☛ Research articles, book reviews, poems, short stories, travelogues and interviews are being invited for the October issue (2025), Volume-6, Issue-4 on or before 30 September, 2025.
☛ Colleges/Universities may contact us for publication of their conference/seminar papers at creativeflightjournal@gmail.com

Performing the Margin: Feminist Interventions and Gendered Realities among the Women of Arunachal Pradesh

 


Performing the Margin: Feminist Interventions and Gendered Realities among the Women of Arunachal Pradesh

Dr. Subhashis Banerjee,
Assistant Professor,

Department of English,
Nagaland University (A Central University),

Kohima Campus, Meriema, India.

Abstract: The relationship between gender and feminism is fundamental and intricate. Feminism as a movement arises from the need to dismantle discriminatory structures born out of socially constructed gender roles. In the specific context of Arunachal Pradesh—a region marked by ethnic diversity and socio-political marginality—the interplay of gender and feminism presents unique manifestations. This paper explores how women from select tribes such as the Nyishi, Adi, and Puroik negotiate their identities amidst dominant gender binaries. Drawing upon theoretical frameworks by Judith Butler, Juliet Mitchell, and R. W. Connell, the study analyses oral narratives, contemporary feminist poetry, and ethnographic accounts to examine how gender is performed, resisted, and reclaimed. The notion of gender performativity is explored not only in ritualistic practices but also in indigenous resistance literature where women’s voices challenge both patriarchy and ethnonational hierarchies. The paper argues that feminist discourse in Arunachal Pradesh must move beyond urban, mainland paradigms to incorporate local knowledge systems, embodied traditions, and community-based agency.

 

Keywords: Gender performativity, Feminism, Arunachal Pradesh, Indigenous women.

 

 

Introduction

The relationship between gender and feminism constitutes one of the most profound and enduring debates within the field of critical theory and cultural politics. Feminism, at its conceptual and activist core, arises not merely as a movement for women’s rights but as an epistemological challenge to the very foundations of gender as a system of knowledge and power. Feminist theory has historically interrogated the stratification of human identity along the axis of gender—an axis that functions not only as a marker of difference but also as a mechanism of social regulation and exclusion. Central to this interrogation is the recognition that gender is not an innate, biological reality but a cultural and discursive construction. Michael S. Kimmel aptly notes, “we are not born different; we become different” (Kimmel 34), thereby highlighting the pivotal role of socialisation in shaping gendered subjectivities.

The notion that gender is learned rather than inherited has gained widespread acceptance among contemporary scholars, yet its implications continue to unfold with greater nuance in diverse cultural and geopolitical contexts. Judith Butler, perhaps the most influential voice in gender theory in recent decades, radically redefines gender as performative, arguing that “gender is not something that one is, it is something one does, an act…a doing rather than a being” (Gender Trouble 33). By framing gender as a stylised repetition of acts within a highly rigid regulatory framework, Butler dismantles essentialist views and shifts the focus to how identities are produced through discourse and ritual. Gender, in this framework, is not merely a category of identity but a process of enactment, sedimented over time, naturalised through cultural practices, and policed by hegemonic norms.

This critical understanding assumes greater significance when applied to societies that exist outside the purview of dominant Western or even mainstream Indian gender discourses—particularly in indigenous communities where cultural values, oral traditions, and kinship structures form the basis of everyday life. In the tribal societies of Arunachal Pradesh—home to over 26 major tribes and more than 100 sub-tribes—gender roles are deeply embedded within the oral-literary matrix, performative rituals, cosmological beliefs, and customary laws. These roles, however, remain largely under-theorised within academic feminist circles, which have traditionally focused on urban, caste-based, or religious axes of gendered oppression. As such, the gendered experiences of indigenous women in Arunachal Pradesh remain on the periphery of feminist scholarship.

This marginalisation is not merely academic but symptomatic of what Spivak terms “epistemic violence” (Spivak 284), wherein dominant forms of knowledge production silence subaltern voices by rendering them either invisible or unintelligible. Women from tribal societies in Arunachal Pradesh are doubly marginalised—first as women within patriarchal community structures and second as indigenous subjects within a nation-state that often exoticises or ignores their cultural specificities. Their gendered realities are refracted through an intersectional lens of ethnicity, geography, class, and colonial legacy. Therefore, any feminist inquiry into their lives must necessarily engage with what Chandra Talpade Mohanty calls the “geographies of struggle” (Mohanty 243)—the situated, context-bound arenas in which gender identity is negotiated and contested.

