constrains their capability development and advancement in education. The forms of abuse that learners can experience within schools can be sexual (physical, verbal, psychological or emotional in nature) or non-sexual (corporal punishment) (Leach, 2006). Abuse can prevent learners from participating actively in education and this in effect will lead to various forms of capability deprivation. Women in particular are
130
more deprived and given fewer opportunities than men. According to Subrahmanian (2007, p. 42), even when women are given the opportunities, gender inequalities are
“institutionalised in the norms, processes and structures of interventions and institutions, and present barriers to equitable outcomes”. There are many factors within the school that can force females to leave school, such as harassment, violence and even the curriculum which may not be “female-friendly”. This can contribute to a female having a narrow educational capability set as she faces constraints to her educational capability.
The narratives from the participants included experiencing acts of violence while at school. Schools are primary social institutions, and therefore, must maintain standards of behaviour that can be upheld by other institutions and by children (Subrahmanian, 2007, p.114). Many of the perpetrators who inflicted punishment on the participants were their educators, as noted in the following narratives. When the participants were asked about their worst memories of their schooling, all participants referred to corporal punishment, as evident in the following extracts
You know, in our schools, the corporal punishment, is the one thing that I can say, you can either take it or leave it. Our teachers were very, very strict. And they were... I will say that I am kind... they were very unfriendly. I mean you can say whatever, they were very harsh, they were very mean, I got punished, but for a reason. But I think it was too much sometimes. In high school our Agriculture and Maths teachers would punish us severely if we did not know our work. My Maths teacher would make us stand against the wall and he would beat us here, on our legs. (Mandisa, photo-elicitation interview, 13 September)
...we were about eight girls and we had done nothing wrong. Even today I can tell him, “The day you punished me, you just punished me for nothing. I just hadn‟t done anything wrong‟.
The way we were thrashed on our buttocks severely, I couldn‟t sit. I couldn‟t sit for two days.
And I wasn‟t at home. My parents were not there, my sisters were not there. I just wanted to pack my bags and go home. (Thembi, photo-elicitation 1 August)
I remember my Afrikaans teacher in high school having long fingers as he used to slap us across the face when we did not get things right. (Rita, photo-elicitation interview, 19 April) In those days children did not open their mouths in class. You would get a crack with a ruler and a whip and all sorts of things thrown at you, (Gene, photo-elicitation interview, 17 September)
I recall getting into trouble with this teacher. He also complained to my mother about me....
The teachers were good but they were strict and sometimes they were not fair in the way they dealt out corporal punishment (Neelam, photo-elicitation interview, 3July)
In these narratives it is evident that educators had control over the learners in class.
Educators used their authority to instil fear, and submission, in learners. The narratives indicate that educators were often males, and their forms of punishment were physical and harsh. Violence against learners suggests that the capability of
131
freedom from bodily harm and bodily integrity had been violated. Not being able to secure the capability for bodily integrity, suggests that a life that is “truly human”, that is worthy of being human, had been denied. The capability to function in class is weak, as the participants did not have freedom of movement, speech or choice, because the educators restricted them through violence. The violence that confronted the participants rendered them powerless against the male perpetrators. They therefore had to submit to the punishment and accept the norm that males are the authority figures in society. Violence is used as a marker of authority and it also reminds the women of the power structures within society (Subrahmanian, 2007, p. 117).
In the narratives, the women middle managers in their early schooling, accepted the authority of their male educators and did not resist punishment. For example, Mandisa accepted a punishment as warranted, when she states, “I got it for a reason”. Gene also reflects on the passiveness of learners and how they were conditioned into silence.
Thembi questioned the reasoning behind a punishment she received and said she wanted to leave school. Neelam recalls that teachers were “strict” and were “not fair”
when they punished learners. Rita‟s and Mandisa‟s narratives reflect how learners were taught through fear and often through violence, notwithstanding the age of the learners. Authority is marked not just by gender, but by age, ethnicity and ability (Subrahmanian, 2007). Thus the male teachers reminded the older girls of their authority over them through physical violence. Women and girls were made to fear male authority and this was carried through into their adult lives. In these accounts we see that male aggression was “normalised” as an accepted part of school life, as Leach (2006) too records. Moreover, it constituted a school culture that tolerated violence against women and girls.
