Does not abuse of these women count?

Only because the police force represents the establishment, should we ignore how some cops, especially female, are treated by civilians? In Bareillly, Uttar Pradesh, men have been calling up the police stations and harassing women cops with sexually provocative comments.

This reveals a certain cockiness, besides a problem with attitude. It does not help that this report refers to the men as "desperate romeos" and the sexual harassment they indulge in as "dirty talk".

A frustrated police department has now blocked the SIM cards of 90 mobile phone owners. In October alone, more than 1,738 such calls were made. Many among those, knowing full well that the calls were being recorded, spoke such obscenity that the women cops were forced to run to their seniors for help.

Why does the report make these female cops sound like 'damsels in distress'? They have a legitimate right to complain about abuse at the workplace, whether it is by their colleagues or callers. Had a male policeman been threatened, he too might have approached his seniors.

The CO (Circle Officer) added that there were occasions when the woman cop would just hand the phone over to a male colleague, but the intrepid caller would roundly abuse the male cop, too, and threaten him with dire consequences.

Clearly, the Indian media may talk about using terms like "survivor" instead of "victim" for those who've suffered sexual violence, but has no concept of how to respect the rights of women without such sound bite crutches.

***

Should the fight against 'love jihad' be restricted to Hindu-Muslim alliances? Why are moderate Hindus and liberals not taking up intercaste 'honour' crimes?

Those news items are relegated to inside pages and rarely get any prominence, that too only if there is a hook to make them saleable. Meanwhile, incidents such as these continue to take place:

A Vijayawada-based man was arrested for allegedly raping his teenaged daughter over several months as punishment for having an affair with a youth from a different caste, after the victim and her mother approached the police...

"Initially, his intention was to punish her with that cruel deed. Subsequently, he developed an interest in her and went on repeating the same for almost a year", said PI (Nunna rural) Vara Prasad, who is probing the case.

A Appa Rao started out with vengeance, revenge against another caste person. There were no political ideologies involved, which is often the case. Do they matter less if there is no 'love jihad'-like catchphrase attached to them? Is there any sympathy for his teenage daughter, about her future and the love she lost?

If the Sanghis are hanging on to the phrase to demonise it, those battling against it have also made it into a business franchise. As there is a steady stream at the doors to partake of it, they realise it makes little sense to diversify into what stares them in the face by the same perpetrators — caste divisiveness and anti-Dalit sentiments. Should someone find an appropriate title, maybe our concerned liberals might join the bandwagon.

---

Also my piece on love, jihad and politics

Victims, perpetrators and watchers: Preity-Ness

The problem with the Preity Zinta-Ness Wadia case is with the word molestation. As a feminist and one who would err on the side of a woman, I do have a few questions.

First, this is what happened: Zinta and Wadia are joint owners of the IPL Kings XI Punjab cricket team. They were in a steady five-year relationship, but had split quite sometime ago. They continued with the professional partnership.

The latest season of the IPL matches brought Zinta a lot of attention for her infectious enthusiasm and support of her players. Wadia seems to have been more a backroom partner, although given his background as scion of the Wadia business empire he certainly would take a call on financial matters.

On Thursday night, June 12, she filed a police complaint against him. Here is why:

On May 30, an IPL match between Kings XI Punjab and Chennai Super Kings was played at the Wankhede stadium. During the match, when Preity was at the Garware Pavillion, Ness reportedly accosted her and also bad mouthed her in front of many people.

She gave a written complaint following which an FIR was registered against Wadia under IPC sections 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) and 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman), police sources added.

The police has acted quickly on her complaint that he accosted her, grabbed her hand and abused her before a bunch of people. Her complaint was converted into an FIR within a day.

This is how it ought to be, but often isn't. Besides, she had not recorded her full statement as she had to leave the city.

Now for a few points:

• This is important to her, so could she not delay her travel plans? She also took 13 days to file a complaint, again because she was traveling. Where are the priorities? We must understand that she is educated and is not striving to survive, and has a support system. This is not the case with many women who are forced to stay quiet. The impact of an immediate complaint would help investigators too.

• The Oxford dictionary defines molest as 1.Assault or abuse (a person, especially a woman or child) sexually; 2 DATED Pester or harass (someone) in an aggressive or persistent manner

Despite the public statements being more in the nature of the latter, it has been given a titillating connotation. Unless there is more to it than we do know, such loose references demean those who suffer from sexual/physical exploitation of the worst kind.

In fact, just recently the courts have announced that sexual force against a woman's will in a marriage will not be considered rape. There are cases of domestic violence and harassment at the workplace that rarely get heard.

The response is likely to be that Preity Zinta has come out in the open and it might help women, and she has shown courage to take on a big man.

It does take courage, but she is a famous person in her own right. That is the reason that the Mumbai Police Commissioner has personally ensured the case gets due attention and the Maharashtra State Women's Commission have demanded action.

On her Facebook page, she has raised some important issues:

"It saddens me that no one at work or around ever stood up for me in the past when i was abused and insulted publicly. This time i was left with no option but to take this stern step as this incident happened in front of way too many people."