The prevailing gender structures in Arunachal Pradesh are informed by deeply symbolic and customary practices. Among many tribes, such as the Adi, Nyishi, and Puroik, the division of labour, inheritance rights, and decision-making power are allocated along rigidly gendered lines. Yet, as Juliet Mitchell observed in Woman’s Estate, gender is a “socially conditioned fantasy” (Mitchell 73), sustained by cultural narratives and psycho-social mechanisms that assign fixed roles based on perceived biological difference. In these communities, the role of the woman is typically tethered to domesticity, fertility, and ritual purity, even as she plays a pivotal role in agriculture, craft production, and oral knowledge transmission. This paradox—between power in practice and marginalisation in ideology—requires a critical feminist engagement that moves beyond simplistic binaries of victimhood and agency.

Butler’s notion of performativity becomes particularly relevant in examining the ritualistic and oral practices of these tribal societies, where gender roles are enacted through songs, dances, dress, festivals, and even silence. The embodied repetition of these acts creates the illusion of stable identities. As Butler elaborates in Bodies That Matter, gender identity “is not a simple matter of the body’s surface features, but a complex, ongoing negotiation of norms that precede and exceed the subject” (Butler 12). In the context of Arunachal Pradesh, the performative enactment of femininity can be seen in festivals like Solung (Adi) or Nyokum (Nyishi), where women’s roles are both celebrated and contained within traditional expectations. These performances, while appearing apolitical, are sites where gender is continuously reiterated and naturalised.

At the same time, fissures within these performances open up space for resistance and reconfiguration. As Sara Ahmed reminds us, feminism often begins with “the experience of being blocked,” of refusing to continue along a path shaped by others (Ahmed 139). For tribal women, resistance may not take the form of protest slogans or policy activism but can emerge through micro-practices—refusal to marry young, participation in informal literacy groups, or the creation of cooperative weaving collectives that assert economic autonomy. These everyday acts are not insignificant; they constitute what Michel de Certeau would term “tactics of the weak”—subtle appropriations of dominant space that allow for temporary reversals of power.

The neglect of these experiences in mainstream feminist discourse also stems from a limited understanding of knowledge itself. Arturo Escobar, in Designs for the Pluriverse, argues for the need to “decolonise knowledge by acknowledging the legitimacy of non-Western, community-based epistemologies” (Escobar 34). The cosmologies of many Arunachali tribes do not subscribe to binary gender models. For example, the Adi spiritual system of Donyi-Polo (Sun-Moon) posits a dual yet non-hierarchical cosmic balance, symbolising complementarity rather than conflict. This cosmology could serve as the basis for an indigenous ecofeminism that resists both gendered hierarchies and environmental degradation. As Mohanty warns, feminism must guard against becoming “imperialistic in its reach” by failing to recognise the political and cultural agency of women in non-Western contexts (Mohanty 249).

This paper, therefore, seeks to address a critical gap in gender and feminist studies by exploring the complex, multilayered, and culturally specific performances of gender among the tribal women of Arunachal Pradesh. It attempts to answer how these women articulate their gendered identities within frameworks that are both oppressive and enabling. Drawing on theories of performativity, postcolonial feminism, and indigenous epistemologies, the paper proposes that the relationship between gender and feminism in Arunachal Pradesh is not a unilinear narrative of oppression, but a dynamic field of negotiation, appropriation, and resistance.

In doing so, it challenges the homogenising tendencies of both state policies and mainstream feminist theory, urging instead for a situated feminism that recognises and validates the pluralities of gender experiences across India’s diverse socio-cultural landscape. As feminist thought moves towards greater inclusivity, the voices from Arunachal Pradesh—rooted in oral knowledge, performative traditions, and community agency—must find their rightful place within its theoretical and political horizon.

Gender as a Socially Constructed Identity

The understanding of gender as a socially constructed identity marks a foundational shift in both feminist theory and socio-cultural analysis. Juliet Mitchell, in her seminal work Woman’s Estate, refers to gender as a “socially conditioned fantasy,” indicating that what is perceived as natural or biologically ordained is, in fact, a result of sustained cultural conditioning (Mitchell 73). Gender, according to Mitchell, operates within a psychic and symbolic structure that socialises individuals into specific roles and expectations based on culturally defined masculinity and femininity. This framework has profound implications in tribal societies like those of Arunachal Pradesh, where gendered divisions are often perpetuated through oral pedagogy, ritual practice, and customary legal frameworks.

In many tribes, particularly the Adi, Nyishi, and Apatani, the inheritance of property, political authority, and even religious leadership is predominantly male-centric. Among the Adi, for example, village councils (Kebang) are traditionally male-dominated, and women’s participation is either restricted or completely excluded (Barua 105). The gendering of roles—where men act as decision-makers and women as caregivers—mirrors broader patriarchal structures, yet it is not rooted in any biological imperative. Instead, these roles are upheld through an intricate web of expectations, rituals, and communal norms that prescribe and reinforce specific behaviours.

