Raja vs Rakhi: Digvijay Singh's Sexism

What makes a senior political leader use the example of a woman from the entertainment industry to hit out at a political opponent? Congress General Secretary Digvijay Singh is known to shoot his mouth off. However, his statement, "Arvind Kejriwal is like Rakhi Sawant. They both try and expose but with no substance" is senseless, besides being in poor taste. 

The latest news is that he says she is welcome to slap a defamation case against him where she is seeking Rs. 50 crore in damages. This is just so arrogant. 

It is not surprising that much of mainstream media will not take up for Rakhi. She is not in the top league, and started her career as an item girl performing to titillating dance numbers, which is what heroines do today. She has been called drama queen, attention seeker and several other names, even as she was used by these same media channels to spice up their programmes.

It is to her credit that while she superficially reinvented herself – better clothes, better shows – she essentially remained grounded and, in some ways, coarse. I liked her before she got legitimised by Karan Johar on his talk show ‘Koffee with Karan’, and everyone suddenly started taking up for her being oh-so-frank when she made the famous comment, “Jo Bhagwan nahin deta woh doctor de sakta hai” (what god does not give the doctor can) regarding her several cosmetic surgeries.

Most times, she is cannily self-deprecatory. Like getting excited about designer clothes. She knows that she can afford them now, but she is also aware that whatever she wears will be seen as ‘cheap’. The same slit gowns, the same clutches, the same limited edition baubles that a top star might wear, and promote after being paid for by the sponsor, will be seen as favours done to her.

This is the sad state of our perceptions, of how we view people, especially women.

What Digvijay Singh has done is in the same league. However, like the others, he felt the need to use her name, a name that has become a symbol. There are many who expose, but he could think only of her. Or, he was too afraid to name Vidya Balan or Kareena Kapoor. The analogy was about Arvind Kejriwal exposing people’s names without any merit or substance to his accusations.

How does Rakhi Sawant exposing herself come into the picture? She is revealing her own assets, not anybody else’s. Besides, on what basis does he say she has no substance? This is her substance. This is what has made her, at least partially, what she is. This is her bread and butter. This is what people pay to see. This is how the respectable media exploits her.

She has written letters to the Mumbai Police Commissioner and the Maharashtra Home Secretary against Digvijay Singh. CNN-IBN published her letter, but not before stating:

“Here's the full text of the letter written by Rakhi Sawant, which has been reproduced in its entirety with spelling mistakes and grammatical errors”

So what? It goes without saying she has not drafted it. This works for the English-educated, Oxford-flashing mob to bring down the ‘vernies’.

Even if Rakhi Sawant is a drama queen, she is way better than these microphone queens who think they can change the world. Oh, not just that. They think they are in charge of the world.

Rakhi's letter raises a few important points:

“…outraging modesty of a woman/female, charges of passing lewd remarks and eve teasing, abusing, mischief, passing defamatory remake and false statement and rumour etc…”

Some may think the reaction is exaggerated. It is time to at least address these issues. 

• Outraging of modesty can be verbal.
• What he said is lewd.
• I don’t like the term eve teasing, but such comments do amount to harassment of a woman.
• It is abusive.
• It is mischievous, for it immediately grabs attention
• It is defamatory.
• It is false because Digvijay Singh does not know her, and there is no reason to drag her name in.

I do understand that she has not been advised too well, though, for there is no relation established between her and Kejriwal nor is it about her gender.

It is also possible that she will renege on her own position and retract the case. But, then, so do politicians. Mr. Singh said he was "an old fan".

The same hierarchy prevails here, too. The lumpen politician passing sexist remarks is immediately pulled up, but a posh Raja Digvijay Singh will get a bemused reaction. He has chosen a target who even feminists would not feel comfortable standing up for.

The whole “objectification of body” argument will be raked up. She has paid to get that body with her money. And she did not ask a politician to objectify her with his comments. 