I assume she is talking about the IPL colleagues and not the film industry, for she has thanked them. I am disappointed though that abuse for her is abuse if it is in front of way too many people. This is one of the reasons people do not complain about what happens behind closed doors. Some news channels are talking about how there has been a history of abuse even during their relationship, and she has now decided to not remain silent. It is astonishing that not only was she quiet all these years, she continued with the working relationship for another five years when she filed the complaint.

He has reportedly talked about his political clout and she says her life is under threat. Did all this transpire during that one incident? If such abuse has taken place (Ness Wadia says it is not possible as she is always "surrounded by bouncers"), then it clearly reveals the arrogance of the man who assumes no one would dare to oppose him. In a sense, he was right. She gave him 13 days of respite.

"Sometimes we are so ashamed and humiliated that we fool ourselves to believe that no one saw what happened. Everyone always looks away as if they don't exist or then we don’t exist."

I am afraid, but I have to ask this: is there more concern for reputation, of being publicly humiliated despite being a star? This is a problem with fame — their status as former partners in a relationship would make them 'untouchable'. Besides, the reports on the cctv footage mention that she was with family and friends. Did they look away as well?

"Ironically what happened at Wankade is being diluted by every other fabricated story about my character except the truth of what happened. I'm sure the witnesses will speak the truth and i trust and believe that the police will do their job fairly and quickly."

This is by far the most unfortunate aspect. Indeed, it is treated like a soap opera. Even worse, some who are standing up to support her are comparing her courage by calling other actresses bimbos without any context. The media and social media space has always sensationalised abuse, more so when celebrities are involved. Even director Mahesh Bhatt has used this opportunity to plug the film 'A Hate Story' by referring to this as one as opposed to the love story it was. Nobody seems to realise there has been no personal relationship between the two for a while.

"No woman likes to be involved in a controversy like this which makes her open and vulnerable for all to take a dig at."

There is no reason that a fight for one's self-esteem and against abuse should be seen as a controversy. It isn't. However, if anyone commenting on this case believes that it will be an eye-opener, then we are deluding ourselves and living in a cocoon.

Barely a few days after the Badaun gangrape, there has been another case. Every single day, it happens in some form or the other.

It is also time to ask whether the blanket usage of the word rape is counter-productive. While the violation of a woman's body/person in any manner is reprehensible and should deserve punishment, the media and the cops tend to divert their energies towards motives and extent.

That is the reason I feel that Preity Zinta is doing injustice to herself and the cause of women speaking up. She should have taken action sooner, and helped the investigations. Without a full statement, it appears that she is as privileged as Ness Wadia, who should have certainly not said that he did not imagine she could "stoop to such a level".

This is the usual damning indictment when any woman raises her voice. If only many of them would raise their voices. And that at least a fraction of those showing support now would gather around them even after the media glare fades.

Note: Had withheld this hoping for more information. Have decided to post it with the proviso that while no two instances are the same, it is society's attitude towards different victims that reveals how we are and will be.

UPDATE: June 15, 11.30 am IST

Some reports have now added details about the case. Some of it is here.

The more I read about victim blaming/shaming, the more I realise that there is no sense of proportion. If we cannot compare this case with other instances of abuse, then why should we use the standards of other cases for this? The law applies the same sections for all, based on the complaint.

Some newspaper websites are carrying slideshows of her previous affairs. While she is called an attention-seeker, he is referred to as a mamma's boy, and his mother too is dragged into it. Wasn't there talk of a soap opera? Besides this, anyone with an internet connection becomes a commentator. Worse is that the 'concerned' are posting the insulting remarks by anonymous people, only adding to the shaming they are fighting against.

On the other hand, a TV channel was showing clips of her films, as though it was an award-winning moment.

Regarding her appeal for privacy, the case happened in the public domain, witnesses who were present there will be questioned, the police are talking to the media. And would respect for privacy have resulted is any support that she is getting?

I am aware of 'everyday misogyny' as much as any other woman, but I refuse to consider all crimes against women as "rape culture", a despicable and horribly misogynist term used liberally by feminists too.

Whatever anybody says is based on available material, and all speculation will rely on this as well as a general attitude. No one can take the moral highway on what is right or wrong. If this was not a one-off incident, then I do believe that Preity Zinta should see it as her duty to use her privilege and not just her right.

© Farzana Versey

The rape 'excuse'

Why has everything become about rape? The US ambassador to India, Nancy Powell, was asked why Americans did not come to India for studies. This was during her visit to an institute in Ranchi. She replied:

"The concern for personal security and perceived increased danger to women as a result of the rape cases was perhaps a factor in US students' decision regarding study in India."

First let us get this out of the way. How many Americans would want to study in India? The obvious answer is, few, if at all. And these few would opt for an off-beat course, not any mainstream field of study.

India is a good education option for young people from Africa and the Middle East. One does not see European, American or Australian students here, unless their parents belong to the diplomatic corps or have jobs in the many multinational companies that have set up offices. They have a choice in the American School or the more elite institutions run by business houses.

The latter are doing a good job, in fact, of preparing Indian students to qualify for further studies in the West. Many of them will probably stay on, unless they have big daddies at home who will keep the swivel chair ready for them.

Chances are that nobody will bother to ask them about the dangers of living in any of the countries overseas due to fear of racist attacks, of gun culture, of teen pregnancies, of date rape, or of any of the problems that the young citizens of those countries face.

