elpais.com
Galician Asylum Exposed: Women Imprisoned for Defying Social Norms
Carmen V. Valiña's research into the Conxo asylum in Galicia (1885-1936) revealed that nearly 20% of the 456 reviewed files lacked psychiatric diagnoses, exposing its use to confine women who challenged societal norms of purity and submission, often from rural, impoverished backgrounds.
- What specific behaviors or circumstances led to the confinement of women in Conxo asylum, and how did these actions differ based on social class or literacy?
- Valiña's research, based on 456 patient files from Conxo asylum (1885-1936), uncovered numerous cases of women incarcerated without proper psychiatric diagnoses. These women, often from impoverished rural backgrounds, were labeled "hysterical" or mentally ill for actions like premarital sex, motherhood outside marriage, or defying male authority. This highlights the patriarchal control mechanisms used to silence women.
- How did Conxo asylum in Galicia function as a tool of social control against women who transgressed societal expectations during the first half of the 20th century?
- In 1931, Dolores, a deaf and mute woman, was admitted to Conxo asylum in Galicia, Spain, after becoming pregnant at 14 and subsequently engaging in behavior deemed "depraved" by her family. Her case, along with others documented by researcher Carmen V. Valiña, reveals the asylum's use as a tool to punish women who defied societal norms.
- What are the long-term implications of the findings in Valiña's research for understanding the historical treatment of women and the role of psychiatric institutions in maintaining social order?
- Valiña's book, "As tolas que non o eran," exposes the systematic incarceration of women in Conxo asylum for non-medical reasons. This reveals a pattern of social control and patriarchal oppression masked as psychiatric care, with lasting consequences for women's autonomy and societal recognition. The findings challenge historical narratives and shed light on the experiences of marginalized women in 20th-century Galicia.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative is strongly framed around the injustices suffered by the women, highlighting their victimization and the oppressive nature of the asylum. This is apparent from the very title, "Las locas que no lo eran." The use of quotes like "vida depravada" and "llena de inmoralidades" from family members, while used to illustrate the bias of the time, reinforces the framing by emphasizing the harsh judgment against the women. The article's structure, focusing on individual cases of women wrongly confined, amplifies the emotional impact and underscores the theme of societal injustice.
Language Bias
While the article aims to expose the biases of the past, its language choices subtly influence the reader's perception. Words like "depravada" and "inmoralidades" are used to describe the women's behavior, reflecting the judgment of the time, even if the article critiques that judgment. The repeated use of the phrase "locas que no lo eran" (crazy women who weren't) strengthens the narrative of injustice but could be considered slightly inflammatory. More neutral phrasing would enhance objectivity. For example, instead of "vida depravada," a more neutral phrasing could be "lifestyle deemed unacceptable," maintaining the historical accuracy while mitigating potential bias.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the experiences of women confined to the Conxo asylum, offering a compelling account of their stories. However, it omits any counterarguments or perspectives from those who might have supported the asylum's practices or offered alternative explanations for the women's confinement. The lack of information regarding the asylum's overall treatment of patients beyond the cases highlighted, including potential positive aspects, constitutes a potential bias by omission. The article also doesn't delve into the broader societal context of mental health treatment in 1930s Spain, which might provide further insight into the practices at Conxo.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a clear dichotomy between the women's behavior and the asylum's actions, suggesting that the women were unfairly punished for violating societal norms. However, the article does not fully address the complexity of the situation. While the diagnosis and confinement seem unjust, the article doesn't examine if any of the women exhibited behaviors that might have been perceived as genuinely concerning at the time, even within the flawed context of the era's medical understanding. This simplified portrayal of a complex issue can lead to a biased interpretation.
Gender Bias
The article explicitly focuses on the experiences of women who were subjected to societal and medical bias in 1930s Spain. The fact that the article focuses solely on women who were confined to the asylum illustrates a potential bias, as it could be argued that it omits discussion of male patients and therefore reinforces gender stereotypes. However, the selection is not an omission of information but rather a studied focus on a particular group and how gender played a role in their experiences. While this focus is understandable, a brief comparative analysis of male patients at Conxo during the same period could enhance the analysis.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article reveals the historical injustice faced by women in Galicia, Spain, who were confined to the Conxo asylum for behaviors deemed transgressive to societal norms of the time. These women were often labeled with psychiatric diagnoses that lacked medical basis, effectively serving as punishment for non-conformity. This directly reflects the ongoing struggle for gender equality, exposing systemic discrimination against women and highlighting the need for recognition and redress of historical gender-based injustices. The confinement of women for behaviors like having premarital sex, being single mothers, or defying male authority demonstrates the suppression of women's autonomy and agency. The fact that many of these women were poor and illiterate further underscores the intersectional nature of the oppression.