(c) Farzana Versey

Digvijaya Singh's Tantalising Politics

Has national politics been reduced to gossip? I am not sure whether it is the Congress party that has anything to do with Digvijaya Singh’s latest “killing you softly” stance. But, it is most certainly not how issues of corruption and wrongdoing at the national level are dealt with.

He should either produce evidence and out those he has evidence against or keep quiet. In an interview to Karan Thapar, he said:

I am a politician and I have been in politics for the last 40 years. What my relations do, is not my business. I never ask them. I have got four daughters and four sons-in-law. What they do is not my business.

This is so clearly trying to absolve a certain Robert Vadra. So, if what relatives and family do is their business, why has he even bothered to insinuate about the families of Atal Behari Vajpayee and L.K.Advani?

Karan Thapar:  And this is evidence that you say if used would embarrass Advani ji and Vajpayee ji.

Digvijaya Singh: We will never use it.

Karan Thapar:  But would it embarrass Advani sahib and Vajpayee ji?

Digvijaya Singh: Yes.

What is this? It is way more devious and dangerous than what can be stated and done with, whatever the consequences.

It would be naïve to imagine that members of the NDA were above improprieties. If the Congress chose to keep quiet, then they betrayed the country. Political parties are answerable to the nation, not to each other.

It is rather unfortunate that now established leaders and parties are behaving as though they are at a Kejriwal rally and throwing darts.

Ramdev and Digvijay: Leaky Pens

Inked face and assaulter

We are a culture that thrives on condemning. We condemn those who are silent and we also condemn those who make a noise. Such condemnation takes away from any other questions. So, it was not surprising that the Congress, the BJP, the RJD, everybody condemned a man who threw ink on Baba Ramdev. Soon after, some ‘uncondemned’ the act. The theatre of the absurd does not quite go with a Greek tragedy, but Indian democracy can manage such contradictions. We will get there. First, a snapshot:

A man who gate-crashed at Baba Ramdev’s press meet on black money splattered ink on the yoga guru when he refused to answer a question on the 2008 Batla House encounter. 

Kamran Siddiqui, was beaten up by the yoga guru’s supporters immediately after the incident at the Constitution Club where Baba Ramdev was speaking to reporters regarding his plans to campaign against black money in the upcoming Assembly Elections. Siddiqui, who runs a non-governmental organisation called Real Cause was placed under arrest following a medical examination. A case under sections 153 (promoting enmity among communities) and 355 (criminal assault) of Indian Penal Code has been registered against him, a senior police official said. A first information report has been registered against him at the Parliament Street police station. If convicted, he may be jailed for up to two years.

When Baba said that the Batla House encounter was not fake, Kamran threw ink on him. Siddiqui is a petitioner in the Batla House encounter case.

A few points:

• If Baba Ramdev is discussing politics, stop calling him a yoga guru in the context of his speeches.
• A bit strange that nobody had heard about Kamran Siddiqui even though he is a petitioner in the case. Is it difficult to find that out?
• Even more strange is that he asked this question to Baba Ramdev, and the latter chose to answer it. On what basis? 
• Why has he been arrested for promoting enmity among communities? This sort of pigeonholing makes it into a communal issue. Batla House is not the whole of India.

Arrest anyone who indulges in this sort of behaviour, but is it so unusual? Don’t our MPs throw slippers at each other inside Parliament? What about heads of educational and medical institutions whose faces are blackened?

What about scheduled caste/female victims who are paraded with their faces smeared because of some ‘honour’? Why do we not condemn those acts with equal ferocity?

Typically, Baba Ramdev has become a martyr:

Media reports quoted Baba Ramdev as saying that he was not deterred by such attacks and would continue his campaign against corruption with full force. I spoke about bringing back black money to the country and giving it to the nation. I spoke about eradicating corruption. I spoke about turning a loot-tantra to a real loktantra (democracy). And in return, as a prize, this is what I have got. I don’t mind receiving black ink. By throwing ink on someone, one cannot malign someone’s character, he said.

You talk about a vague show-me-the-money, and everything else gets washed off. The report said that Baba Ramdev said that it was not an encounter and that led to the ink throwing.