Judith Butler’s concept of performativity is especially useful in this context. In Bodies That Matter, Butler asserts that gender identity is “tenuously constituted in time” and is materialised through “a stylised repetition of acts” (Butler 15). Gender, she insists, does not pre-exist these performances but is instead produced through them. In tribal Arunachal Pradesh, these performances are visible in daily routines—how women draw water, how they greet elders, how they weave, or participate in agricultural work and dances. These seemingly mundane actions are performative acts that reiterate and reinforce gendered distinctions. For instance, the ceremonial dances of the Adi tribe, often restricted by gender, are performances of cultural memory that also re-inscribe gendered divisions of sacred space and agency.

Such practices ensure that gender roles appear 'natural' and timeless, although they are in fact meticulously sustained by sociocultural repetition. Butler argues that the illusion of an essential gendered self is “a strategy that conceals the gender discontinuities” (Butler Gender Trouble 140). In this light, the gender roles in tribal Arunachal are not spontaneous but regulated by tradition, shaped by intergenerational narratives, and reinforced through rituals of belonging and exclusion.

Moreover, these constructions are deeply tied to epistemological frameworks rooted in oral and mythic traditions. The concept of 'womanhood' is taught not through formal institutions but through lullabies, folktales, ceremonial practices, and rites of passage. The gendered subject in this context is both a cultural signifier and a product of cumulative performativity, situated within a communal framework that privileges patriarchal continuity.

Gender and Oral Traditions: Resistance in Storytelling

The oral traditions of Arunachal Pradesh are repositories of collective knowledge and identity, forming an essential aspect of cultural pedagogy and worldview transmission. Within these traditions, however, the female voice is often either muted or symbolically codified. Female characters in myths and folktales are frequently depicted as mothers, wives, sorceresses, or sacrificial figures, roles that reflect and reproduce patriarchal values. As L.K. Barua notes, “tribal folktales tend to reflect a patriarchal consciousness where the woman is passive, dependent, or spiritually marginalised” (Barua 112).

This symbolic representation of women aligns with Spivak’s assertion that the subaltern woman is doubly silenced—by patriarchy and by colonial or national narratives that do not account for her voice (Spivak 275). However, oral traditions are not monolithic. There are subversive pockets within these narratives where women defy their stereotypical roles. In a lesser-known Nyishi tale collected by Talom Rukbo, the protagonist, a young girl, defeats a demon not through brute force but through wit, resourcefulness, and spiritual acumen. This counters the dominant male-hero archetype prevalent in tribal and non-tribal folktales alike and creates a space for alternative articulations of power and agency.

The subversion here is subtle yet significant. It shows that oral traditions, while largely conservative, are not entirely closed to the idea of female agency. Feminist critic Sara Mills argues that “subversive discourses often operate from within the structures they seek to challenge” (Mills 61). The presence of such tales indicates that resistance is not necessarily external or revolutionary; it can emerge from within the cultural system, through reinterpretation, parody, or allegory.

In this sense, oral storytelling becomes a site of feminist intervention. Women narrators, often grandmothers or ritual singers, play an unacknowledged role in transmitting and occasionally transforming gendered ideologies. This aligns with Mohanty’s proposition that the feminist subject must be understood within her context—“as produced through historical and cultural specificities” (Mohanty 248). For women in Arunachal Pradesh, these folktales are both a mirror and a canvas—a reflection of gendered expectations and a space to subtly revise them.

Gender Discrimination and the Case of the Puroik Women

The case of the Puroik women exemplifies how gender discrimination is compounded by ethnic and economic marginality. Formerly stigmatised under the derogatory exonym ‘Sulung’, the Puroik community has historically been subjected to bonded labour, social exclusion, and dispossession. This systemic marginalisation extends to Puroik women, who face multiple axes of oppression—gendered, cultural, and economic.

Priyanka Taba, in her ethnographic study of the community, highlights that Puroik women have limited access to education, legal protection, and land rights. “They are excluded from local councils, have minimal say in marriage arrangements, and are often subjected to exploitative labour practices” (Taba 78). These women are rendered nearly invisible within state policies and feminist discourses alike.

However, resistance is taking shape through grassroots initiatives such as weaving cooperatives and informal savings groups. These efforts, often led by women, allow for community bonding and economic autonomy. Mohanty would describe this as “feminism without borders”—a feminism rooted in local contexts but resistant to hegemonic definitions (Mohanty 249). The activism of Puroik women is not loud but persistent, not urban but grounded in the vernacular life worlds that frame their existence.