Certainly, it is disturbing that women's security is treated with such disdain in India. There is relentless harassment of female western tourists at some places and there have been cases of sexual crimes against them.

But, Ms. Powell is being unfair in using rape as the reason for students staying away. Or she is just feeding on the relentless media blitz following the Delhi gangrape and the articles that have kept up the momentum?

I have stated this often that we are indulging in the worst possible form of reductionism by making rape into an exhibit and repeating every detail, thereby objectifying the victim.

Instead of grabbing every news item and airing it, giving the cops their 15 minutes of fame, the media could be more proactive. It is not only about how the world perceives us, but how this sort of coverage impacts on minds. I am repeating myself, but this is creating ghettos where women are told to be afraid at every step.

The implication here is as bad as 'she brought it upon herself'. Women are told that if they venture into certain places, they could be raped. What does this mean? Would it not make sense to ensure that those places are well-secured if we know about the danger there?

And it would really help if all those Indians writing stories for the western media would not try and replace the old exotica with this backward society narrative. For, it is only one part of the truth. Those who capitalise on it constitute the rest of the this truth. They are the progressive regressors who use rape as an adjective without even realising how demeaning that is.

© Farzana Versey

---

This post is not to ignore the problems faced by women from outside, as you will see in this earlier piece: Can Indian men handle foreign women?

---
Image (only for representation): Latitude News

The sexual harassment of Mallika Sherawat

Mallika at Cannes and with Obama. PR?

It is unbelievable that a woman who is independent becomes an object of derision for saying what we do almost on a daily basis.  I’ve already made a reference to her earlier and elsewhere. What I’d like to understand is that at a time when we are applauding some women for “having balls” (sexist terminology, anyway), an anonymous female on a social networking site, whose own picture is a pair of legs taken lying down, dismisses a woman as being “all boobs and no brain”. There are many such ‘brave’ people whose vapidity hides their stupidity.

Mallika Sherawat, who we are talking about, is successful partly because we are what she says we are: a regressive society, enjoying a spectacle. Initially, no one was even bothered about the content of her comments; it was the accent that they found weird. Yes, she is speaking with a twang, in this interview to Variety, as much as Aishwariya Bachchan does. It is as fake as that of some urban Indians. Was she dishonest for saying she was the first woman to kiss on screen and wear a bikini? I agree she is not quite on the dot here, but I am amazed that those very people who have problems with exposure on screen are now dusting memory files or running a search to find out who really sucked face first or wore a two-piece. Then there is this business about her wearing too little, especially at major events. Who does not? If you talk about a woman having control over her body, then she is well within her rights to dress as she wishes. If she stated that following such attempts, “instantly, I became a fallen women and a superstar at the same time”, then this is true. In fact, the reactions to her only prove her point.

I first watched her many years ago. She had already become known for her bold statements – yes, she does that too. It was a debate on just such a subject and in that panel that comprised a well-known media person and a feminist, she held her own without shouting down anyone. She made a whole lot of sense, and even as I write this it does seem so patronising. Why do we have to certify others? Who has given us the right?

Oh, but she was running down our country, they say. Ah! An India they remembered after they ran out of jokes about her accent and her body.

If she is of no consequence, why did Aseem Chhabra, the New York-based analyst of all things Indian, especially culture, write an editorial piece in Mumbai Mirror? “How is Mallika Sherawat walking red carpets all the time?” he asked, aghast. And answered it himself: “By splurging on a PR team.”

And then he does what any good man would do – pit her against other women.

“She is not a former beauty queen turned actress like Aishwariya Rai, with a major contract with a cosmetic giant, who has actually worked in a few non-Indian productions that do qualify as Hollywood credentials. She is not a former beauty queen turned actress like Priyanka Chopra, who is legitimately trying to establish a signing career in the west.”

What does legitimately mean? Since when have beauty queens, who are recreated in ‘labs’ and taught how to speak, become superior beings? Does Ms. Chopra not have agents? Heck, she needed one to handle the dead body of one of her team because she was too busy being legitimate. And what she sang is essentially mimicking the west, using their fantastic music studios to sound like anyone but herself. And, yeah, heard that accent? Aishwariya has a PR team that her brand arranges for her. Besides, for someone living in the US, it is surprising that the writer does not know that all Hollywood stars have their lobbyists. It is part of the business. But he is doing his business:

“So what or who is Mallika Sherawat and how does she get invited to parties and get pictures with genuine celebrities that she tweets all the time? That question baffles me sometimes, although usually I do not care much about it. The only answer, if any, is that she has spent a lot of money on a public relations team, which ensures she dresses sexy, is spotted on red carpets and paparazzi take her pictures.”

Are the others dressed like nuns? She wore such clothes before she got anywhere near the red carpet; they are probably now designer labels.  If it is a PR team that is managing it so well, then many more people ought to hire its members. At least they do not stage wardrobe malfunctions and make their real celebrities look like rag dolls. Are the big film festivals taking money from PR agents to let anybody walk the red carpet? What does it reveal about them? The same goes for the paparazzi that the stars love to hate.

“It is less clear what she gets out of all the partying and being spotted on red carpets. I know she made Los Angeles her temporary home. Even her Twitter handle - @MallikaLA says so. I suppose she believes that handle gives her certain respectability, an edge over other Indian stars who insist on living in Mumbai.”