This is not an attempt to blacken the face of Swami Ramdev. This is an attempt to blacken democracy, Hazare said in a statement.

Has Anna Hazare never seen such blackened faces before? Much as I do not relish the idea of such juvenile shoe-ink throwing, let us remind Mr. Hazare that his movement is a protest that has attempted to speak on behalf of the population without its consent. He should not be talking about democracy. If democracy is about protest, then black or blue ink should not be of concern. Hazare and his team should be finding out what it is that angers certain people. He has been holding the flag for such propagandised anger for a while now.

We have entered absurd territory, and the wilting cherry on a leftover cake is this:

Congress leader Digvijay Singh said the incident was a well-orchestrated conspiracy by RSS and the NGO activist who did it was anti-Congress and had links with BJP.

There have been occasions when such orchestrated attempts were made, by every political party. I do not understand how it can be deemed anti-Congress when the Congress government had said the encounter was not fake. (Unless, Ramdev has joined forces with the Congress Party!) Or, is this a strategy similar to the one he is accusing the RSS of – outsourcing, with the frontman speaking one version while the high command maintains its larger role?

The Batla House case was already politicised. The encounter had several loose ends that I mentioned in Shooting Terrorists and Other Stories: It was over within 30 minutes. 25 shots were fired by the cops; eight by the terrorists. Were these dreaded men so naïve as to open the door to a ‘salesman’, sub-inspector Dharmendra. What was he trying to sell? Did they buy anything? Did they not notice him looking at them carefully? Did all the “suspicious characters” stand at the door to welcome him?

Now Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav has spoken out clearly:

"Congress is not serious on the issues pertaining to Muslims and treats them only as a vote bank. That is why when assembly polls are underway, the issue of Batla House encounter has been raised by party leader Digvijay Singh, who termed it as fake. Why has this issue been raised by him now? Congress should either sack him or take action against PM and Home minister, who feel that the encounter was not fake...This is just a political gimmick to befool Muslims, who are being treated as a vote bank.”

Do the political parties realise that for the majority of Muslims, all this produces a huge yawn? You think someone in Bhiwandi (a communally sensitive area in Mumbai) cares or even knows what Batla House is? Or are the ordinary Muslims suddenly expected to possess knowledge about all that happens with, to and by their community?

It disturbs me that one episode of ink-throwing has brought another case to the fore. And it is back to the chain reaction of condemn this and condemn that. Don’t. Each player is an actor here. If Siddiqui was sponsored by the RSS, and Digvijay Singh has been sponsored by his own party, with the satellite players Anna and the rest forming the chorus, then the crowded stage is bound to fall.

Nothing new. We invariably get the dark pits we deserve. If only we saved that ink and wrote our own fate.

(c) Farzana Versey

- - -

Image: Mumbai Mirror

NGOs, Kiran Bedi, the Media: Who’s the ‘farest of them all?

Kiran Bedi is indeed wrong, but when media persons sit to judge her it is a bit of a laugh. Clearly, they do not look in the mirror.

Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to question all sorts of voluntary agencies and their modus operandi, we have a situation where a person is pinned down for wrongdoing without a backward glance at how the whole NGO business works, often with the media’s involvement.

Kiran Bedi has been fudging her bills, where she charged inflated amounts from her hosts. The main source was airline tickets. She would travel by economy class, that too at a discount because of her gallantry award, and charge business class fares. We now have these sanctimonious NGOs tell us that they took it at “face value”. Most NGOs send the tickets themselves. So, why did they let her use her travel agent? And what sort of auditing departments do they run? The reason for keeping quiet is not that they were afraid of Ms. Bedi’s wrath – they obviously did not mind shelling out Business Class fares – but because their finances will lead to many question marks.

This is my point. The media and certain activists have taken a convenient yo-yo stand on the Jan Lokpal Bill campaign. They propped him up and were completely besotted by Team Anna. After they were done with the photo-ops of the caps and the fasting and dancing, they realised that there were chinks in the armour. No one was interested in the deeper questions – it came down to superficial put-downs.

