Microfinance Participation and Marital Violence in Bangladesh: A Qualitative Inquiry

Sample, Sampling Strategy, and Recruitment

The sample pool included ever-married women aged 18-45 years who resided in a particularly dense high poverty—or slum—area in Dhaka, purposefully selected because it is one of the largest slums in the city. Purposeful sampling methods were employed to select respondents who accessed microfinance. Sample recruitment was facilitated through a non-profit organization—Shabab Murshid Development Foundation—that works with schools in high poverty slum neighborhoods. Their director identified a schoolteacher who was well connected in a particularly dense slum area. He knew parents of the children of the slum school in which he taught and was able to identify community members who accessed microfinance. Using a “known sponsor” approach (Patton, 2002), the teacher, on behalf of the study Principal Investigator (PI), communicated with women in the community, asking them if they would agree to be an interview participant. Upon their verbal consent, they were asked to meet the research team at a time of their choice at the school, where the PI obtained consent and conducted the interviews. The school was chosen as a meeting place so that the setting of the interview was familiar to the respondents (Glaser & Strauss, 1999; Patton, 2002).

All of the women were currently married. None was ever divorced, and all of them had children, though of varying ages ranging from 5-30 years.

The Setting: Dhaka “Bosti”

From a distance, it looks like a very cramped campground, where people have set up tents right next to each other. On approach, one is in the midst of a pulsating ambience—a din of voices and myriad activities; vibrant visual assaults of colors of billboards; assorted food stalls with vendors peddling their fares, an open-air bazaar; a surge of people of all ages, flowing endlessly in and around the dwellings, going about their work or chores. But, as one gets closer to the grounds, the chimera of the “campground atmosphere” gives way to dirty paths, with makeshift tents made from used jute and plastic bags, polythene covers, old vinyl billboard wrappers, bamboo mats, and all kinds of recyclable semi-durable materials, hanging precariously from bamboo frames that create dwelling “rooms.” An average of five people dwell in these rooms: typically, a husband and his wife with their family, sometimes a grandparent, or maybe another relative who has come from a village. Many, about a 100, such tents crammed next to one another form a “bosti,” as slums are called in Bangladesh. The average room rental is BDT 2,000 (US$25) a month.

It is in these tents that the respondents of this qualitative study live and from which they operate their micro businesses. Each of the 30 enterprising individuals that we met, in a school in the slum where the interviews were conducted, shared a part of their lives with the interviewers. We had envisioned conducting the interviews at their residences, but that was not feasible, not just because of lack of space, but due to lack of privacy. Even if we were to talk alone in the rooms, the conversations would carry to the neighbors given the close proximity of the hovels.

The people who live in the slum are all poor, even though there are within-group differences in levels of income and material goods; some own television sets, radio sets, bicycles, beds, and shoes, while others do not. Similarly, there are within-group differences in the types of residences in which they live—some have mud floors and ceilings made of bamboo mats, while others have discarded plastic billboards as roofs and floors. This disparity, which is seemingly marginal, is in reality the difference between families that are considered to be better off economically (with more visible material assets) and those who are the most poor, within that group.

All of the women in the sample were married, and they ranged in age from 18-45. All of them had children, and the children ranged in age from 5-30 years.

Microfinance Businesses

The 30 women operated a variety of small enterprises with their microfinance loans: snack shops, tea stalls, vegetable and fruit vending, and garment makers. Some of the women ran the businesses jointly with their husbands; one woman purchased a rickshaw with her loan, which her husband operated. The income from these small businesses did not lift the families of these women out of poverty. Rather, it typically eased the depth of their poverty, and provided extra money for food, clothing, and household items. A large majority of the respondents, such as Samina, reported a positive change in the basic standard of living:

Now . . . I can provide my family with food on a daily basis. I am not working the streets as a beggar. I am not going crazy trying to fend for my children and myself during bad weather. I can send my children to school; I am not dependent on the income they bring in as beggars. I am able to clothe them. I can live a normal life . . .

Running their businesses also meant that the women were more likely to be out of the house and making their own decisions regarding the operations of their businesses, and potentially have more self-earned income at their disposal. It was that evolving status that led us to inquire whether they perceived that their participation in microfinance had changed the nature of the dynamics within their household, given traditions of patriarchy.

Experiences of Marital Violence

Every one of the 30 women interviewed reported experiences with verbal and/or physical marital violence, of different levels, and in varying contexts. In describing this violence, they volunteered a wide range of reasons and justifications—both internal and external to their family and household—for verbal and physical assaults. For example, Asha, one of the women who reported comparatively low levels of violence, said,

He brings his problems with the world to me, I get to see his anger, and he takes it out on me. But, that is more verbal. He hits me only when he feels I am neglecting the children. For example, my son got sick, and he said it was my fault because I fed him in front of other people who gave him the “evil eye.”

