CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5. Gender equality and women empowerment
2.5.2. Feeling Unsafe
As discussed in chapter one the National Development (2030) aims to guarantee safety of all who live in South Africa. Yet media reports and the annual SAPS crime statistics offer a different narrative. Feeling unsafe is as much physical as it is physiological and psychological. These dimensions will be briefly discussed herein.
Twemlow, et al. (2002) maintain that one etymological root of the word “safe, “means “whole.”
They further maintain that the Latin “salvus” also implies healthiness. These researchers believe that those dimensions of feeling safe are frequently forgotten. Nonetheless they purport that a whole and healthy person feels safe both inside and outside. Consequently this feeling of safety obtained from feeling whole then permeates the individual and the community.
On the notion of fear Gross and Canteras (2012) argue that the term ‘fear’ is used to describe the feeling that arises when we experience an impending threat to our survival and that fear which is an emotion that has powerful effects on behaviour and physiology across animal species. The amygdala is the brain region most implicated in fear. The figure (3) below shows the large range of stimuli and situations that may serve as objects of fears and phobias in humans, Ohman, Dimberg, and Ost (1985; see also Ohman, 1986).
34 Figure 3: Paths of Fear
Mayr (1974) in his argument on paths of fear first made a distinction between behaviour directed toward the living and the non-living world which he referred to as communicative and non - communicative behaviour, respectively. Then within the communicative category, Mayr made a further distinction between behaviour that is focussed toward members of one's own and other species (intraspecific and interspecific fears, respectively). Ohman et al. (1985) added to this discourse on fear by distinguishing between fears of physical objects or events (e.g., heights, thunder; non-communicative fears), fears of other humans (social fears; communicative intraspecific fears), and fears of animals (communicative interspecific fears). These various distinctions of fear were linked to three important classes of human phobia: nature phobias, social phobia, and animal phobias (cf. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition; DSM-IV', American Psychiatric Association [APA], 1994).
For Lieber (2007), “Feeling unsafe” in the public and political sphere is a phenomenon that has an equal impact on individuals regardless of social and gender differences. Robert and Pottier, (1998)
35
purport that this feeling involves at least two dimensions, which gained momentum through sociological studies: on the one hand, the way people refer to lack of safety in public space, on the other, fear for oneself. Hanmer, (1977) and Stanko, (1990) commenting on feminist-oriented studies, conducted by primarily Anglo-American researchers, show that the when women express personal fears their mobility is inhibited. This according to Valentine, (1989) indicates the importance to study the ways in which women use or occupy public places, especially since the media, family and friends, aim to persuade women that public places are where men elect to commit violent acts against them. Consutez et al, in the qualitative aspect of their research on women’s feelings of safety accentuated how women are mentally affected by avoiding these spaces. They further maintained that the avoidance tactics that women display suggest that the norms that apply to public places remain generally hostile to women. Thus they concluded that
“being female in the street is not an unmarked characteristic, and there are many sanctions to remind women of the role they are supposed to play and the practices expected of them.
Additionally it seems that the reasons for the fears that women declare are not necessarily linked to personal experience of physical assault but rather gender-specific violence. This research also found that the social impact of feeling insecure is evident when the quality of life of citizens deteriorate.
This climate of insecurity fuels further fear of being a victim of crime, especially in the case of previous direct or indirect victims. This fear also influences the behaviour patterns of victims. As mentioned earlier victims begin to change their daily routines. They may confine themselves to their houses, avoid passing by dangerous locations, and (depending on affordability) improve or install security within their homes. Consequently these changes impact how they use public places, owing to the uncertainty about safety. Similarly approximately 36.0% of people using public transport in the metropolitan area of Mexico City say they feel unsafe or very unsafe. In the survey conducted by ENVIPE, the most insecure places for the participants are ATM on streets, banks, public transport and the street.
Khameneh and Ebrahimpour (2007) argue that the need to create safe spaces that accommodate women must be a participatory process especially in the face of strong social relations.
Communities serious about creating safe public spaces for women should first analyze who and when, inter alia, public spaces are used. In undertaking this analysis Khameneh and Ebrahimpour
36
(2007) argue that the outcome will provide critical data of when certain groups, like women or girls, do not use a space. This information will then provide an indication that the space feels insecure to members of that group. They conclude that the planning and designing of public spaces where women and girls feel safe should be ongoing and must consider the physical and social characteristics of the particular space. Continuous evaluation of the social and physical implications of the planning and design process will facilitate the success of such an exercise (Khameneh and Ebrahimpour, 2007).