Their stories also challenge the notion of the passive tribal woman. They demonstrate that gendered agency can manifest in non-Western, non-institutionalised forms—through everyday negotiations, survival strategies, and collective labour. As Escobar suggests, decolonising feminist praxis means recognising the legitimacy of such plural forms of agency and resistance (Escobar 86).

Literature as Feminist Assertion: Voices from the Margins

Despite the scarcity of published literary work by tribal women of Arunachal Pradesh, emerging voices like Yater Nyokir are asserting their place within feminist discourse. Nyokir’s poetry—circulated orally and in unpublished collections—reflects themes of alienation, maternal labour, and spiritual longing. Her poem “Woodsmoke Dreams” encapsulates the invisibility of women’s labour: “She carries the village / on her back like firewood / only to be forgotten when the meal is done.”

This kind of poetry constitutes what Sara Ahmed calls a “feminist snap”—a moment of rupture when the assigned role no longer suffices, and the subject turns away from compliance towards resistance (Ahmed 112). Through such poetic expressions, tribal women critique the emotional and physical toll of gendered labour while also asserting their interiority, wisdom, and autonomy.

These narratives are also epistemic interventions. They challenge the Cartesian bifurcation of emotion and reason, domesticity and politics. The private becomes political in such writing, and the personal becomes revolutionary. Feminist theorist bell hooks argues that “marginality is not a site of deprivation but of resistance” (hooks 152), and these poems exemplify that idea. They do not seek assimilation into dominant paradigms but celebrate the local, the tactile, and the affective.

Rethinking Feminism through Indigenous Epistemes

Any feminist project rooted in the tribal communities of Arunachal Pradesh must acknowledge the indigenous cosmologies and value systems that underpin these societies. Arturo Escobar warns against exporting Eurocentric feminist models into radically different ontological landscapes. Instead, he advocates for “pluriversal epistemologies”—worldviews that emerge from specific, relational, and community-based knowledge systems (Escobar 34).

The Adi belief system of Donyi-Polo, which reveres the Sun (Donyi) and Moon (Polo) as co-existing and interdependent deities, exemplifies such a worldview. Neither gendered nor hierarchical, this duality reflects a cosmology where balance, not dominance, is the guiding principle. Such beliefs create conceptual room for a non-binary understanding of gender, where femininity is not opposed to masculinity but complements it in a sacred continuum.

Feminism in Arunachal Pradesh, therefore, must be relational and dialogic. It must emerge not from imposition but from immersion—listening to the songs, stories, and silences of the women who live at the margins yet embody immense strength. This calls for a feminist ethics that honours relationality, embodied wisdom, and collective healing.

Conclusion

The gendered experiences of women in Arunachal Pradesh present a compelling lens through which to re-evaluate dominant feminist paradigms and their assumptions about universality, agency, and resistance. At the heart of this investigation lies a paradox—while tribal communities in the region have often been celebrated for their perceived egalitarianism and preservation of cultural authenticity, women within these communities are frequently subjected to rigid gender roles, exclusions from political participation, and culturally embedded forms of marginalisation. Yet, this marginalisation does not produce voicelessness. Rather, it produces complex forms of resistance that defy the binaries of victimhood and agency, silence and voice, tradition and transformation.

Feminism, if it is to maintain its relevance as a liberatory discourse, must engage rigorously with the specificities of indigenous epistemes, and interrogate the coloniality of its own universalising tendencies. Postcolonial feminist theorists such as Chandra Talpade Mohanty have consistently warned against the homogenisation of “Third World women” as a coherent group whose identities and struggles are assumed rather than interrogated (Mohanty 244). Her critique is especially pertinent in the context of Arunachal Pradesh, where women’s lived realities emerge at the intersection of indigeneity, regional marginality, gendered power relations, and postcolonial state dynamics.

The framework of performativity, as articulated by Judith Butler, offers a nuanced understanding of how gender identities are not static essences but are enacted through repeated cultural performances (Butler Gender Trouble 33). In Arunachal Pradesh, these performances are deeply embedded in ceremonial dances, agricultural labour, kinship rituals, and oral traditions that construct and sustain gendered expectations. Yet, as Butler also reminds us, the very repetitiveness of these performances makes them susceptible to rupture. That which is repeated can also be subverted, reconfigured, and refused. The subaltern woman, in this light, is not an object of pity but a subject of politics—enacting what Sara Ahmed calls a “feminist snap,” a turning away from the roles prescribed to her (Ahmed 112).