This 26-year-old woman with a cosmetic microfinance business was the only one who reported not having an “arranged marriage,” that is, a marriage orchestrated by parents and relatives. However, it seemed that with this came pressure to remain in a marriage that she had fought for, even when their relationship had started to go awry.

We got married because we fell in love. It was not arranged by my family . . . I chose my own husband. So, I try to be understanding of his anger when he gets mad at me, because if things go wrong, as in if he leaves [me], they will say it’s my fault. They [my family] would say I should not have married someone of my own choice.

The notion that she had to accept the violence in her life because she chose to marry her husband was not only imposed on her, it was what she took upon herself as her own responsibility.

Others echoed similar notions of life stressors that had violent manifestations in the household. Often, chronic poverty seemed to be the source:

There was a time when he wasn’t working. So he took money from someone, BDT 200 [US$2.25]. He was in debt. And the creditor wanted the money back. Then he got mad. And, he came home and hit me. Hit my head. Usually it is just that—he takes out other people’s anger on me.

We live in poverty so there are problems related to that. Today, for example, I was complaining about how my husband doesn’t do anything and I am raising the kids, and I said I want a bed. He got upset and hit me because we don’t have enough money to buy that.

Among the respondents who reported high levels of violence was a woman named Fatima, who blamed her mother-in-law for the violence in her life.

He [my husband] beats me almost every day. My mother-in-law causes a lot of problems for me by instigating him against me, telling him that I am not a good wife, that I ignore her or don’t feed her well enough, and he gets mad at me for “treating her badly” and “misbehaving” with her and beats me up. I understand she is his mother and he is protective of her, and when he thinks I am starving her on purpose he gets mad. Truth is, we don’t always have enough food for everyone.

Fatima alluded to issues that often come with living in a joint-family structure (which used to be the norm but is quickly becoming less common) amid poverty and scarcity. In this structure, children are seen as “social security” who are expected to grow up to take care of the parents, which often entails everyone living together in close quarters. And in that environment, violence is sometimes justified by family members as a tool of reprimand, although the presence of family members in joint-family structures may also mitigate extreme forms violence (S. Amin, 1998).

Laila, a vegetable vendor, said her husband had the right to beat her if she did anything wrong, suggesting that there was a considerable amount of “justified” violence taking place in her life. However, she also identified times when it was not justified:

Violence is not always justified. For example, my husband hit me when my daughter had typhoid as if it was my fault that she got typhoid. He didn’t allow me to take her to the doctor and as a result she is handicapped [unable to walk]. How is that my fault? But he says it is, and so does his family members.

Others, such as Tara, suggested that it was because of the different expectations they had from each other that they got into fights, which sometimes turned violent.

We have differences in terms of what we want in life. He just wants to have fun. For example, he frequently sleeps around with other women. In addition, he has very archaic ideas about educating our daughters. In fact, he himself never went to school. On the other hand, I want the kids to learn new things, be educated. Because there are so many points of disagreement, we fight and sometimes he slaps me during those fights.

One of the older respondents suggested that her age was related to diminished abuse over time, saying, “We’re old now, we don’t fight, there is no violence.” As for reasons as to why older women were less likely to be abused, respondents suggested that women’s status increased as they aged. As one said,

As an older woman I am seen as wise, I garner more respect, [younger men and women in the community] look up to me. And no one hits a respected woman, including my husband. As I grew older, my husband gave me more respect as well, thought my opinions mattered more as I had seen more of the world.

Others said this was particularly true if they birthed male children.

When I was older, and became a mother of a boy, my respect in the family increased. My husband and his parents rewarded me by not beating me, I guess, for bearing a male child, someone to carry their genes, bongshoporompora.

Still others claimed it was their husbands’ disinterest in them that led to reduced violence:

Maybe he got bored of me. He used to hit me after we got married, because he would be jealous of other men, and he wanted all of my attention. Now, it’s not that way anymore. He doesn’t get jealous, nor does he beat me.

