of life for all, men and women, as far as the material aspect of existence is concerned, but also for the personal dignity of the children of God. Conclusion Some challenges If feminization of poverty is a persistent feature in the present process of globalization, it stands to reason that any proposal of economic and political alternatives, will have to include concerns and perspectives in connection with the issue of gender. It is worthy of mention that in Copenhagen the Swedish Minister Ingvar Carlsson spoke about the necessity to feminize the struggle against poverty, which meant for him sharing power and 2 responsibility. For us it would also mean to reconsider the traditional categories of economy from a gender perspective, because as stated by the economist Mara Arcelia Gonzlez the categories of The Capital work, labor force, and so on represent abstract concepts of development planning. They are based on assumptions that comes from an androcentric outlook on the world. It is necessary first to judge the conceptual framework critically and then create new categories directly related to the excluded human groups, such as domestic and informal jobs.3 From a theological viewpoint, it seems to be that we are confronted with another gospel, anathematized by Paul - one that demands a blind fulfillment of the law. We women reject being subjected to any law, institution or logic which does not take into account the particular situation of women, the different ways in which they are oppressed, their wishes and aspirations. We recognize that the logic prevailing in our context arises from the patriarchal and hierarchical tradition. To establish a solid foundation for the gospel of freedom in the law, as found in Paul, would be an important step for the creation of alternatives leading to the creation of a
2 Co.Rebeca Montemayor. Pobreza y derechos repropductivos.Dos lados de la misma moneda?. Monograph, unpublished, 1995. 3 Ciencias Econmica y perspectiva de gmero. Monograph, unpublished.

world which makes room for many worlds.4

4 Phrase coined by the Zapatists, and taken from the Theological Meetings of CETELA.