The women of the Nyishi, Adi, and Puroik tribes are not merely bearers of culture but also critics and rewriters of it. Their participation in storytelling, weaving, seasonal rituals, and poetic expressions constitutes what Michel de Certeau refers to as “tactics”—subtle appropriations of imposed systems that enable agency without direct confrontation (de Certeau 96). For instance, when a Puroik woman forms a self-help cooperative or narrates a folktale that centers a clever and defiant female protagonist, she is not merely engaging in cultural practice—she is performing a counter-discourse.

It is essential to highlight that these counter-discourses do not always manifest in overt acts of rebellion. Resistance, in indigenous settings, often takes the form of quiet endurance, coded expressions, and community-based negotiations. This is not a failure of feminist praxis but rather an expansion of its lexicon. As Gayatri Spivak famously posed the question, “Can the Subaltern Speak?” she also challenged scholars to rethink the modes through which subaltern voices articulate themselves—through opacity, silence, gesture, and cultural repetition (Spivak 285). The tribal woman in Arunachal Pradesh may not speak in the idiom of protest marches or social media campaigns, but she does speak—through lullabies that reframe domestic labour, through textile patterns that narrate ancestral memories, and through ceremonies that subtly invert gendered hierarchies.

These modes of expression are often misread or undervalued by frameworks that privilege textuality and visibility. Yet, to ignore them is to perpetuate what Escobar describes as “epistemic blindness” towards pluriversal ways of being and knowing (Escobar 40). True feminist solidarity must therefore involve an epistemological humility—an openness to learning from the rhythms of life and resistance that exist outside the metropolis, the academy, and the nation-state. The cosmological balance of Donyi-Polo, the emphasis on communal well-being, and the embodied practices of healing and storytelling among Arunachal’s tribes all offer alternative imaginaries of gender and power—imaginaries that do not separate the personal from the political, the spiritual from the social.

The contributions of theorists like Juliet Mitchell also remind us that gender is not just culturally constructed but psychologically internalised, becoming a “fantasy” sustained by collective belief and symbolic structures (Mitchell 73). Among the tribes of Arunachal, these fantasies are not disseminated through mass media or formal schooling but through the intimate domains of family, myth, and ritual. It is here that feminist critique must intervene—not to dismantle tradition but to unveil its gendered dimensions and expand its interpretive horizons.

This paper has attempted to foreground the gendered experiences of tribal women in Arunachal Pradesh not as an anthropological curiosity but as a site of serious theoretical engagement. Their stories, practices, and voices urge us to reconsider feminism not as a finished project but as an evolving conversation—one that must be deeply attentive to locality, relationality, and difference. The emergent literary voices such as that of Yater Nyokir, who write from within the life worlds of their communities, offer powerful reminders that feminism need not always arrive in the language of theory. It can arrive as a poem, a shared meal, a woven shawl, or a ritual chant.

As bell hooks asserts, “marginality is a site of resistance. It is not the site of domination. It is the site of possibility” (hooks 149). The tribal women of Arunachal Pradesh inhabit such marginality—not passively, but with a quiet radicalism that is profoundly transformative. Their resistance lies not only in what they oppose but in what they affirm: kinship, land, ancestral memory, and the slow, deliberate creation of alternative futures.

The gender identities of women in Arunachal Pradesh are not determined solely by custom or constrained by patriarchy. They are performative, contested, and fluid—always in the process of becoming. Feminist theory, if it aspires to inclusivity and transformation, must listen to these voices with care and humility. It must move beyond abstract universals and engage with the lived, the situated, and the embodied. Only then can it become truly liberatory—not just for some women, but for all women, in all their complex, plural, and powerful manifestations.

Works Cited

Ahmed, Sara. Living a Feminist Life. Duke UP, 2017.

Barua, L.K. Oral Tradition and Folk Heritage of North East India. Spectrum Publications, 1999.

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble. Routledge, 1990.

---. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of Sex. Routledge, 1993.

Escobar, Arturo. Designs for the Pluriverse: Radical Interdependence, Autonomy, and the Making of Worlds. Duke UP, 2018.

Kimmel, Michael S. The Gendered Society. Oxford UP, 2004.

Mitchell, Juliet. Woman’s Estate. Penguin, 1971.

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade. Feminism without Borders: Decolonizing Theory, Practicing Solidarity. Duke UP, 2003.

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “Can the Subaltern Speak?” Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, edited by Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg, U of Illinois P, 1988, pp. 271–313.

Taba, Priyanka. “Bonded Labor and the Puroiks of Arunachal Pradesh.” International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews, vol. 10, no. 3, 2023, pp. 73–85.