Across these in-person interviews, marital violence was found to be a complex problem that manifested itself in many different ways within the sample. The women reported various types, levels, and rationales for violence. It appeared that many regarded the violence as normative to various degrees, as evidenced by their spoken words, facial reactions, body language, and inflections—which were often resigned rather than angry or defiant. Many women talked about the violence in their lives as causing pain on one hand, but something that they have accepted as fate, on the other. Phrases such as “just a slap” and “he beats me only once in a while” were commonplace, even when some of their eyes welled up with tears while talking about it. Most of the women conveyed through their comments that violence was an expected facet of marriage, and some accepted self-blame. Sharifa commented on its normative nature, “He slaps me once in a while, it’s no big deal. These things happen in marriages.”

An example of someone who blamed herself for the violence was Lamia. She said, “If we neglect household chores, [we] will get beaten up. If we ignore those chores knowing that we will get beaten up, it is really our fault.”

Microfinance Participation and Marital Violence

We asked women directly if their participation in microfinance had an impact on their marital relationship, and on violence within the relationship. About a third reported that the violence was exacerbated by their participation in microfinance, about a third said that the violence decreased after they got involved in microfinance, and about a third said there was no difference.

Among those who reported an increase was Amena. She said, “I think my husband has been more violent towards me in the recent past than he was before. He accuses me of not wanting to spend time with him, and hits me when I argue that he’s wrong.” It appeared that the time she spent away from the home made him angry, which was a big change from when she used to be a homemaker and was readily available at all times. “It [operating my business] means I’m not always there to make him food, or be there for him when he wants me to, and maybe that’s what upsets him,” said Amena.

Faiza had a similar observation:

Staying away from home and working allows me and my family to have more income but it means I have little time for household chores which means I have to do everything in a short period of time and am unable to do it as well as I used to when I had all day to do it. This makes my husband angry who complains about the quality of my household chores . . . like his shirt not being clean enough or the food not tasting as good.

About another third reported that violence decreased after microfinance was accessed. Sarah was one of those who reported reduced violence. “I have no real complaints anymore about the violence. He doesn’t try to hurt me anymore. I think it’s because he thinks I don’t deserve to be beaten up because I work so hard!”

In other families, more time away from home was given as the reason that violence decreased, because of the practical reality that the spouses did not see each other as frequently. For example, Sheuli said, “I am away from the house more often as a result of my business outside the house, so maybe that contributes to less violence—I did not spend enough time at home to have as many interactions.”

Others saw a decline in violence in their lives when their husbands were more appreciative of their abilities. Yet, others such as Sarah suggested that improvements in her own status gave her more “power” to assert herself: “I am able to stand up for myself when he hits me—I can say that this is wrong and you can’t beat me,” she said. But she alluded that this assertion often increased the intensity of the violence in those particular moments, but she believed it worked to reduce the frequency of violence.

Shaila, another woman who noted a decrease in violence, also described a change in the way she responded to her husband, “I feel I am better able to represent myself and my thoughts, I am more confident of my own ideas and my worth as a person. I can tell him what I really think without fear of retribution.” This ability to assert herself did not result in violence being perpetrated against Shaila, as status inconsistency theory might suggest, but, according to Shaila, earned her respect because she was an income earning individual; with increased respect, the violence perpetrated against her decreased. “I think it is because he thinks—what will happen to us financially if I stop working?—that he hits me less. Who knows?” she said.

Others, such as Amiya, suggested that the levels of violence had not changed, but that the reasons for its perpetration shifted as different issues came into play.

Now it’s a lot more shouting, a lot of verbal attacks about my jobs and my business. He even accuses me of having liaisons with other men at work or at my place of business. I don’t think he actually thinks it, but he likes making me feel bad. He also tries to guilt me with statements like, “You don’t give me much time anymore.” I am doing what I am doing for the family. I am making sure I can repay the loan. I am making sure there is food on the table. But sometimes, he just seems to forget all about that.

We asked the respondents if they sought microfinance loans as a way to escape or cope with violent marital relationships. The question was usually met with puzzlement by the respondents, or deflected with references to poverty. Their responses indicated that violence was normalized, and leaving the abuse did not form a conscious part of their decision-making process. “I took the loans to fight poverty, nothing else. I didn’t have food to eat. My family was starving. I couldn’t get a job in this economy. I took the loan to feed our starving bodies,” said Lamia. Farah was more specific:

The violence had nothing to do with me trying to get a loan. I didn’t like getting beaten up, that’s true. But these things happen in marriages. I had bigger problems. By leaving, I would only increase the number of problems in my life. Where would I go? Starting fresh on your own isn’t easy when you’re a pauper.

Other women echoed what emerged as the primary motivation of pursuing microfinance loans: increasing income to meet basic needs, and to better the lives of their children.