He obviously has not seen our Page 3 and the fact that people do party. They do not have to give explanations and there might be none. Is it so difficult to understand? And if she is just doing it without any purpose, does it not mean that she is getting nothing out of it, and is not on the make, so to speak? What exactly does “certain respectability” mean? Is he implying that she lacks respectability? What is his yardstick for measuring it? I’d really like to know, for it was difficult to find any substance in the verbiage of inanities.

He mentioned her being photographed with “genuine celebrities” (I suppose Paris Hilton would figure prominently in the list, although he has missed out on President Barack Obama), forgetting that celebrity is itself a term that has to do with popularity and little to do with genuineness because all possible means are employed to get it.

He dismisses her acting, which is fair enough. It is also true that she does not have big films, although a part in a Jackie Chan movie would be considered an achievement by some, especially when our own biggies do walk-on parts in Hollywood films.  But to take a statement she made and then snigger is no different from groupie behaviour at a dorm:

“So I wonder what kind of ‘a lot of love’ Hollywood was showing Sherawat? Hollywood does do inexplicable things like inviting people with unknown celebrity quotient to parties. But Hollywood producers rarely take the risk of casting unknown faces that do not have much promise.”

If Smarty-pants has the answer, why does he go on and on? Has her PR agent hired him?! (You know what they say about bad publicity, although this is not even bad – it’s a lot of slosh.)

He too manages to get hot and bothered about the “peculiar accent”, but quickly covers it up with the patriot card:

“Sherawat managed to make a few jibes at India – ‘a hypocritical society where women are really at the bottom’. She said she made a conscious decision to divide her time between Los Angeles and India. ‘So now when I experience the social freedom in America and I go back to India which is so regressive for women, it's depressing,’ she said…The interviewer failed to ask her how India was regressive for a woman like her, who presumably is financially successful and a well-known Bollywood personality.”

Does he recall how Indian women and celebs were the toast of news channels after the Delhi gangrape? How every misogynistic statement was paraded so that people could hit out at it? This was Indians discussing our hypocrisy, our patriarchy. Even our prominent film stars discuss inequality when it comes to roles and pay. The writer probably lives in a cocoon where he believes money and celebrity save you from regressive behaviour. The Hollywood he is so in awe of has several such examples of chauvinism.  

But to expect depth to understand pop culture is asking too much from someone who says, “In fact, what has stayed with me about her is that she is Haryanavi and I smile when I think about it, a slight Delhi arrogance I have over people from Haryana.”

Priyanka Chopra poses with Gerard Butler. PR?

Think about how a woman from Haryana, without the ubiquitous godfather, made it. It is pathetic that Priyanka Chopra has decided to oppose her by stating:

"I think we are a progressive nation. I disagree that we are a regressive nation. We are all sitting here and talking about educating the girl child, taking our country forward. I think it`s a misrepresentation of what our great nation is on the world platform…When it comes to Mallika`s statements, I think they were very callous and I don`t agree with her. It was upsetting for me as a woman. It was upsetting for me as a girl who comes from India. I think it was extreme misrepresentation of our nation. I don`t think it`s fair."

As regards the world platform, even Satyajit Ray was accused of marketing our poverty overseas by actress and Rajya Sabha member, the late Nargis.

Unlike our cantonment beauty queens, who live in a protected environment, Mallika Sherawat comes from a conservative family in a region where khaps issue diktats. Mainstream films in which Priyanka acts also misinterpret India. As do Miss Worlds who talk about changing the world. Why, the fact that they want to do something for the disadvantaged means that there are a whole lot of them. And we talk about it because it exists. She said it and so do you. What makes you superior?

© Farzana Versey

The Big Bad Ad

The US ad for Virgin Mobile appears to have made light of a crime: rape. The obvious question would be - are there no limits to sexism? But, then, we reduce the argument. 

As you can see, it features a man standing behind a woman, trying to shut her view. He holds a red box. The caption reads: 'The gift of Christmas surprise. Necklace? Or chloroform?' 

I go with the rape theory. However, for the sake of argument, are rapes always planned? By asking her, are we as viewers of the ad complicit in suggesting that a man will ask before he commits the crime, that the woman is to blame for wanting a gift so badly that she might - a very covert suggestion - just say chloroform to humour him? The ad is bad enough; seeing it as a joke on rape seems worse. 

Like most people my first reaction was the same. Then, I looked at the picture a few times. The gesture of her hands does convey exclamation; it could also mean she is protecting her neck from the necklace. Why is she smiling then? Blind trust?

Virgin Group founder Sir Richard Branson took immediate action: 

“Having just seen, for the first time, the Virgin Mobile US advert which has upset many today, I agree it is ill-judged. Although I don’t own the company [it is owned by a US  firm, Sprint Nextel], it carries our brand.”

Will anyone unsubscribe to Virgin Mobile or its US partner Sprint?

Now we come to the business of advertising. Why would a festive occasion like Christmas be transformed into something Gothic? Does it subliminally appeal to consumers, who probably become less sensitive to social propriety in their fervour to buy, and that as a result everything becomes an object?

That is something we should ask ourselves.  

