Economic Roles: Who Provides?

 
 
In the classical juristic understanding of qiwamah, which influences contemporary laws and cultural norms, men (fathers, uncles, brothers, husbands, sons) are responsible for providing for and protecting women and children; women in turn must obey these men.
 
But in each of the countries involved in the Global Life Stories Project, resource persons shared stories of the men in their lives who did not provide for or protect them and their children. In extreme cases, women and their children were abandoned by their husbands or fathers, who married additional wives, began to favour other wives or simply disappeared. More frequently, men struggled to earn enough to support their families, and women picked up the slack, or the women worked or earned more than their husbands to begin with. In many cases, this led to insecurity on the part of the men and instability within the marriages.
 
The stories show the disconnect between the laws—and even the theory and logic behind the laws—and the realities that families face. The idea that the man should be the sole provider and protector does not work for these families in today’s globally competitive system, especially amid the rise of nuclear family formations. And when men do not fulfil their responsibilities, they still retain their privilege and right of authority over women, which is unfair and unsustainable.
 
These are some of the main observations about the economic roles taken on by men and women in the life stories documented through this project:
 
 

In all the countries, women took on the roles of providers and protectors for themselves, their children and sometimes their extended families. Most of the resource persons earned money and contributed to their households regardless of economic status. Women took up formal and informal work as farmers, office workers, journalists, domestic workers, cooks, NGO staff, teachers, college professors. They did home-based sewing projects, sold items at markets and took on cleaning, sweeping and other odd jobs. Women also disproportionately carried the burden of unpaid work at home.

 
Safiya from Nigeria started petty trading, had her children hawk pure water (potable water in plastic bags), alale (bean cakes), boiled yam etc., borrowed money for school fees and finally was able to go into full scale trading with a loan from a micro-finance bank to enable her children to attend school and meet the other needs of the house. She said:

My husband was completely irresponsible and didn’t adequately provide for me and our children...He did not provide enough food for the house let alone other things, which I heard Islam says he is supposed to do. To survive I was forced to find a way to supplement his meagre contribution.

Samina from Canada supported herself in her second marriage, in which she was the man’s second wife:

He did not look after me financially, nor was he there emotionally. Throughout the four years of our marriage he took no responsibility. There was no fairness or justice. He only used to stay two days with me and the rest with her. He did not financially support me in any way. Never once when he came over did he bring anything for me. Physically, yes, perhaps he was taking care of me, or I was taking care of his physical needs.

Mawar from Malaysia is the main earner in her family, like her mother before her:

Fate decides everything. When my first child was six, my husband became ill and had to be hospitalized for hernia surgery. Since then, I had to take over the responsibility as head of the family from my husband. He couldn’t work for four years. I took a job tapping rubber...My income increased as most of the rubber trees were young and still produced a lot of latex. With this income, I assisted my husband, brought up my children and became the head of the family.

Nadia from Egypt helped her father support her five siblings, then supported her first and second husbands. After graduation from university, she gave up a prestigious job as a researcher and worked in a hotel to earn a larger income. Then she emigrated to a Gulf country where she worked as a wedding planner in a hotel, supporting her family in Egypt and paying the marriage costs for her younger sisters and brothers. She married twice while living abroad, both times to Egyptian men, and gave birth to three children. Both marriages failed because of conflicts with her spouses about their marital roles, since Nadia constantly felt uncomfortable and a little resentful about shouldering the financial burden of supporting the family in addition to child care and housework.
 
 

In most cases, women’s husbands and fathers wanted to keep the women under their control even though they were not fulfilling their responsibilities as providers and protectors. In addition, the resource persons’ communities continued to think of the men as the heads of their households. This was true across countries and class lines.

 
All of the Indonesian resource persons worked in paying jobs throughout their marriages and lives (e.g. Nurul and Murti as farmers and traders, Nisrina as a migrant worker, Sinta as a preacher and teacher, Shafira as a teacher, Nadira and Amalia as food and confectionaries sellers, and Nawa and Asih in NGOs). The Indonesia team reflected on the four life stories collected in their second phase: “All husbands expected their wives to take part in providing for the family, to be obedient and submissive wives at the same time and to take care of all domestic chores.”
 
Similarly, Shadiya from the UK reflected:

Many times I have felt that this ‘man as head of household’ identity is a farce, but other times I know it to be true. Although I am the main earner, and I am better educated and qualified than my husband, I am still a woman and I don’t have the final say in anything. In some things I have a say, but I feel that this is more to humour me and keep me on his side. I feel I am given permission to work or to see my friends, rather than this being my choice, so in reality I don’t have a say at all.

The fact that the resource persons were helping to provide in the face of societal expectations caused problems within marriages on both sides. Both men and women often expected the men to provide, and when they could not, the men felt threatened—as if robbed of their manhood—and the women too were disillusioned. In addition, the women’s economic roles did not allow them legal or social claims, so they were ambivalent about contributing.

Rafia, a well-educated middle-class woman from Bangladesh, has consistently provided for her husband and herself, contributing approximately 65% of the household expenses. Her husband has had trouble holding down jobs, and she has consistently worked to help with expenses. Rafia said:

He feels bad about this—I know. But if he admits that or shows me too much affection, he feels that he will be defeated. This saddens me... I think if his financial woes are lifted, he will be in a better place, he will behave better. His ego just can’t accept that I bear most of the household expenses.

The couple has had trouble making ends meet. Emotional and physical distance has grown between them, especially after she suffered a miscarriage, and Rafia also felt cut off from her family and friends because of their financial predicament.
 
Similarly, when the husband of Asih from Indonesia was unable to provide for the family, they faced tensions in their marriage—from her side as well as his. This led to major arguments between them, triggered by his failure to try to support the family. They were thrilled to have their first child, but:

The happiness did not last long. Since L. was laid off, L. did not seem to try his best to find another job. If he did have a job, he would not stay too long with the reason that he did not feel comfortable with the new job. He kept changing jobs. Finally what L. did was just odd jobs here and there...He only gave money occasionally and it was not sufficient.

Naeema from Canada was the sole breadwinner for many years while her husband was earning his degree. She earned all the money, paid deposits for the two houses the couple bought, paid mortgages, contributed to his tuition fees, etc. Once he got a job, he immediately demanded that she stop working and move with him to London. When she protested and said she’d wait to move until finding a job there:

[H]e gave this ultimatum of ‘I am your husband, and you have to obey me.’ I said, ‘No, I do not have to obey anyone.’ And then he said, ‘In Islam the wife has to obey her husband’, and I said, ‘Not that I know of. The next day he went to my father to tell him what happened, and said ‘This is what I want her to do, but she won’t.’ So my father said to him, ‘What are you talking about? She made you [financially supported his studies], and you would not be what you are if it weren’t for her.’ This was just the biggest insult for him...He dashed out of the house, really angry.

Naeema reflected, “I think he needed to be affirmed as the head of the household. He needed to assert that, and up to that point he could not do so since I was the primary breadwinner. Now that he could earn and he was earning, he said, ‘You do not need to’. Maybe all along he was unhappy that he was not in charge…[and] in a subordinate type of a role.” Naeema continued to work outside the home. Soon after, her husband unilaterally divorced her. He married another woman months later.