Let us get this fudging business clear. Kiran Bedi has admitted to it and says she will return the excess money that she wanted to use for her own NGO. Where do the NGOs get this kind of money that they can afford to invite people from different cities for seminars? I have often posed this query when we rubbish other institutions. Do you know that most of the activists themselves travel Business Class, stay at fancy hotels, and order the best food – for what? To gupshup about the state of the nation, the homeless, female foeticide, dowry, terrorism, communalism?

Check out the number of people who have left their high-paying corporate and bureaucratic jobs to “serve the nation” or, “become useful members of society” or, “fight communalism”. They could do all of these by continuing to work. The reason is that activism has become a paying proposition. Have you seen the huge ads put up in newspapers inviting you to attend some conclave or the other? Is it affordable or even appropriate to shell out this kind of money on overheads? Besides government grants, there is a good deal of foreign sponsorship and donations from industrial houses. While the international ‘intervention’ often comes with some amount of side-effects (pushing of substandard products and services clubbed with the do-good, feel-good stuff), some of the Indian business black money that is not stashed away in banks abroad is routed to charitable organisation, with income tax exemption.

Why does the media not raise a voice about this? Has the media ever questioned journalists who attend these same seminars? Oh yes, the same journalists who give inflated bills to their accounts departments for their travels and hotel stays and “related expenses”. Journalists who sit at the desk and make phone calls but charge taxi fare for the quotes. Journalists who try to get tickets and freebies because they think they are in a position to ‘arrange something’. Journalists who do not have to spend a paisa at restaurants and spas because they just might mention it, in passing, in their next column. Journalists who give us scoops that are fed to them by interested parties or who conduct sting operations that are again paid for by interested parties.

Of course, it is not only the media at fault, but also those who host such talks. Corporate India’s ladies who lunch get a big high when they invite a person who can indeed talk and add to their resume. They flash such people as trophies to display their own worth as ‘aware citizens’. That some media people are doing their evening show with this group should be an eye-opener rather than a can-opener.

If, as some commentators wish to know, why people from public office enter the fray late in the day to become part of NGOs, then one might wish to ask them why they have timed their queries now and not for all these years. Do they ponder about it when they go on government-sponsored junkets?

The problem is that this whole Anna Hazare campaign has been a sham, and revealed more shams both on the inside as well as on the outside. It showed us how the ruling party and the opposition got to pay politics; the arrests also reveal a lot about those who got away without a scratch to their reputations. It is rather disingenuous of Digvijay Singh to say that if Kiran Bedi can offer to return the money, then every bribery case can be closed by saying the bribe-taker will return the money, including, A. Raja.

This is some gumption. A minister in the government of India is caught in a scam of frightening proportions and another government person uses this as an analogy. He is also quite gung-ho about such a thing happening at the highest level. The 2G Spectrum scam is not just about bribes, but also about how the nation was taken for a ride with the government, big industrialists and lobbies involved. It is about how the government functions and not merely who took how much. This case has come under scrutiny; many others do not.

If political agencies get a chance, they try to co-opt the activist groups. Most are willing to go along because it is the easy option. In some cases where they need the government to act, it does become a crucial mutual involvement. Therefore, if a political party invites activists, and they fudge figures about travel expenses, then what will the political parties do? Why not question the complete lack of balance by media groups? One can understand individual commentators taking a particular position, but why do they blatantly follow the newspaper/TV channel line? Where is their independence? Those who talk about objectivity should really look in their own backyards. There is favouritism everywhere and the media indulges in it as much as politicians, and the ‘activist’ role of the media should also come under scrutiny.

Tavleen Singh, Indian Express columnist, while raising some important points, makes a rather shocking comment:

“My own observation is that many NGOs working in India appear to be funded by organisations bent on ensuring that India never becomes a developed country… In order for India to become a halfway developed country, we need new roads, airports, ports, modern railways and masses more electricity. In addition, according to experts, we need 500 more cities by 2050. The odd thing is that the NGOs who oppose steel plants, nuclear power stations, dams and aluminum refineries in India never object to the same things in China.”