Sexism and slang

Sexist jokes are vile and unacceptable. However, I object to a study that uses this yardstick to understand whether women fit in under these circumstances.

A Melbourne Business School report found that companies lack strategy to tackle "low level sexism" despite having policies in place that target "overt" sexual harassment.

The risk factors of sexism, sexual harassment and gender stereotyping were found to be key characteristics of male-dominated work environments, in industries such as natural sciences, engineering, medicine, police forces, military forces, information technology, law firms and financial services.

I find it curious that the entertainment industry is not included. This reveals how even feministic ideas do not pay attention to what they probably consider a ‘lesser’ profession. Do models and movie actresses permit sexism due to the nature of their jobs, which often objectifies them?

This would be hypothetical. With exceptions, what role do women play in the military and police forces? Besides the jokes, they are discriminated against anyway. In other fields, it depends on societal factors. The manner in which women are expected to perform is itself discriminatory, and many of them are partially to blame when they use terms like being better than men or like men, when they try to mimic men with power dressing.

It is the business of organisations to ensure that all their staff are not the recipients of jibes – be they sexist, racial religious, or physical.

The part about such a study that bothers me is it works as a trap and belittles women while seemingly rationalising how to empower them.

“If women feel they do not fit in or are not accepted as equals they are less likely to stay in their role or in the organisation.”

This gives the impression that women are weak and cannot fit in. The onus is put on them, instead of those who use sexist language. A workplace is not a cocoon. These are professional women who have gone to college, used public transport, interacted at small jobs, and with paternalistic family members and patronising well-wishers. They watch films and television; listen to music, read the papers. They are not ignorant about such slang. It is rather insulting to assume that what men say in passing would make them give up their careers. (I might add here that one is not talking about stalkers or dangerous characters out to destroy a woman.)

And if blonde jokes are so offensive, then why do women go and colour their hair light? Are there no successful blondes, or will someone have the gumption to say it is only because gentlemen prefer them? 

By suggesting a “no just joking” policy, the bullying will not stop. Perhaps such studies should try and find out why bosses deny women equal pay and equal opportunities.

Such attempts at bridging the gender gap are merely cosmetic. It is the warts that need to be extricated.

Whose campaign is it, anyway?

Silent observers when a ghastly crime occurs and 25,000 supporters for the victims once it becomes news. What does this tell us? Citizens’ awakening is an important aspect of civil society, but are individual cases of ‘no tolerance’ enough?

The news: At Amboli in Mumbai on October 20 after a night out a group of youngsters were in the street having their post-dinner paan. Some goons tried to molest one of the girls. After a verbal tiff, they returned with more men wielding sticks and knives. Keenan Santos and Reuben Fernandes, the men in the group, were assaulted in the most horrendous manner. Keenan died soon after reaching the hospital; Reuben survived a little longer. These two young men are dead. Their friends had tried getting through to 100, but no cops turned up. And no one helped them – restaurant staff, hawkers, passersby.

This news has been reported from the day after the incident. The campaign group is doing its best. However, I do hope they stay away from the ‘conscience-pricking’ lot. Let it not turn into a media event, although it is in danger of becoming one now that it has gone ‘viral’ on social networking sites. I understand the reach, but the idea being pushed is to have a “Jessica-like fast-track justice”. The Jessica Lall case dragged on for years because the culprit was influential and the people protecting him were too. There are still unresolved cases, including that of Aarushi and many unknown numbers.

To what extent is citizen journalism a viable alternative? Can it ensure that cops are on duty, that the emergency helplines are available, that goons don’t stalk the streets for prey, and most important of all that people who are around assist those who are being assaulted?

Think about it. It is easy for us sitting at our keyboards to talk about how the hawkers and those in the restaurant should have come forward, but how many of us would have done so when you see a bunch of guys molest a girl who is with her male friends and there is an argument, after which they have the gumption to return with weapons? It is not just fear of the consequences of intervention, but of having to give statements to the cops, attend court hearings, always be on tenterhooks that the criminals or their friends could trace us and make life miserable.

Would we, who are now talking about a campaign and candlelight vigil, ever go and help a female hawker?

What those who are fighting the case – and do not call it a cause because it will immediately become just another ‘rally’ing point  – should ensure the safety of the friends. Then, get the police to act. The culprits have been identified and confessed. There is talk of stricter laws. Of course. But can a law prevent people from indulging in such acts?

Indeed, as they say, this could happen to anyone. It is not a question of ‘could’. It has.

Posters and support groups need to push for access to emergency numbers besides 100, and the presence of police chowkies or at least cops at night every few kilometres where there is social activity going on. These culprits do not have clout, fortunately.

That is the reason I say: avoid the Jessica Lall reference. Her killer, who is now serving life imprisonment, has sought parole from the Delhi High Court to attend his brother’s wedding. What is shocking is that on earlier occasions when he was granted parole he would visit discotheques and violate the other conditions. Apparently, only a one-year conduct of the convict is taken into account for granting him leave. I do not see how convicts, unless they are dreaded criminals, would get away with misbehaviour inside the jail premises. Their conduct would out of necessity be quite unremarkable, and harmless within the confines of prison walls.

