Abimbola Agboola

WOMEN AND NEGOTIATION POWER IN THE FAMILY ABSTRACT Women are considered very important members of the family with their influence being felt in every aspect of family life. However, the patriachal nature of the Nigerian society has given men more power to dominate family decisions. This study revealed that though men have more power in the Nigerian society, women wield the control of such power. Men are likened as being the head of the human body while women are the neck, thus, wherever, the neck turns so does the head. Hence, the study revealed that women contol men subtly in the family using certain tools. The research design used were both descriptive and exploratory. A total sample of 382 respondents who were members of a family were used for the survey; 20 married men and women were used for In-depth Interview as well as two batches of Focus Group Discussion. The sampling technique for this study was random and purposive sampling method. Data were collected by triangulation of structured questionnaires, in-depth interviews and focus group discussion. Data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) employing descriptive statistics. The qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis to enhance the explanatory clarity of the findings. The study revealed that women own emotional power, vocal power, decisional power, and sexual power. The study revealed that that people often get hurt in marriage but they should negotiate bearing in mind four factors – food, sex, children and emotions. The study thereby recommended that seminars should be organized to enlighten women the instruments they could use to negotiate power in the family. INTRODUCTION The patriarchal nature of the Nigerian cannot be overemphasized where househols are male-headed dominant primary decisions in the family. However, ther has been increased incidences of female-headed famililies due to constant changing roles of men and women in the family. Nowadays, men are not the only ones burdened with the survival of the family, women have also braced up to face challenges and seek to contributing intellectually and financially to the family. There is a rise of women breadwinners in most families with women providing for the needs of their family members regardless of the cultural position of man in the family. There is a constant tussle for power between spouses with men upholding the cultural declaration of man as being the head of the home and thus, should make the major decisions in the family with or without the consent of women. However, women are not ignorant of this and thus, looks for means to negotiate for power in the family’s interest. WOMEN AND THEIR NEGOTIATION POWER In a family system, power within the family is defined according to what members have the power, how they got it, how they maintain it, and at what costs to other members. In most circumstances, family members must cooperate and consider others in order for their needs to be met, even individual needs. When there are diverse individual needs, they are met with conflict, frustration, hurt, and disappointment among family members. For example, a husband tries to influence his wife while the wife is trying to influence her husband. Often times understanding these patterns is more complex than what meets the eye. Early family studies researchers generally supported the argument that “the balance of power will be on the side of that partner who contributes the greater resources to the marriage” (Blood & Wolfe, 1960: 12). They found that partners who bring more income, education, status, or social capital to their marriages tend to exert greater control in terms of decision making, and have less responsibility for household labor tasks (Chen, Yi, & Lu, 2000; Cromwell, Corrales, &Torsiello, 1973; Fox, 1973; Hsu, 2008; Kandel & Lesser, 1972; Katz & Peres, 1985). A certain number of women are faced with the problem of male-domination and subordination in the family. Such women’s voices are not heard in the society or are rather silenced. Some women’s opinions are not sought in their individual families and thus, their ideas are inconsequential in family matters. Even if they have very relevant and cogent ideas contrary to their husband’s ideas, it is most times treated as trash due to the husband’s ego; however the reverse is the case in some families. That women virtually play a subordinate role is a recurrent implicit or explicit assumption in sociological literature. Contrary wise, J. Bryner (2007) in her study, “Women are in charge at home”, identified that wives have more power than their husbands in making decisions and dominating discussions. Hence, women have certain means they utilise in ensuring their interest is maintained in the family. She further noted that the marriage is a place where women can exert some power. Also, a lot of men think that women wield power over them based on sexism. Women are viewed as being gifted with emotional sensitivity and sexual power over men which they use often times. They understand how to manipulate the passions of others - especially that of men making them offer their services and sacrifice themselves at will. Thus, women use these means in influencing their husband’s decisions in the family. Negotiation has been seen as a key concept for understanding how modern couples organize their life together within different areas of family life. This emphasis on negotiation has been accompanied by a notion that intimate relationships within the family and couple relationships has been transformed. Giddens for instance depicts modern couple relationships as moving towards the ‘pure relationship’ where couple relationships are characterized by greater democracy and gender equality (Giddens 1991). Families have gone from being seen as duty oriented to being ‘families of negotiation’. Under late modernity, couple relationships are seen as more open and freed from rules and traditional norms. An underlying assumption often associated with the use of negotiation is that couples and families need to negotiate in order to make their everyday lives work. Negotiation in couple relationships has often been seen as rational, intentional and necessary for the organization of everyday life (Beck & Beck-Gernsheim 1995; Björnberg & Kollind 2003; Giddens 1992). Within the social sciences, there has been little consensus regarding the definition and use of the concept negotiation (Espwall et. al. 2001; Johansson 1997). While some researcher see negotiation as an open and specific form of interaction that can and should be distinguished from other forms of social interaction, (Johansson 1997; Author & Author 2009; Syltevik 2000) others define negotiation in a much broader sense. Anselm Strauss, leading proponent of the negotiated order approach for instance sees almost every social order as a negotiated order and emphasizes that negotiations are an aspect of most kinds of social relationships. According to him, negotiation is a way of ‘getting things done’ in social life (Strauss 1978). From this perspective it is not only possible to talk about open and explicit negotiations, but also implicit negotiations and ‘silent bargains’: Some negotiations may be very brief, made without any verbal exchange or obvious gestural manifestations; nevertheless, the parties may be perfectly aware of ‘what they are doing’ – they may not call this negotiation bargaining, but they surely regard its product as some sort of worked out agreement. Other negotiations may be so implicit that the respective parties may not be thoroughly aware that they have engaged in or completed a negotiated transaction (Strauss 1978:224-225; emphasis in original). Most times women utilize the silent bargaining to achieve their objectives in the family as well as to influence family decisions. This might go unnoticed but it is common in most families of procreation for women to wield power in a particular issue. Conceptualizing what happens in families in terms of negotiation is an important step in understanding what goes on in families. The notion of the family as a unit built on consensus and complementary gender roles was shifted in favour of a picture of the family as an arena for individual and different (sometimes conflicting) interests (Syltevik 2000). Household allocation decisions are the result of a bargaining process in which its members seek to allocate resources, over which they have control, to goods they especially care about (Bourguignon and Chiappori, 1992). Crucial to the final allocation is thus the bargaining strength of each spouse. Relative income clearly influences the intra-household distribution of power (Duflo, 2004; Thomas, 1990, 1994), but it is not the only variable that affects the decisional process. Factors that change the household's economic environment and in particular their members' respective bargaining positions are also important. According to the bargaining models, the final distribution is the result of a negotiation between the members of the family, in relation to their relative power, i.e. their authority. In order to understand which sources of authority are available to women, a more complex analysis is necessary which considers the interconnection between the domestic and the public sphere, because households are not autonomous and self-sufficient units, but rather are in constant relationship with other households and with the society in general (Harris, 1981) Women use several means in influencing their husband’s decision with or without force. Most married women have a hold on the decisions their spouses make. Women could use several types of power to influence their husband’s decisions including emotional power, sexual power and vocal power. For emotional power, some women deploy tears in influencing their husband’s decision. This is seen as an act of manipulating a man’s decision; however, this means doesn’t work with all men. Also, a woman could use her emotional power in relating her experience; desire or need to her husband with a soft tone of voice and this could in the tail-end influence the husband’s decision. Another power, women own in the family is the sexual power. A man becomes powerless when he has an urge to have sex with his wife, he is completely at her whim (Peter, 2012). Thus, women use this power in ensuring they have their way or need in most families. Also, this also does not work in all families. Sexuality is all too often used as a tool to gain power or control in a relationship. No marriage can function well when the beauty of sexuality is used in a harmful, controlling manner. Not only does a couple’s sexual relationship allow for physical release, but the intimacy component of sexuality provides a bonding element that is critical. When sex is used to make war rather than to make love, the effects can be devastating. On a neurobiological level alone, the body is deprived of the truly positive effects of several neurochemicals, including the bond-building oxytocin. Instead, negative sexual war tactics build levels of stress-related neurochemicals, such as adrenaline and cortisol. Passive-aggressive behaviors are common and include tactics such as intentionally withholding sex or only offering sex as a reward when the partner has "done something right." Worse yet, when sex