Giedre Purvaneckiene

Member of Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania

SOCIETY IN CHANGE – IS IT TIME FOR GENDER EQUALITY?

Since 1990s and especially after 1995, when the IV UN Fourth World Conference on Women took place in Beijing, in all spheres of life in countries with changing societies positive changes towards status of women and equal gender opportunities are noticeable. But at the same time, gender equality is not yet achieved in any of these spheres. And processes according to my view slowed down, sometimes we can notice even backlashes. I will illustrate these my statements using examples mainly from Lithuania, the country regarded as one of the most advanced in state policy in gender equality among the countries in transition.

A deteriorated situation of women, their discrimination, unequal treatment of the feminine and masculine gender, as well as stereotypes of gender roles confirmed by opinion polls justify the requirements to improve the situation raised by women organisations. As a result of that, legislation has been amended, a mechanism for the implementation of equal opportunities is in the pipeline, women progress programmes and programmes for the implementation of equal opportunities are being drafted and applied. All of these processes are intertwined with tremendous social transformations. The public at large has achieved a huge headway towards democracy, free market is firmly established in the economy, private initiative has developed. These changes were accompanied by unemployment, poverty, and stratification of the society. The index of differences in the income level puts Lithuania among the countries with a relatively great inequality. As a result of that, a new phenomenon emerged – feminisation of poverty. Poverty usually affects households of widows and divorced women with children.

Numerous changes in the society are associated with ignorance of gender specifics: the consequences of the decline in the number of kindergartens, in fact, affected only women. Women were the ones who faced most difficulties in participating in paid employment and public activities. There are more cases of this type, and often they promote poverty feminisation.

Let us briefly overview changes in the gender situation in the light of social transformations. Women’s level of education is higher than that of men, and the educational gap between men and women is growing. The highest level of secondary schools as well as colleges and universities are attended by more girls than boys. In 2001, women accounted for 59 per cent of the total number of University graduates with Bachelor’s degree and 60 per cent of those awarded Master’s degree. The labour market, too, experiences positive changes: the share of unemployed women in 2001 was lower than that of men. Though on average, women earn less than men, the salary gap between men and women is narrowing both in the public and private sectors. Statistics bears witness to that. Nonetheless, a more in-depth analysis is needed. What influence is made on this statistics by the shadow economy and existence of unofficial wages? In 2001, women made up 64.8 per cent of people employed in the public service, and their average salary equalled to 76.8 per cent of the men’s salary. The private sector employed 43.1 per cent of all women, and their salary made up 83.3 per cent. The data on the salary level in the public sector are reliable, beyond any doubt. And what about the private sector?

The two areas that are least favourable to women are politics and violence against a person. The fact that they are unfavourable is proven by factual data. Two fifths of women suffer from domestic violence, and the residual effects of violence reduce women’s capabilities to be equal members of the society. No essential changes, however, have been reached in the area of violence eradication. The main obstacles to change this situation are prevailing views, while in the area of violence, laws, as well.

Even when the participation of women in politics was at its peak, their involvement did not reach the level of “critical mass” either in local governments or in the Parliament and Government. Presently, when f our members have left the Parliament, women account only for 10.2 per cent. It should be noted that in all countries in transition around the Baltic Sea, women in Parliaments do not reach the critical mass (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Women in Parliaments of the Baltic Sea Region, %

(as of 28 March, 2003)

Though value orientations, and gender role expectations of the Lithuanian population have been changing and modernising in the recent decade, they still remain patriarchal in their nature. The opinion of the Lithuanian people, including women, about women’s involvement in politics has not changed at all. Lithuanians remain absolutely indifferent to women’s participation in politics and governance. By the way, the traditional division of roles in the everyday life of a family has become yet stronger in the period between 1994 and 2000.

A new phenomenon emerged in the latter years: state policy of equal opportunities. It develops in along three lines. In 1994, the creation of National machinery for the advancement of women started, the development of which was determined by the change of the Government. At the end of 1997, the state policy was focused on the enforcement of equal opportunities. Two positions of staff directly responsible for the implementation of equal opportunities were established in the Labour Market and Equal Opportunities Department of the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, while the Department of Statistics set up a position of staff responsible for gender statistics. The Government has set up a Commission for Equal Opportunities of Men and Women, which comprises representatives of all ministries, the Europe Department and the Department of Statistics. In September 2002, the post of an adviser to the Prime Minister was re-established.

At the end of 1995, the Government approved the Action Program for the Advancement of Women. In 1997, the new Cabinet reaffirmed its support to the programme, approved the action plan for its implementation, and earmarked funds for certain programmes and actions. The Action Program for the Advancement of Women was implemented by the Government in collaboration with NGOs. Due to the change of Governments, the implementation and financing of the programme have been delayed for some time. Presently, the process of approval of a newly drafted Plan for the Implementation of Equal Opportunities of Men and Women has set off in the Government. Attempts are made to mainstream gender aspect into all state policies.

The third line of action consists of the control of equal opportunities. The Seimas adopted a Law on Equal Opportunities on 1 December 1998. In spring 1999, an Equal Opportunities Ombudsman was appointed and a relevant office opened. Unfortunately, on 27 February 2003, when drafts of the Seimas Resolution on the Approval of the Regulations of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman were submitted for the parliament, the implementation of the Equal Opportunities Law as well as the existence of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman Office were put in jeopardy.