Should a person serving a life term be granted parole at all for anything, except perhaps a tragedy in the family? Can you picture this guy dancing at his brother’s wedding? I would imagine that his friends, or even onlookers, would take photographs on their cellphones and post them on some networking site, which will immediately be grabbed by the media to show us the ugly face of justice. Why do they not say anything before? After all, the Jessica Lall case was touted as a media victory.

- - -

Just the other day, there was a protest against the immolation of Tibetans and the brutal Chinese regime on the eve of the G20 Summit to pressurise various government heads to raise the issue. It is a subject that gets mileage, but no concrete action is taken.

Before the rally, an email was circulated. It said, among other things:

We, the Delhi Chapter of Students for a Free Tibet, with a bulk number of members and Indian supporters are organizing a protest action tomorrow. The action will involve street theater, flash mob, and photo opportunity. If you're interested in covering it, please get in touch with the organizers directly. They can fill you in on more details.

"Photo opportunity"? This is what always worries me.

Citizens, however concerned they are, play into the hands of some establishment or the other. It could be the government, the police, the courts, the media and the ‘watchdogs’, who just wait and watch.

RIP Keenan, Reuben, Jessica, Aarushi, Shivani,Tibetans, and the thousands that go unreported and unsupported.

Will Ramdev Join The SlutWalk?

I’d like to know how many of these women who are promoting the SlutWalk in India are bothered about sluts. Spend a day as a slut, a whore, a sex worker and then tell us what it feels like to be called a slut after servicing upto ten men in a tiny cubicle behind a dirty curtain. Yes, you want to bring awareness to India, then don’t ride on the name of a group of women who don’t wear masks or carry placards saying they are sluts. For them it is bloody work and the only means of earning. And most of them do not dress up in fancy dress even when they have to lure men for their keep.

Some of them should get together and protest against this group of pampered pop activists and prick their bubble.

Women, feminists and others, have been writing about their bodies, about sexual exploitation, about objectification. So, why is the SlutWalk being heralded as something that has finally arrived in India, like some colonial hangover after a rave party?

I thought I’d give this major happening a pass because what does it say that one has not said before? But the people responsible and those opposed are gearing up for it. To sufficiently localise it, they have added ‘besharmi morcha’ to the terminology. What does it convey? That, yeah, we are shameless and so what?

Someone said, oh, cut out the crap about rural women, as long as it works for some. It works for the very people who already don’t give a damn, will dress as they wish at their lounge parties and ask for “Orgasm on the beach’ from a bartender who has seen more cleavages than cognac bottles. It will work for the teen brigade that is looking for a heart-stopping, heavy-breathing cause that is in your face but does not need much work. It will work for a certain kind of feminist who is discovering her ‘ism’ and a walk won’t hurt.

It is true that women are often derided for what they wear, but it is disturbing to see westernised clothing as representative. What about hipster sarees and backless cholis? How many of the girls/women will be dressed in everyday clothes and not hot pants and short skirts? Because this is making it into a garment association and women are objectified even in the workplace not because of what they wear but who they are – talented, confident and achievers. Their achievement is stimulus enough to taunt them.

The SlutWalk is not only about rape, but while Bollywood films of the 80s often had courtroom scenes where a lawyer raised sexist questions, art-house cinema has not been much different – what about ‘Bawandar’ that was based on the Bhanwari Devi gang-rape case? The protagonist was asked: “Were you wet?” She had her ‘odhni’ covering her, but her head was not lowered. Finally she said, looking straight into his eyes, in her dialect, “A woman gets wet when she is intimate out of choice, but when it is forced on her she bleeds.”

It is sad that we begin to be thankful for small mercies, so if someone takes on the ‘challenge’ of portraying a true story, we shower hosannas. But think about it. The rape in the movie was depicted quite graphically. Then at the police station the cop is shown smelling the victim’s ‘ghagra’, swirling in it and finally masturbating. There is also the lasciviousness of the MLA who asks the culprits whether they enjoyed it or not. All this in the name of realism.

Do the Dilli billis know about these aspects? How grounded are they in such real issues and what about the already educated men in the BMWs who commit date rape? What about marital rape and the silence of emotional rape?

Now we have Baba Ramdev who has made the accusation that the cops had plans to rape his female supporters at the Ramlila grounds rally. It is pretty disgusting the way women are used all around. There are several cases where such things happen, but in an open ground with the ruling party watching and seeking electoral brownie points? Isn’t it surprising then that he chose to dress as a woman to escape? Has he ever commented on the Nityanand type swamis and their antics captured on camera? Or the godman who sold pornographic CDs of young boys and girls against the exotic backdrop of the Varanasi ghats and of his wife too with deity pictures in the background? Does Baba have anything to say about these?

The Slutwalk is a minor tic, but today when everyone wants to be a concerned citizen, it could turn into a movement. I won’t be surprised if some media group joins in to sponsor the event. After all, we do have beauty pageants that already flaunt the female body as an example of empowerment. The ramp is the precursor of the SlutWalk. No one calls it ‘besharmi’ because these girls are trained by ‘experts’ and Mother Teresa protégées in diction and clichés. They speak up for causes ranging from global warming to education. Not one of them has spoken up for the real slut. The whore. The sex worker. The woman who works by getting fucked. Really.

If on the appointed day they can walk and show solidarity for those women, then these hawks can tawk.