Is this the definition of development, and the only model? As I have already said, many NGOs do have an agenda, but not only if they are funded by organisations that do not wish to see a developed India. By this logic, Gujarat should have no NGOs. And why must Indian NGOs object to what happens in China? Has the Indian government opposed the self-immolation of Tibetan monks and nuns in support of the Dalai Lama’s return? Has the BJP done so? Has the media done so?

Forget the NGOs for a while. Think about how these plants were to come up, who was to be uprooted and how it would affect the environment. If this development is only for those setting up factories and making India technologically advanced, then why are we still the hub of western-powered outsourcing? Are the NGOs involved here?

Why absolve the fat cats of business only to hit out at the NGOs unless they are specifically playing dirty? How many media people have taken free jet rides, attended fancy wedding functions abroad and written glowing accounts of them? Will they be sanctified as the facilitators of development? Or do they need to get closer to the seats of such power or perhaps such development? These are trick or treat queries. Ask them we must, for there is much beyond Kiran Bedi, whose banshee persona was in fact given a boost by the media when they needed her sound bytes. They were birds of a feather, until she was grounded.

The still-feathered ones have taken wing and are giving us a bird’s eye-view.

(c) Farzana Versey

Also published in Countercurrents

- - -

My earlier related piece on such superficiality: Kiran's Dance, Illiteracy and Symbolism

Digvijay Singh and the many shades of terror

The problem with Digvijay Singh’s recent statements about saffron terror is that they seem tangential. The question is most certainly not the veracity of what he has said, but it is also rather convenient to ignore what he is saying. It has resulted in a bizarre blame game with both sides claiming to be beaten up with rods and sticks. Then, there is the banter of “Is the Congress party with him or does it distance itself from his comments?”

No one cares about the initial spark when the Indian Mujahideen were seen as natural suspects. Here are quotes from some reports:

The government's refusal to speak on the nature of groups behind the terrorist attack saw Muslim leaders object to conclusions about an IM hand. Some even hinted at saffron terror.

While Congress did not speculate on the identity of terrorists behind Mumbai attacks, the party did not take kindly to IM being named without official confirmation. The party reaction came in response to questions about terror outfits being named within minutes of the recent Mumbai incidents.

AICC spokesman Shakeel Ahmed said, "You should ask this question to mediapersons sitting left and right in the room because they have named the group. Only they can answer how the culprits are identified within minutes of an incident." Terror outfits should be named only after the government had confirmed their role, he said. "This is a sensitive issue. So one should not speculate on it, it vitiates the atmosphere."

For the past few days we have seen a veritable line-up of all possible names – SIMI, HuJI, LeT, ISI, Kashmir extremist groups, IM. So, why is there such a reaction when saffron terror is mentioned? Digvijay Singh did not implicate them, but said in response, “I do not rule out anything”. It was only later that he said:

"I have been saying that RSS was spreading terrorism in the country and it has been making bomb factories.”

He clarified that it was not about these blasts.

In a rather well-timed move Swami Aseemanand who had confessed to his role in several blasts has said he is “innocent”.

The rightwing is getting all hot and bothered and its party spokesperson Shahnavaz Hussain stated:

"The BJP condemns the disgusting statements of Digvijay Singh and seeks an apology from Congress chief Sonia Gandhi on this.”

Well, there are a lot of people who are disgusted with a lot of things. Instead of an apology, ask Digvijay Singh to produce the evidence he says he possesses regarding the role of saffron terror.

I am a bit curious about the Gujarat IM angle. I think there is a concerted attempt to push the Gujarati idea deliberately. The IM’s role is probably the most obvious from the perspective of observers, but I find this portion from a report datelined Ahmedabad rather intriguing:

Terror outfit Indian Mujahideen has tied up with Taliban for sinister plans in India. Crime branch officers, who arrested a key IM operative, Danish Riyaz, in June claim to have unearthed details of the joint venture between the IM and the religious militia in Pakistan-Afghanistan.

