In China, the painful custom of binding young girls’ feet to alter their shape began in the 10th century and continued for a millennium until it was outlawed in 1911. Although the practice did not truly end until the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, by 1990 China’s female labor-force participation rate had climbed to 73 percent — well above the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development average.
In 15th-century Europe, women started wearing corsets, often reinforced with wood, bone or even metal, designed to mold the upper body into a V-shape. Comfortable clothing that was easier to move in came into fashion only over the course of the 20th century.
However, today, several European countries have the highest rankings in terms of gender parity across various dimensions.
Illustration: Constance Chou
Both practices — binding women’s feet and constricting their waists — started among the aristocracy before spreading to the middle and lower classes. Given this trajectory, it is not surprising that adherence to beauty norms made it difficult for women to participate in economic or productive work.
Although China and Europe are poles apart culturally, both pushed women into subservient roles in similar ways. Similarly, both societies were able to shed restrictive social norms — of which body modification is only one example — and make significant progress on gender equality.
It is important to understand how this happened, especially because international organizations and academics have increasingly focused on changing social norms as a means of achieving gender equality, designing tool kits and interventions aimed at nudging individuals toward new attitudes and practices.
However, they tend to forget an important lesson from history: Social norms are products of material realities and, as a result, only shift in response to changes in those conditions, not because of a sudden change of heart.
Comprehending the complex evolution of social norms requires examining the long arc of history. The work of economist and Nobel laureate Claudia Goldin exemplifies this approach.
Focusing on the US, Goldin said: “Increased participation of women over the long run resulted more from a changed nature of jobs, such as decrease in hours of work and the rise of white-collar work, than from shifts in social norms and attitudes.”
This insight is particularly useful in India, where the proportion of women in paid work remains very low, despite high rates of economic growth and rapid poverty reduction over the past two decades. The discrepancy has sparked debate about which social norms are constraining female labor-force participation and, equally importantly, whether norms are the only limiting factor.
Our new study identifies the norms that matter. Foremost is Indian women’s disproportionate responsibility for domestic chores, including cooking, gathering fuel, fetching water, household maintenance, childcare and elder care. Indian women spend as much as 10 times more time on these activities than men, one of the highest gaps globally. Moreover, with nearly universal marriage and a strong preference for sons, young women enter marriage and motherhood sooner than in other parts of the world and are expected to produce a male heir.
Despite the limiting effect of these norms, our data also revealed unmet demand for paid work on the part of women. Women move in and out of paid employment over short periods, indicating a willingness to take on such work when it is available. Constraints on mobility vary by caste status, with women from lower castes historically participating in the labor market at higher rates and also reporting a greater number of transitions, indicating the precarity of available work.
The low proportion of women in paid employment in India is a matter of serious concern and policymakers should focus more on generating demand for female labor, rather than changing social norms. That means working to ensure the regular availability of paid work that women can access and incentivizing employers to hire them.
Several Indian states have already enacted gender quotas in public-sector employment, but with more than 90 percent of India’s workers in the informal sector, such quotas do not affect female labor-force participation rates substantially. Instead, private employers must hire, retain and promote female workers.
Some leading companies, including Tech Mahindra, Wipro, Hero Motocorp and Dr Reddy’s Laboratories, have already launched initiatives to increase female workforce participation and others should follow their lead. More importantly, mandatory reporting of gender-disaggregated data can reveal the exact contours of gender gaps and shape a focused policy response.
Given India’s predominantly rural population, there is also an urgent need to create avenues for remunerative employment for women in labor-intensive sectors such as food processing, textiles, leather goods, and small-scale, low-tech manufacturing.
Women in India want to earn their own livelihoods, as shown by the massive number of rural women — larger than the combined populations of Canada and Australia — who have joined self-help groups under the Indian National Rural Livelihood Mission, the largest and longest-running program of its kind in the world. There is tremendous potential to promote productive and remunerative female self-employment.
In East Asia, the availability of rural non-farm employment provided a massive stimulus for women to enter the paid workforce, and social norms started to change in response. There is no reason to believe that India is any different in this respect. Policymakers must put the horse before the cart: Create conditions for female employment before spending immense sums on efforts to engender a new culture of equality.
Ashwini Deshpande is professor of economics and founding director of the Centre for Economic Data and Analysis at Ashoka University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to