becomes a weapon of physical or emotional aggression, lasting harm can be done to the vital sense of trust and safety in a marriage. If the level of aggression rises, physical abuse can result, leaving the relationship completely unsafe. When a couple’s sexual relationship goes awry, the level of tension in the household can be palpable. In one third of marriages, there is a “desire gap” - one person desires sex more than the other person does. Typically, men want sex more than women do. The one who wants sex the least is the one who is in control, and this is how women use sex as a weapon - to manipulate. (Anne, 2014) The increase in working women in the society and the constant change in roles of men and women has affected to a large extent the power structure in the family and consequently the power women wield in the society. Although some working women are still dominated by their husbands in the family but there are few ways women maintain their influence in family decisions. This study would open up ancient and contemporary methodologies women use in negotiating decisions in the family. CONFLICT THEORY Conflict theory is premised on the works of Marx Weber where he stated a constant struggle between two dialectic forces called the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. He emphasized that these two groups are in constant struggle with conflicting interests. The bourgeoisie owns the means of production and proletariat offer their labour in exchange for rewards which is below their labour. Thus, he stipulated that proletariat have a false consciousness of their situation and until they come to their true consciousness will they realize the state they are in. The realization of their false consciousness would lead to a revolution which would thereby lead to an egalitarian society. However, the egalitarian society proposed by Marx has been seen as a state of utopia, that is, imaginary. Marx’s conflict theory focused on the conflict between two primary classes. The bourgeoisie represents the members of society who hold the majority of the wealth and means. The proletariat includes those considered working class or poor. With the rise of capitalism, Marx theorized that the bourgeoisie, a minority within the population, would use their influence to oppress the proletariat, the majority class. The uneven distribution within conflict theory was predicted to be maintained through ideological coercion where the bourgeoisie would force acceptance of the current conditions by the proletariat. Marx further believed that as the working class and poor were subjected to worsening conditions, a collective consciousness would bring the inequality to light and potentially result in revolt. The resources individuals own in the family determine to a large extent their social class. Thus, in a patriarchal society, the man is expected to own more resources than the woman and therefore, control the activities of the home. However, in situations where the woman owns more resources than the man, there tends to be a reverse of roles with the woman controlling the activities of the home. Consequently, an individual’s social class determines the thought that creeps into his or her mind. Thus, the husband in the family has thoughts concerning provision for the basic needs of the family while the woman thinks of how to manage the resources given her getting the most out of it in the interest of the family. However, there could be cases where the husband views his contribution as the most important, thereby, cheapening the contributions of his wife to the sustenance of the family as he is the ruling class in this case. Although the wife possesses the knowledge on how to manage the family, the husband being the ruling class owns the power to reward her labour which he could cheapen based on his perception of his wife’s valuable contribution to the sustenance of the family. Hence, there is a constant struggle for power between the husband and the wife as the husband sees himself as the head of the home that should make the final decisions in the home based on his social class in the family. METHODOLOGY The research design was both exploratory and descriptive. The participants for this study included single, married men and women involved in power relations as well as decision making in the family in Ibadan. Survey questionnaires was administered to 382 respondents made up of fathers, mothers, sons and daughters spread across the largest local government of the 11 local governments in Ibadan. In addition, 20 in-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted among married men and women. Ten (10) IDIs were conducted among married men and Ten (10) married women. Also, 2 FGDs were conducted. . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Demographic Characteristics of Participants Respondents for the survey were required to provide certain demographic information which included the marital status, highest educational qualifications as well as their ethnic group. 78% of the respondents were Yorubas, 11.5% were Igbos, 0.3% were Hausa while 7.9% were from other ethnic groups including Edo, Ijaw and Igala. 