I had enough of being poor, trying to make ends meet on nothing. We moved from the village to Dhaka for a better life but there were no jobs for us. And that is when I thought about taking a loan and starting a business.

He used to hit me after we got married. He wanted dowry and complained that we didn’t get anything from my parents that were worth a lot [of money]. I was not very educated. I wasn’t pretty. He stopped beating me later, when my daughter was born sick. When they told us she was sick, he stopped beating me. I accessed microfinance around that time; I had to find ways to look after my daughter.

Intersections of Poverty, Microfinance Participation, and Marital Violence

As reflected in many of the comments cited above, our conversations with the women from Dhaka indicated that the topics of microfinance participation, poverty, and marital violence were often interwoven throughout the responses to our inquiries; they were seldom discussed as separate topics. The account of Zara, one the respondents, is provided below, as it captures vividly the ways in which these issues intersected in their narratives.

Multiple Sources of Income

About one third of the women that we interviewed had multiple sources of income, which came from employment in addition to owning a microfinance business. They worked, for example, as domestic help at someone’s house, or at a garment factory, or at schools as maids, or they accessed multiple loans. Women with multiple sources of income reported the highest income in the sample of 30 women. As such, they had more material assets such as bicycles, televisions, and slum rooms made of mud. Many of these women worked for cash income before accessing microfinance, and started a micro business to earn additional income. Once they started their businesses, most of them retained their previous jobs in some capacity.

I used to work at the garments factory, and it paid well enough, but I wanted to spend more time at home while earning additional income. So, I acquired a loan that would help me run a tailoring business from my own home. So now, I sew clothes not only part-time at the garments factory but also at home as a tailor.

Notably, about three quarters of the respondents with higher income reported that they experienced increased violence when they accessed microfinance.

I think the violence increased in my case because I was more independent. He liked the additional income but accused me of going out to have fun when I was going to work and that often would result in physical violence.

Alia also noted that violence was provoked by increased time away from home:

He gets more upset these days because I am away a lot, he accuses me of neglecting the children, not making him his favorite meals and all that. I don’t have the time, what can I do. He hits me when he gets upset like that. It’s not bad, really. It hurts for a little while and then goes away.

It was also evident from the interviews that the reasons for which violence was perpetrated against the women were sometimes different based on their experiences with earned income that was associated with their autonomy and independence. For microfinance recipients who had other sources of income, microfinance was an additional resource; they were already independent to some degree (because of their employment) even before they became businesswomen. In essence, microfinance participation served to enhance the level of freedom they already had, and perhaps that extra step was beyond the threshold that the husbands accepted, which resulted in perpetration of violence. “He doesn’t understand why I need to be a businesswoman now. Doesn’t he give me enough? He asks me. Can anyone ever have everything they want? I respond. Those arguments never go well and he ends up hitting me.” It, as such, appeared as if there was an “optimal” level of freedom, above which women were at risk of being abused. As Shala said,

He used to hit me when I was a worker at a garments factory, but he liked the income I brought in. With microfinance, I bring in additional income, and he likes that too. But now he also hates me. I feel he thinks I think too much of myself now that I’m a businesswoman. And he hits me because of it.

Others indicated that even though microfinance participation created problems between them and their husbands in the beginning, things smoothed over in the long run when the husbands were made part of the businesses, and they saw the benefits that microfinance participation brought to their families.

My husband is usually supportive, but when I wanted to access microfinance, he wanted to know if I was doing it because all my friends were, or because I wanted to spend more time away from home, because we don’t really need it to meet basic needs. I tried to explain that it would increase our choices, give us more comfort, but he held on to the idea that money makes people corrupt. Now he is better, understands that the additional income is not a bad idea, but that’s because he also runs the business. He was violent in the beginning when I was talking about the loan, but once we started running the business together, it was fine.

However, those with lower income often had other, more basic battles to fight: food on the table, clothes to wear, taking care of the children. As such, the sets of problems were often different among women with varying levels of income. When women were extremely poor, the qualitative data suggested, the omnipresent problems were about survival, not gender differences and expectations between partners. As Seema said,

We are too poor to fight with each other; our fight is against poverty. There’s nothing to be gained by quarreling with each other, I think we both know that. When you starve, other things are not important. When he snaps at me, I know it’s probably because he’s hungry, not because he’s trying to show me that he is more powerful than I.

This also indicated that sometimes the “reasons” for which violence was exerted changed after microfinance was accessed. As Asha said, “Before he used to hit me because I was useless, a burden, another mouth to feed. Now he hits me saying things like, ‘Who do you think you are?’ It’s like neither works for him. Everything makes him mad.”