- - -

(c) Farzana Versey

What I would do to a rapist...

• Castrate him? Spit in his face? Report him to the police? Would I have the courage and the presence of mind to do any of these when he has trampled on my body and my self-worth?

I am regurgitating these questions because they must be, especially if you read the letter I got in response (reproduced at the end). No one will sit in at Jantar Mantar for an 18-year-old who was raped in Delhi and then when she cried for help was again raped by those helping her. Our Home Minister was concerned about Delhi culture before the Commonwealth Games and roads and potholes. Has he looked into this culture?

I have already stated how wary I am about the media reportage of rape. Some cases do gather momentum, but the TV channels use them to project themselves as ‘saviours’. That is the reason I was hesitant to watch No One Killed Jessica. The other day I watched it on television and it was not as sensational as the promos made it out to be; I do not know whether it was heavily edited, but the journalist character who initially refuses to cover a ‘soft’ crime later becomes this grand do-gooder when she shamelessly takes over the ‘story’ peppering the urgency with invective.

On an earlier occasion during a love-making session when she gets a call, the hard-nosed hack gets up to leave. The guy asks, “What happens to me?” And she says, “Fly solo.” This was considered bold. We are such an immature society that a woman talking to a man she is intimate with speaking like this is seen as bold. More importantly, what was the point: to tell us that she does manage to get laid despite being a bazooka professionally? Or was it to contrast with the rape case she was taking up to give it to the big guys?


It is always about big guys. The small people and crimes against them don’t make us sit up and think.

But can rape, an intensely personal crime, be adequately covered? That is the reason for the queries at the beginning from a piece I had written on August 20, 2004.

I can only reproduce it with the same headline to express how I feel even today:

Castrate him? Spit in his face? Report him to the police? Would I have the courage and the presence of mind to do any of these when he has trampled on my body and my self-worth?

Would I kill him? Would I want to see him killed? These are cold questions confronting me because in one week I have had to contend with two faces of such brute behaviour.


Were I a slum-woman in a small town in India, would I have lynched a rapist? This is precisely what happened in the Indian city of Nagpur on August 13. 400 women stomped into the courtroom where dacoit Akku Yadav was being tried for murder and extortion; they knew he would be let out on bail. Such was life in their locality – he would walk into houses, drag women out and rape them. This was not lust. It was an assertion of his clout.

Why did these women take ten years to get rid of him? I do not know what snapped. That day they walked into the courtroom, threw chilli-powder at him and, as he was rubbing his eyes, they stoned him and stabbed him to death. Can I see myself as part of such a group? Does bonding in a sisterhood lessen one’s personal pain? Does every woman react to rape in the same manner?

We all have emotional scars which we bear in the silence of our hearts. What we lay bare are the tombstones that pronounce the demise of a part of ourselves. A lone woman speaking out becomes a chaalu cheez. The fact that this was a group has given it a different dimension altogether. The public display will at some point ghettoise them. What will happen to the young girls who would want to go to school, find jobs, get married?


Activists have applauded these “incarnations of Durga”, the goddess of redemption. I am scared that this could set a precedent. The courts in small towns may start believing that they do not have to play a vigilant role and the women can fend for themselves. Should every woman carry chilli-powder now? After she has been overpowered and humiliated, will she have to forget about the pain and the shame, and fumble to find that mirchi? And then gather the strength to kill her molester?

I would not be able to do that. I remember this vignette from an Indian play: the intended rape victim takes out a gun from her bag and makes her tormentor cut off his penis. Then she throws some money for his taxi fare and hands him her handkerchief to staunch the blood, mocking him with a “Thank you, I liked it”. I’ve never shied from calling myself a feminist, but I just could not connect with this.


Then, do I think it appropriate for a rapist to be hanged? Dhananjoy Chatterjee, who was the first person in nearly a decade to face the death penalty in India, refused to accept his crime. As his end drew near he listened to bhajans and read religious texts.

People are saying that capital punishment does not act as a deterrent, and as if to prove this, there has been a spurt of reported rape cases. Far worse, re-enactment of the hanging episode has become a new pastime; in one such case, a 12-year-old girl died while playing with a noose round her neck. So, has the punishment served its purpose or has it become some kind of melodrama that will spawn dialogue- baazi and amateur mimicry?

If I were the mother of Hetal, Chatterjee’s 16 year-old victim, I would have wanted the creep to live and suffer. Instead, today in his village he is seen as a martyr. Before he was taken to the gallows his family had threatened to commit mass suicide and had to be provided with police protection.


There are many such potential “heroes” roaming the streets. I was once at a beach resort in South India and a group of very young men kept passing crude comments. I got up from my deck chair and went up to the worst of the lot and tried to lecture him a bit; he started blowing cigarette smoke in my direction. That is when I lost my cool and punched him in the face. The rings on my fingers left red blotches on his cheek. But he held on to his ciggy, his machismo. Although I did leave some money, in case he needed first aid, I returned to my hotel room and cried. For a few months I even gave up wearing those rings. All I felt was remorse and guilt; at no point did I feel elated.