83.5% were single and 15.4% were married. Also, 47.9% of the respondents had B.Sc as their highest educational qualification while 24.8% were Masters holders and 20.9% had WASSCE as their highest educational qualification. Women and Negotiation Instruments Findings in this study reveals that majority (65.4%) of the respondents asserted that women use their sexual power to influence decisions in the family while 24.6% disagreed with this assertion. Sexuality is all too often used as a tool to gain power or control in a relationship. No marriage can function well when the beauty of sexuality is used in a harmful, controlling manner. Not only does a couple’s sexual relationship allow for physical release, but the intimacy component of sexuality provides a bonding element that is critical (Peter, 2012). Men need sex, while women desire sex, hence, women can use sex as a bargaining tool to maintain their interest. Women use several means in influencing their husband’s decision with or without force. Most married women have a hold on the decisions their spouses make. Women could use several types of power to influence their husband’s decisions including emotional power, sexual power and vocal power. For emotional power, some women deploy tears in influencing their husband’s decision. This is seen as an act of manipulating a man’s decision, however, this means doesn’t work with all men. Also, a woman could use her emotional power in relating her experience, desire or need to her husband with a soft tone of voice and this could in the tail-end influence the husband’s decision. Another power, women own in the family is the sexual power. A man becomes powerless when he has a urge to have sex with his wife, he is completely at her whim (Peter, 2012). Majority of women most times use their emotions as a tool to maintaining their interest in the family. The research findings reveals that a large percentage (69.9%) of respondents reported that women deploy tears in influencing men’s decisions in the family. 40.6% of the respondents reported that women manipulate men through crying which This further explains that women deploy tears to manipulate men into taking decisions in their favour. Since men are viewed as the head of the home and own the final say on every decision, hence, no decision can be made without them. Women, therefore, look for means to influence men’s decision swaying them to their side. The findings of this study revealed the ways women negotiate power in the family including starving the man of sex and food, calmness in speech, the use of children to negotiate their interest, crying, dialogue or building a brick wall as a tool (silence). Others include diplomatic persuasion, quarrel and respecting the husband’s decision but proposing theirs after. Majority (82.2%) of the respondents reported that women have power in the family, while (13.4%) of the respondents reported that women do not have power in the family. From a broad view, in a patriarchal society, men are regarded as the final decision makers but women use their subtle power to control and influence most of men’s actions in the family. A man could just be seen to have power but a woman controls most of his activities. Thus, a woman could influence a man’s decision without force, it just takes her to understand the man’s strengths and weaknesses. A woman could be likened to the neck that controls the head meaning a man is the head of the home but a woman controls most of his activities. Chi-Square was used to test the relationship between family breadwinner and mother role in decision making in family matters. The chi-square table showed that the chi-square is 3.516, P value was 0.172. This is higher than 0.05. Hence, it follows that there is no significant relationship between the breadwinner of the family and decision making in the family. This implies that a man still partakes in family decision making despite the bread winning activities of the woman and although the father is the breadwinner of the home, the woman still partakes in the decision making. Hence, both the father and the mother are indispensable to the sustenance of the family. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the data obtained from the questionnaire, in-depth interview and focus group discussion certain pertinent conclusion can be reached. This study revealed that culture is a major challenge women face as regards power relations in the family. The study further revealed the negotiating methods women could use in maintaining their interest in the family which includes children power, kitchen power, sexual power and vocal power. Some of the respondents during the focus group discussion asserted that they often times use their sexual power to demand things from their husband. However, one of the male respondents during the interview session noted that an intelligent woman would find other means on convincing her husband for a cause instead of using sex as a bargaining tool as the husband can find better options outside the home. The study indicates that women are often involved in decision making in the home and thus, women are not powerless in the home. The result of this study also points out that individuals who contribute resources to the sustenance of the family have a stake and therefore importance therein. Thus, the study revealed that women should contribute meaningfully to their family of procreation for their relevance to be sustained as well as maintained. Finally, the study revealed that power between spouses would most likely be unequal based on the patriarchal nature of Nigeria, thus, women should view the family as a composition of statuses with roles and respective functions and thus, each status holders should perform their functions for the sustenance of the family. The study also revealed the negotiating instruments women could use in the family as a bargaining tool which includes sexual power, emotional power, kitchen power, vocal power and children power. However, the following are the researchers’ recommendations to improve the negotiation power of women in the family: Organizational bodies such as Non-Governmental Agencies should