A senior crime branch officer said, “Emails and correspondence of Danish with five top terror operatives, including Haroon of Kolkata, have revealed this conspiracy across international borders. Haroon had also been to Hyderabad to meet Danish to discuss their plans.”

These developments had taken place before Danish was arrested from Vadodara railway station in June. “According to Haroon’s emails, 10 handpicked youths from across the country were to be sent to Pakistan and then Afghanistan for terror training,” said another senior officer of the crime branch.

This sounds like some corporate tie-up. Danish was in Gujarat, a state that is known to be quite hard on any form of terrorism. It is a known fact that chief minister Narendra Modi spends a good deal of money on spying.

If their plan was across international borders, was Mumbai their testing ground? (Do note that they were to go to Pakistan and then Afghanistan for training – does it mean there is a hierarchy in this schooling?) Since Danish did not get to meet with his colleagues, did they carry out the attacks without any ‘leader’? It is extremely pertinent to keep track of what happens when a key member of a group is arrested soon before a major attack takes place.

I find it rather interesting that while Digvijay Singh’s comments allude to the fact that terrorism has no colour and he is pulled up for it, the liberals saying so are seen as, well, liberal. Shabana Azmi said it on a TV panel discussion.

Let us get real: Terrorism has a colour. It has an ideology. It has motives. It has specific targets. It has enemies. It comes about due to several reasons – from anti- majority to anti-minority to anti any other.

- - -

In fact, the term terrorism has gained popular currency and is used for just about anything – from fashion to pop culture to food to activism.

Terrorism is a word that is used carelessly.

Imagine a group of citizens who do not want a flyover on their road. The Peddar Road residents have been fighting against it for several years. Earlier singer Lata Mangeshkar, who lives on the main road, had said that the pollution would affect her voice and had even emotionally blackmailed the authorities by saying she would leave the city if it came up. This is a tony locality and it is fair to raise doubts about kickbacks and pollution, even if it might do these people some good if they checked the number of cars per family in these same areas before grumbling about pollution. However, I am plain disgusted to read someone from the residents’ association say:

“If a high-intensity bomb is exploded by terrorists on and under the flyover, it will fall in our compounds. Also, the area lies on a fault line. In case of any calamity, even the rescue vehicles won’t be able to reach people.”

Actually, I am not disgusted. It is expected. Pollution does not sound grand enough. Think of bombs falling in their compounds.

And here is the Times of India. Look at the picture, see who is in it and the caption they have used with it:

SECURITY ABOVE ALL ELSE: A policeman tells a biker that he can’t park his vehicle at Zaveri Bazar on Monday

No comments from me.


End Note:

- - -

Make up your minds, Mumbaikars. You either laud the 'spirit of Mumbai' or you rubbish people who continue their plans to host functions. The Shiv Sena has taken Shahrukh Khan to task for celebrating some film release. He is not in it and has no stake and it was planned much ahead. People have watched the film, eaten popcorn, laughed and joked.

It will be the film community that will attend police functions and be tapped for money, and they will contribute. There is much to critique about Bollywood, but when the Sena and other parties hold their special meetings and have chai-pakoras and start planning on their next move, they too are celebrating the possibility of their victory in the next polls. If they are not, then shut up and promise you will not contest elections riding on the back of this incident. I will say the same applies to Digvijay Singh, who I am reasonably certain will not win. Shabana Azmi can.

Contradictions anyone?

Just wondering

Why is that everytime Digvijay Singh makes or receives phone calls (or says he does) from people who are in some controversial situation they get killed soon after?First Hemant Karkare, now Salman Taseer.

- - -

The TOI had this picture on the front page with the title: "Look, no one's watching the president".  Ms. Pratibha Patil took a  break and decided to get some cool Goan breeze at the beach. She is surrounded by plainclothes security. How many people does the newspaper imagine ogle at women in a saree on the beach? And how do they know no one was looking? Or, is the TOI mighty pleased at getting a picture?