Education for women's empowerment or schooling for women's subordination?

This article distinguishes between "schooling for subordination," the notion that promotes conventional schooling for women within existing school systems as a possible basis for them to improve their position in society and "education for empowerment," a more radical perspective that links women's advancement with the transformation of the patriarchal social order. The article opens by defining gender training as provision of skills and methods for improved gender-orientation of development programs. The conservative interpretation of gender training holds that it seeks to increase women's access to resources. The radical definition holds that inequality in access to resources is a mere symptom of a deeper problem caused by structural gender inequality and calls for conscientization of this problem. The two definitions of women's empowerment that follow this distinction are 1) a watered-down view of empowerment as self-reliance reflecting the conservative definition and 2) a more robust and pure view of empowerment as enabling women to identify and end the discriminatory practices that block their access to resources. It follows that education may be mere schooling for subordination in systems where patriarchal gatekeepers limit chances for women and where women who do succeed become "honorary males" and "queen bees" intent on repelling the advancement of other women. Education for empowerment can be found in gender training, which holds objectives that are opposite to those found in formal schooling and may be more readily adopted by women with less exposure to formal, patriarchal schools.