Not all the participants recalled physical abuse. Some of the participants stated that they were verbally abused by their teachers. Whereas physical abuse denies the capability of bodily integrity, verbal abuse, leads to loss of self-respect. Both forms of abuse, either physical or verbal, render the capability of emotion and affiliation weak.
The women experienced fear and anxiety that obstructed the capability set for emotion and, through the lack of respect and the humiliation they experienced, the capability of affiliation was then constrained. The following extracts show how the participants experienced verbal abuse which led to weak emotional development and state of well- being:
132 I was pretty cynical about life in high school which was a painful experience for me. There were two incidents in high school that I can single out that were excruciating for me. When I was in Standard 8 I had a spat with my science teacher...And then when I was in Matric my mother had died in February, and I had missed a week and a half of school. When I got back to my Biology class, the teacher said something terrible about me finally making an appearance.
He was a pompous, self–opinionated creep. (Arthi, photo-elicitation interview, 12 July) In primary school a teacher would pick on me and will hit me every day. She would tell me that that I am a stubborn donkey. I‟m stupid and that I would never get on. That motivated me because I wanted to prove her wrong. (Valerie, interview, 23 August)
These extracts reflect the anxiety the participants experienced because of verbal abuse.
Arthi refers to the abuse as “the painful experience” that is “excruciating” for her. The verbal abuse that she experienced from her educators formed barriers for her own emotional capability so that she became “cynical about life in high school”. Her inability to show affection or care for those who taught her is evident when she referred to her educator as a “pompous, self-opinionated creep”. Valerie‟s narrative shows that women educators are also perpetrators of abuse, although women, more than men, display the feminine qualities of care, affection and understanding. Her narrative reflects that the woman educator, like her male counterpart, is incapable of showing compassion for the learner, as she resorted to “name-calling” and physical abuse in order to suppress Valerie‟s educational development. The narrative shows Valerie‟s display of resilience, as she was inspired to “prove her (the educator) wrong” and develop into a person of worth. The narratives do not reflect the participants‟ resilience to the physical abuse they received. This suggests that, as women, they were unable to retaliate against the tougher, more physically stronger- built male teacher. The participants were unable to defend themselves against the brute force of the male teacher and this could explain why they were not resilient in the case of physical abuse.
Nussbaum (2000a, p. 83) states that human beings can become fully capable of human functioning provided they receive the right educational and material support. She further states that humans have “basic capabilities” (Nussbaum, 2000a, p. 83) and only with material and educational support can people achieve the higher level capabilities that are featured in the list of functional capabilities that she provides.
The discussion thus far, shows how the participants acquired basic capabilities, like the capability to think. If this basic capability does not receive material and
educational support, and is not nurtured, then the participant will not be able to freely
133
achieve the capability for sense, imagination and thought. The internal capabilities, which are the mature conditions of readiness (Nussbaum, 2000a, p. 84), like the capability for reasoned thought, can be prevented from functioning if the external conditions are not suitable “for the exercise of the function” (Nussbaum, 2000a, p.85).
This Nussbaum (2000a) called the combined capability which includes the internal capability with the external conditions in which the capability has to function.
I have highlighted how the participants have internal capabilities, and the development of these capabilities depends on the support of the surrounding environment
(Nussbaum, 2000a, p. 84). For example, the participants had the internal capability to communicate with others, but, if the external environment did not support open communication, like the educator who enforced silence through abuse, then the capability was not realised. When there are obstacles or barriers in the environment, that do not promote the realisation of a capability, then a woman has a weak capability set. If there are factors that promote the achievement of the capability, through
freedom and opportunity, then she displays a strong capability set. My findings are that the participants developed weak and strong capability sets in their formative and schooling years because of external conditions in the environment, either the family or school, and at different stages and in different contexts, the capabilities were either threatened or promoted.
The development of the participants‟ capabilities, through the years, enabled them to make choices concerning their careers. Although, the women participants experienced many barriers in their educational lives, they still decided to pursue teaching as a career. The participants had various reasons for following this route and these will be discussed in the next section.