Sabarimala, MeToo in India and Brexit in Britain: No simple answers
- In Current Affairs
- 09:03 AM, Oct 18, 2018
- Anupama Handoo
Flicking through the pages of the daily newspaper in the UK, all I read is about Brexit woes. To the uninitiated, UK has decided through a referendum (51:49) to come out of the European Union. So far, so good. Only, the people who shouted the loudest about 'leaving' the EU have fallen by the roadside for one reason or the other, leaving Theresa May who campaigned as a 'remainer' to carry out the wishes of the public. The support she's getting from rest of the Parliament to accomplish this herculean task can be summed up in the statement by Sarah Vine in the Andrew Marr show "She is tenacious, she is calm, she does plough on. I think it would be quite nice if all the men stopped shouting and screaming and waving their willies around, and maybe just gave her a bit of a hand occasionally." The Irish Border seems to be the bone of contention. Currently there is no hard border between Northern Ireland (part of the UK and thereby destined to leave the EU) and the Republic of Ireland an independent country that will remain part of the EU going forward. There's a long history of bloodshed between NI and the Republic of Ireland until the Good Friday agreement in 1998. This agreement lays out details about how NI will be governed, relationship between NI and Republic of Ireland; and relationship of Republic of Ireland and Great Britain - and this agreement was also agreed by a referendum. Going back on that referendum and creating a hard border between NI and RI will cause return of the Troubles' and lead to further bloodshed. Sticking to the referendum will leave the Irish Border issue unresolved and negate the latest EU exit referendum. No matter what one chooses there are no good answers. Mrs. May will be judged in the future, whatever decision she takes. Damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.
This is not unique to the UK landscape. We are inhabiting a world which is increasingly assertive, polarized and vocal about what is right and wrong. Trouble is that these are all complex issues that people with a point of view and hardly any stake try to solve with a broad brush.
Take the issue of Sabarimala. Mainstream media may be pointedly ignoring the sea of women on the streets of Kerala and Tamil Nadu - however it's quite obvious, the entry of women aged 10-50 in Sabarimala is not welcome by an overwhelming majority of those who practice the faith. No amount of justification and argument suffices in the matters of faith and belief. If you believe in Ayyappa you will be #ReadyToWait as he has ordained for those who visit him. If you don't believe in Ayyappa, why are you even trying to get here? Young women who are keen to go will be taking the pilgrimage alongside a mass of men who have abstained from all worldly pleasure including sex for 41 days to take a treacherous journey to Sabarimala.
Safeguarding these women will be a nightmare for the administration with a single stray incident of as much as a glance or a touch setting the whole Hindu community on a tinderbox of shame all over again. Not allowing these women to go to Sabarimala will ignite the Left Wing feminazis who will be eager to approach the SC again. BJP could pass an Amendment Bill in the parliament, a supposedly Hindu appeasement card - but do you remember the Shah Bano case and how Rajiv Gandhi tried to overturn the SC verdict on Triple Talaq and alimony? This when he had a cast iron guarantee that the particular community would vote for him blindly following this appeasement card; Narendra Modi has a split verdict in front of him. His own Hindu base has a significant proportion of hardliners who want to make entry of women to 'all' religious institutions a matter of political debate - hence Sabarimala is a test case for them where they want to maintain an arm’s length distance from the SC verdict. Modi doesn't get a cast iron guarantee that all Hindu's will vote for him, either way he turns. For him, there is no good answer.
Then there is the #Metoo movement across the globe- something that should have a black and white answer. Abuse of women from position of power and control is bad and must be punished. Right? However the feminist in me is struggling to find the right answer. From Kavanaugh to Patekar a chill runs down my spine when a woman mentions that she was in the past violated physically, sexually or emotionally by someone. The world is keen to believe that the accusations are true. If we look around us it's quite obvious that women face lewd unwanted comments and molestation on an almost daily basis. It is so prevalent that women often ignore it and go with the flow. As part of induction to her workplace, a woman is warned about the usual suspects and accordingly advised to wear her dupatta low, put on less makeup, smile more, don't take a lift from so and so, don't keep the door closed when meeting the boss etc... And women take this advice as self-protection tips.
Inspite of all self-preservation actions, women face a daily barrage of violations that is hard to justify. I personally think it's a way to squeeze out every little bit of space that women occupy in public - make us fight for every moment we truly deserve. On the other hand it is fair and true to say; women also exploit the situation to get what they want. 'Compromise kar lo' was made famous by Mr Kejriwal but has been in circulation for times immemorial. Radha (in Mother India) was just one 'yes' away from a completely different life with Sukhilala. For every Radha there are thousands who succumb to the pressure or the lure. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and the judge appointment scandal being a case in the point. Often women get something in the bargain for the compromise - money, promotion, good roles. How justified is this #MeToo when the woman has benefitted and then went on to exploit the relationship several years after.
That is just trade. How justified is this #MeToo if the woman comes forward only when the accused is in a political position or about to occupy one. As a woman I shouldn't say this because every time I disbelieve a #MeToo story, I push back thousands of 'non-celebrity' women like the Kerala nuns who have genuinely suffered at the hands of predators like Bishop Franco. Crimes that are happening here and now. Crimes that need to be squashed with a firm hand of police and judiciary. The flag bearers of law and order fail the little 6,7,8 year olds who are being abused, raped and killed by grownups and trusted people they know, because police, politicians, media and judiciary are overwhelmed by Zaira Wasims and Tanushrees of this world. Dismissing these celebrity cases as just attempts at hogging limelight is not a good way to go. These women have found a voice after many years and law must take its own course. Is giving celebrity #MeToo unfettered access to primetime debate over the genuinely heartbreaking cases of young children and the nuns; the only way to maintain spotlight on crimes against women? Is a rape 10 years ago any less a crime than one committed yesterday? Does a woman get an automatic right to be believed just because she is a woman? Will she be a victim even after law takes its course and acquits the accused? There is no good answer to this question either.
It is a world of dichotomous debate, where Mainstream Media and Social Media are screaming to push a one-sided version and vilify one version against the other at the drop of the hat. It’s irking a sizeable population that Javadekar has not purged the school history books out of their colonial, subjugated tone and one-sided narrative. However there were equally strong sentiments against Smriti Irani when she initiated a review of the NCERT books in 2014 for the very same purpose and she had to pay with her job. If you are at the helm of affairs you need to think a million times - should I leave the Ram Mandir decision to the SC or deliver my manifesto? Should I praise NDTV for their awareness raising on Swacchta Abhiyaan or ignore it. Should I take Rahul Gandhi to court for his slanderous lies or resist the temptation of making him a martyr? With so much information, fake news and opinion flying about I am sure decision makers are increasingly finding it difficult to maintain a balanced view and to seek really good answers.
Comments