The Paradox of Empowerment

The looming pressure of high uncertainty and volatility associated with the water-food-energy-climate-health nexus in addition to the well-documented gender inequalities across all sectors in development are among many factors defining the imminence and urgency of sustainable health impact and outcomes. Gender equality is at the core of sustainable health outcomes, as gender plays a critical role in the ability to improve and protect health, which is increasingly imperative to a population that is both growing and aging. The crux of the problem is that despite progress bridging gender gaps over the last two decades, gender disparities are widespread and persist with high variability in health impact and outcomes by geographic region and populations. So, in an effort to address these variations, public policy and the development community have introduced a new phrase, the classic “female empowerment,” into their game of strategic-approach-buzzword-bingo. According to the United States Agency for International Development’s (USAID’s) Policy on Gender Equality and Female Empowerment, female empowerment “often comes from within and individuals empower themselves” and “cultures, societies, and institutions create conditions that facilitate or undermine the possibilities for empowerment.” Trust me, I understand if you’re wondering how female empowerment could possibly be problematic, as I’ve hypocritically used this phrase time and time again before only recently realizing its paradoxical implications after feeling irked by its ambiguity and overuse in the development arena. Other than those who believe empowerment is a zero sum game, with whom I vehemently disagree with, where female empowerment results in men’s disempowerment, I’ve only understood female empowerment to have a positive connotation. As I’ve now come to realize the contradictory implications of female empowerment extend beyond semantics, I believe it’s seemingly positive notion is precisely what distracts our ability to see this rhetoric for what it is – a concept masquerading by proxy of a positive connotation to undermine gender equality. Let’s be clear: I am the utmost supporter of female empowerment in the context of a measure of progress in gender equality; however, I believe the use of female empowerment as a strategic approach is not only a paradox, but also reinforces societal norms that disempower females. While I too initially considered the possibility that I was quibbling over semantics, I now see my reluctance as a testament to this discursive barrier’s strength. Here’s why: Despite the implied meaning of the development community that power can be bestowed upon you, by definition, empowerment comes from within. Consequently, a strategic focus that involves “female empowerment,” not only places an undue burden on females never experienced by their male counterparts that is inherently unequal, but also perpetuates a fallacious understanding that empowerment automatically translates into opportunity. Anecdotal evidence: how many times can you recall seeing the phrase “male empowerment?” Based upon my experience, disadvantaged females require “empowerment” and disadvantaged males require “enablement.” If the goal is gender equality, why are we perpetuating gendered rhetoric? Furthermore, even if seizing or realizing the full extent of your power translated as de facto opportunities, why is the development community fixated on the individual efforts of women and disregarding those social, economic, cultural, and political determinants that disempower? In effort to transcend the misnomer of gender equality in terms of parity or numbers and to ensure impact beyond what’s superficial, the development community needs to clearly articulate and ensure that the underlying issue is being addressed rather than its symptoms. When I read “female empowerment,” my first thought is “How?” To effectively address gender inequality and ensure sustainable outcomes, we not only need to understand how it’s proposing to be done, but also what the end goal is. In other words, what does the empowered female look like? If I, as a Western woman, am the ideal of an empowered woman, why do gender gaps in pay and labor persist? What are the shortcomings of strategies focused on female empowerment? Rather than burdening females with the individualized responsibility to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and become empowered, the development lexicon should address the structural disadvantages females encounter that disempower. For those questioning the importance in analyzing discursive implications, I urge you to consider empowerment’s implicit notion of male dominance and its effect on the distribution of power.  Perhaps, a discursive approach to deconstructing gender roles would be more effective in creating the social transformation necessary to achieve gender equality. This means unlinking gender from societal norms by reframing the structural differences in opportunities, such as comparing the differences in how females actively participate to men.   About the author: Augusta Smallwood is a graduate of George Mason University’s MHA program in Health Systems Management and The College of William & Mary where she studied Gender and Healthcare. Her work as a Consultant at LMI focuses primarily on global health issues and health supply chains.