What conclusions could be drawn from the brief overview of the changes in social gender differences? It has to be admitted that no major progress has been achieved in the elimination of social gender differences, moreover, the results achieved are not stable. For instance, in 1996, the number of women elected to the Seimas increased considerably, however, that was determined not by the change of the system of values or views, but rather by other causes. This is why in 2000 we went back to the beginning of the 20^th century according to the share of women elected to the Parliament.

What are the main causes behind the instability of changes in gender differences and relations? I think, one of the most important causes is the fact that the transition from the advancement of women policy to equal opportunities policy led to the strengthening of the gender neutrality principle. This is particularly true of legislation. Amendments to laws regulating various fields of life left out discriminatory rules in terms of gender as well as most safeguards provided for due to biological functions of women. Nonetheless, the introduction of gender dimension into the analysis of social processes and social policies in no way means that laws and other pieces of legislation must retain gender neutrality. The integration of the gender dimension means that consideration is given to cultural and social gender differences, and analysis is made of all political instruments or laws influencing both genders in a specific country. For example, the New Criminal Procedure Code, as well as the one valid at the moment, pays absolutely no attention to gender differences in cases of violence against a person. A different procedure is still applied for the cases when the perpetrator of violence is a family member and when he/she is a stranger. The Criminal Procedure Code is much more lenient in the cases when violence is perpetrated by a stranger. What has gender difference to do with this? The thing is that usually the victims of domestic violence are women, children, and in very rare cases men. While physical violence perpetrated by strangers more often affects men. The gender neutrality, however, is retained. In both cases, the provisions of the law treat women and men equally. But it is only women who are victims of domestic violence…

Another example is taken from Part III of the Civil Code “Family Law”. The provision of Article 3.69 (2) of the new code can be quoted as a classical example of applying the gender neutrality principle: “If one spouse is guilty of the termination of marriage, the court can, upon the request of the other spouse, prohibit the spouse guilty of dissolving marriage from retaining the surname obtained in the marriage, except for the cases when the spouses have common children”. There are no doubts that this provision is applied to both genders equally. However, only 0.6 to 0.8 per cent of married men assume the surname of their spouse. This case is a perfect illustration of total disregard of cultural traditions as well as public opinion. It is only in Lithuania that the surname of a woman reflects her marital status. On the other hand, the negative approach of the public towards “old spinsters” is well known. Therefore, this legal provision, which is still in effect, discriminates against women due to the cultural tradition and due to its applicability to women only. These rules are not the only ones that incorporate the principle of gender neutrality with truly unfair implications to persons of different gender.

One may ask then: what are you, women in parliament, doing? But there are so few of us, our initiatives are not taken seriously, ridiculed by the mass media, men do resist, lawyers who comprise well paid group with conservative views, do resist. Very often any gender issues are not taken seriously (Box 1.)

Box 1. Extract from protocol of plenary session of Seimas (17 04 2003). Discussions on approving candidature of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman.

Member of Seimas (male): Dear colleagues, I will support the candidature, but I would like to spread experience for men who are discriminated by wives at home. How I avoided this? I bought a tribune and when my wife is complaining, I order her to speak from the tribune. And when one has to go to tribune, then, you know, she has to be prepared. In one word, we escape from unnecessary rub and mess. One has to buy a tribune.

Who could perform the gender-oriented analysis of all legislation and policies? Today probably the only institution of this kind is the Equal Opportunities Office. They have not done anything like that up to now – maybe they lacked willingness, maybe capacities – it would be difficult to tell now. And now they face a threat of being no longer able to do that in future.

Here I should note that there is big differences in perception of gender equalities and equal opportunities by the members of women’s NGO’s, and civil servants – equality workers, including Equal Opportunities Ombudswoman (Box 2).

Box 2. Extract from protocol of plenary session of Seimas (17 04 2003). Discussions on approving candidature of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman.

EOO (answering question on positive discrimination): … Look now what is going on at the universities. Women comprise over 70% of students (NB! in reality – 57.7%), may be some day it will be necessary to apply positive discrimination towards men. Nobody says no. ...

No real prospects of changing the situation are seen for the time being. A feminine approach to the management and administration of the society is not represented in politics and government, and what is more, women themselves do not perceive the necessity. Who will conduct gender-related analysis and monitoring of all legislation, policies, programmes if there is no one to make decisions of this kind? The Nordic countries have an asset in this respect, as they can carry out an analysis of budget in terms of gender following a decision that has been made by an almost similar number of woman and men. Against this background, I would like to point out that organised movement of women includes far from sufficient number of women to be able change the public opinion on gender issues. The education system, which is one of the most important factors in the socialisation of children and youth, keeps shaping patriarchal views. Research into gender issues is scattered, not co-ordinated and not taken into account in the decision-making. The research is scarcely linked to women NGOs that cannot refer to scientific evidence in their activities unless the research was carried out by themselves. I hope that this conference attended by scholars, practitioners, politicians and public figures will push forward the consolidation of the feminine gender.