And that was, in comparison with the enormity of rape, a minor incident. We tolerate many such little offences in our subcontinental bazaars – elbows nudging breasts, bottoms being pinched. I begin to wonder whether our bodies are really our own. And just as I feel desperately low, I hear news of a young Muslim woman living near Kolkata being forced to marry her rapist, when the judge made that the condition of his release.

What would I do to a rapist?

(Farzana Versey)

- - -


This is the letter I had received in response. It sucks...

"Dear Versey:

This is in regard to your article you wrote. You were raped!!! whoa! and the rapist is about to be released. At the end you wrote that "What would i do to a rapist?". So i sujest that you should try to get over it and don't get confused. If you really like that guy you can always marry him. One of my friends married her rapist 17 years back. Now she has 3 kids and so she is living a happy married life now apart from the routine quarrels of husband and wife."

I find it strange that people cannot understand even the most straightforward writing. Worse, this guy had the audacity to expect a reply to let him know if I found his letter pathetic.

Rape: Beyond Shiney Ahuja

Actor Shiney Ahuja gets seven years rigorous imprisonment for raping his maid. I am surprised that even now there are people who are claiming his innocence when the judges too refused to accept the maid’s later turning hostile. They have evidence and the DNA samples match. Why is no one concerned that victims can be forced to backtrack, especially in such cases?

And let us not get into the ‘he is being made an example of’ argument. He never was in a position where his example would stand out.

My views have already been clearly expressed in Taking the shiney off him. Someone had wanted to know what I - a "man hater" - would say if he was proved innocent. My position would not change on the subject of rape, even if this case goes in further appeal. But it only shows how insensitive we are and the bizarre nature of social talk.

There is a spurt of articles about abuse of domestic helpers. This is not a new phenomenon. It has been going on, but only now these cases are highlighted. Just talk to the girls and women working in homes or even the hawkers. Some used to give in because of money; some to keep the job. Shiney’s wife had the audacity to call it a honey-trap.

Even more distressing are news reports that mention how youngsters are exploited in places that are supposed to protect them. Remand homes and homes for the destitute are known to send these girls and boys to keep people happy. Imagine a situation where they are mentally or physically challenged. What sort of devious people can resort to such despicable acts?

The respectable person you might meet or have to meet in some office could be a trustee of such an organisation covered with the halo of concern and he might be among the first to take advantage of his situation. Will anyone speak up? Will anyone even know his identity, except for the equally respectable go-between who arranges it and needs to keep her/his respectability?

I have already discussed at length how religious figures abuse their situation. The widows of Vrindavan, having been shunned by their families, are made to shave their heads to appear unattractive. Does it stop the business of being targets of lust? No. It is a thriving industry and the women get nothing out of it. Nothing. For them it is life imprisonment.

Of course, India is all about family values. Scrape the surface and skeletons will stare at you, but we have blunted nails. Numb people.

Marathons and men

Instead of filing a police complaint or refusing to run the race in a sponsored marathon event, actress Gul Panag has gone to the media. Or else no one would know that she was groped. Her reason for highlighting the incident ought to reveal the genuine problems faced by women everyday, but what we see here is a diatribe against Delhi culture and story of personal bravery.

Since she was brushed against in an inappropriate manner at the starting point of the race where the crowd took advantage, there are chances of other women participants having experienced something similar. Had she raised an alarm and alerted the authorities, it would have probably resulted in some arrests.

“Against which one of the 400 odd people I was stacked with at starting point shall I file a complaint?”

It would have at least sent out a clear message. These marathons are for specific reasons/causes and participants often include celebrities who are roped in for their fame. The point is that the organisers need to be careful. Many changes in civic law have taken place when people have brought such incidents to notice as examples. She says:

“Of course I’ll run again. I am a fighter.”

What exactly has she fought against or for? It is also a bit odd when she states:

"I won't advocate running around the city to women in Delhi. When you are at a busy junction here, you won't know who has touched your butt or pressed your breasts. It has to be the ugliest experience for a woman, but here you have no choice but get used to it.”

There are a multitude of women who need to use public transport and the roads to walk and run. They have no choice. And I think people know what groping means so this explanation of where women get touched is wholly unnecessary when dealing with a sensitive issue.

Then there is this thing about Delhi. I always love to hear someone lambasting the city!

"I am not at all shocked by the instance. It is most likely to happen if you are in Delhi. I just wonder when it's going to change, the typical north Indian male mentality. Just by having pretty roads and good infrastructure at places, you cannot sit back with a Capital city that's totally unsafe. It is difficult being a woman in Delhi.”

It is, but there are women living and working there. The local trains in Mumbai aren’t exactly havens if you happen to travel in the general compartment. Crowded places aren’t much different here. Our police chowkies have been rape dens and there is sexual harassment in the workplace here too.

While I detest Delhi as an idea, and having worked there for a bit to know it well enough, I dislike the branding of men and women in regional or race terms. The north Indian male mentality would be evident then even among those who live elsewhere. And if the South, West and East do not suffer from such a mentality, then we should check out the figures of women-related crimes in these places. No paragons of virtue in those.

I do not know what the expose has achieved and there is still time for her to register a complaint. Perhaps the organisers can be pulled up. Unless the organisers must not be?


End note:

"Pope softens up on condoms"

I thought TOI had finally come up with a rather lovely headline, till I did a quick check and found that it was not original. Hard as it gets, eh?