2
inspired
2
practices may have unintentionally undermined the ultimate feminist goal of subverting
masculinism.
Research Methodology
In 1997 and 1998, at the request of local women’s organizations in Malaysia and South Africa, I
conducted a study of women’s experiences in accessing legal remedies following the
implementation of domestic violence legislation.
3
In both countries, in the course of
documenting women’s histories, I identified numerous hurdles encountered by survivors when
interacting with the police and judicial systems, including being told by police officers and
judges to go back to their husbands; being told they must have done something to provoke the
abuse; and being told that their injuries were insufficient to warrant a restraining order against
their abuser.
In my final report to these organizations, I concluded that while criminalizing domestic violence
is an important first step in challenging the acceptability of such violence, legal remedies are
insufficient to address the gender biases of those responsible for implementing and enforcing the
laws. Nonetheless, in spite of the many problems involved in looking to the law as a tool for
social change, activists in both countries were devoting considerable time and energy to pushing
for further reforms of these laws. The experience of conducting this study left me with the
question, what are the individuals and organizations that make up gender violence movements
doing to target the causes of men’s violence against women – and the attitudes and behaviors
that sustain such violence? More broadly, have women’s social movements gone beyond
reacting to the manifestations of masculinism to engaging in proactive discourse and action
aimed at gender transformation? If not, why not – and how can a shift be made towards
engendering transformative change?
These questions led me to return to Malaysia and South Africa in 2002 in order to identify what
the goals of activists are within the gender violence movements, to assess whether the tactics
being pursued by activists are actually meeting these goals, and, more generally, to gain a sense
of the dynamics amongst activists within the movements. On the surface, analyzing the priorities
and practices of the gender violence movements in these two countries appears to make for an
unusual comparison. Malaysia is a semi-authoritarian state that has actively suppressed dissent
2
The use of the term “feminist-inspired” acknowledges that while some women’s groups and
organizations have distanced themselves from feminism(s) – at least in the sense of their
unwillingness to embrace the label of “feminist” – these same groups and organizations
nonetheless often have their origins in, or draw from, feminist principles.
3
The field research was conducted for the purposes of preparing my MA thesis, titled “Legal
Reforms & Domestic Violence Prevention: Strategies from Malaysia and South Africa” (1998).
My research in Malaysia led to the completion of a report titled “Monitoring the Domestic
Violence Act” (published by Women’s Aid Organization in Petaling Jaya Malaysia, December
1997) that was circulated among women’s groups and ultimately submitted to the Malaysian
government to advocate for changes to the Domestic Violence Act.
Convention