be set up to educate young single and married women on their roles in the family and the tools they could use in negotiating power for a peaceful atmosphere in their present or future homes. The power of presentation of issues to their spouses should be further emphasized. However, such bodies should guide against abuse of women’s rights. Since the person that contributes resources the most wields more power in the home, thus, the government should also emphasize on the girl child education for the development of the intellectual capacity of women to contribute their own meaningful quota to the family both intellectually and financially. Also, a woman that exhibits powerlessness in the family has had a bad experience that has tampered with her self-worth, thus, to combat this, the government or Non-Governmental agencies should set up seminars or workshops that would emphasize the self-worth of women focusing on the improvement of the self-esteem of women with unpalatable backgrounds which has degraded their self-confidence. REFERENCES Aikman S., Unterhalter E. 2007. Practising Gender Equality in Education. Oxfam Aizer, A., 2010. The Gender Wage Gap and Domestic Violence. American Economic Review 100(4), 1847-59 Alvarez, L. 1995. "Pint-size Interpreters of World for Parents." New York Times, October 1: A16. Anahita K., Masoumeh R., Hossein S., and Lesley P. 2015. Comparison of Family Power Structure and Identity Style Between Delinquent and Non-Delinquent Juveniles Accessed- Barrett, M. 1980. Women's oppression today: Problems in Marxist feminist analysis. London: Verso Books. Baumrind, D. 1971. "Current Patterns of Parental Authority". Developmental Psychology Monographs 4:1–102. Becker, G. 1981. A treatise on the family. Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A.: Harvard University Press. Beechey, V. 1987.Unequal work. London: Verso. Bilancetti I. Wives, Mothers and Workers in and out the Domestic Sphere Accessed- Blau, P. 1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. Blood, R., and Wolfe, D. 1960. Husbands and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living. New York: Free Press. Blumstein, P., and Schwartz, P. 1983. American Couples:Money, Work, and Sex. New York: Morrow. Bookman A. and Morgen S. 1988. Women and the Politics of Empowerment, Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1988 Bradbury, T.N., Fincham, F.D. 1990. Attributions in marriage: Review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 3-33. Breger, R. 1998. Love and the state: Women, mixed marriages and the law in Germany. In R. Breger& R. Hill (Eds.), Cross-cultural marriage: Identity and choice (pp. 129-152). New York: Oxford International Publishers Ltd. Caplow, T. 1968. Two against One: Coalitions in Triads. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Chen, Y.-H., Yi, C.-C., & Lu, Y.-H. 2000. Married women’s status in the family: An example of decision-making patterns. Taiwanese Journal of Sociology, 24: 1-58. Cromwell, R., and Olson, D., eds. 1975.Power in Families. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. DeLoache, J., and Gottlieb, A., eds. 2000. A World of Babies: Imagined Childcare Guides for Seven Societies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Falbo, T., Peplau, L. A. 1980. Power strategies in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(4), 618. Felmlee, D.H. 1994. Who’s On Top? Power in Romantic Relationships.Sex Roles, 31- 31(5-6). 275-295. Fineman, M., and Mykitiuk, R. 1994. The Public Nature of Private Violence: The Discovery of Domestic Abuse. New York: Routledge. Foa, E., and Foa, U. 1980. "Resource Theory: Interpersonal Behavior as Exchange." In Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, ed. K. Gergen, M. Greenberg, and R. Willis. New York: Plenum Press. K. Davis and S. Fisher, “Power and the Female Subject,” in S. Fisher and K. Davis, eds., Negotiating at the Margins: The Gendered Discourse of Power and Resistance (New Brunswick, NJ:Rutgers University Press, 1993), 3-20. Komarovsky, M. 1964. Blue-collar marriage. New York, NY: Random House. Lee, G., and Petersen, L. 1983."Conjugal Power and Spousal Resources in Patriarchal Cultures." Journal of Comparative Family Studies 14:23–28. Lystra, K. 1989. Searching the heart: Women, men, and romantic love in nineteenth-century America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Okome, M. O. 2002. Domestic, Regional, and International Protection of Nigerian Women against Discrimination: Constraints and Possibilities. African Studies Quarterly, 6(3). Omodjohwoefe, O. S. 2011. Gender Roles Differentiation and Social Mobility of Women in Nigeria. Journal of Social Science,27(1),7-74. Omoregie, N., and Ikensekhien, O. A. 2009. Persistent gender Inequality in Nigerian Education.Benin: Benson Idahosa University. Oropesa, R. S. 1997. "Development and Marital Power in Mexico."Social Forces 75:-. Oyewunmi, O. 1997. A Critical Analysis of Oyeronke Oyewunmi’s The Invention of Women: Making an African Sense of Western Gender Discourses.Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press. Swidler, A. 1990. Marriage among the Religions of the World. Lewiston, NY: Mellen Press. Syltevik, L. 2000, Forhandlinger – et fruktbartbegrep for familiepraksis hos senmoderne par?” (Negotiation – a fruitful concept for family praxis in late modernity couples), Sosiologisktidskriftnr. 3, 187-203. Tannen, D. 2001. You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York, NY: Quill. Waller, W. 1938, revised 1951. The Family: A Dynamic Interpretation. New York: Dryden. Worden, M. 1994. Family Therapy Basics. Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Pacific Grove, CA.