Rape: Passing the Buck

The accused in the Delhi rape case have not got a lawyer to defend them yet. It was reported that when a lawyer came forward, others objected saying that it was not moral to defend the accused because of what they had done. The case will not be taken up unless someone comes forward to represent the accused.

As we discuss the morality of rape, it has struck me so hard that our society has become a mass of people who keep passing the buck. The blame always has to be on someone. On the one hand there are several people who are openly asking for a death penalty, others who are asking for close to inhuman steps to be taken on the accused, and on the other there are political leaders, spiritual gurus and others who have the audacity to question the girl who was raped and killed. They continue the assault by putting forward suggestions that women should dress modestly, not go out after dark and beg for forgiveness if anyone tries to violate their body.

In the entire discourse one cannot notice the absence of self examination, the acceptance of one’s own blame and the crimes committed by one self. Instead everyone is happy to put the blame on and pass the buck on to someone else. This can be seen in all fields and by all institutions.

The police force says that teachers should teach the students well and conscientize them on gender equality and respecting women. The teachers say that children learn their initial lessons from home and are influenced by their parents and therefore they should be a better example. The parents blame religious leaders saying that they are not teaching moral education and religions are themselves very sexist. The media joins the chorus and picks on politicians, the politicians pick on the film industry and all of them have now got together to blame the six accused. But take a look at each of them.

The police force makes simple things like filing a complaint, a woman walking into a police station, and providing protection to women, a very difficult proposition. Teachers and educational institutions are guilty of not encouraging equal conditions for girls and boys, being insensitive to the feelings of girls, keeping girls and boys away from each other and being over protective and indirectly pushing through presuppositions about each other which are not even true in the first place. Parents bring up girls and boys in a different way and still hang on to age old clichés about what they should do and how they should grow up. They also think that time with children can be made up by buying them gadgets and not engaging in any serious talk. Religious leaders and institutions are totally oblivious and blind to how girls and women are totally ignored and are only a part of the system and are no where close to being joint leaders and functionaries. Religious spaces are not open and safe for women as well. The media has over the years ignored several rapes and has not reported several cases were Dalit women were raped. In a country were rapes happen everyday, the media has not reported enough. Advertisements which form a majority of the revenue for media houses portray women in a poor light. Many advertisements show women as mere objects of desire and attraction. This does not give any parity or confidence to them. Politicians in turn pick on the media, the film industry and even Western culture saying that all of these are the culprit. Instead of relooking at laws, making people aware and serving the people well they also look to blame. The film industry is also quick to join the band wagon to blame politicians. But seldom is any introspection done on the kind of movies made. If Indian movies have only moved from renaming the cabre dance as item number, what does this speak of how women are characterized in movies in India? Which Indian movie actress is being marketed as a strong actor rather than a size zero or a curvy bodied voluptuous woman? Why are love scenes and bikini clad women shown when it has nothing to do with the script? Are women portrayed as smart, suave or just plain dumb?

If we want to blame the list is endless. The main thing is that each one of us is responsible in our own way for the plight of women in our country. But we are not willing to accept this. The buck does not stop here, rather the buck is passed on…and on.

What is the programme Anna?

The national capital is brimming with large crowds and police personel. Lots of people from several parts of the country are congregating to Delhi to be part of the anti-corruption movement. A Jan Lokpal bill is still being sought even though the government has promised that this will be discussed in parliament. The crowd post April is still there but there are also voices of cynicism about what is happening.

What on earth is attracting people, even if it is only a cross section of people in India? Is it only the anti-corruption drive and the call asking for people to spill on to the streets that is bringing out people or is it that this has become an event and a programme which needs to be attended for several reasons? Why do people attend television talk shows and debates? Some will genuinely be interested to talk on the issues on offer, others will be there for the media exposure (part of the 15 minutes of fame) and a big number will be there for the event or the programme! Is the anti-corruption protest also something like this with thousands of people actually there to be a part of the programme?

Those who are there for the programme need not know the entire sequence of events and what are the deep rooted things which surround it. They are there for the atmosphere, the feeling and the identification with people who have something in common with them. The middle class and upper middle class will definitely be comfortable to be together and corruption is such a common affecting factor that it will in all regards bring in the numbers. This could be the reason why India has seen several protests over the years but they never had the numbers. Every state has had tribal protests, dalit protests, and women’s group’s protests which would hardly even get a passing glance from passers by. Does this mean that their concerns were not concerns and did not warrant even a glance? It rather means that the people did not identify with their problems because they did not see it as a problem. In many cases these passers by would have been the perpetrators of the problem. But corruption is different. The same people who did not bother to look when genuine protests were held have suddenly become very active protestors.

This is a programme which has the likelihood to succeed not because it is a ‘just’ protest but because it is a well staged protest. In countries like India it is strange that true protests are never taken seriously, whereas well directed, managed and staged protests will mostly succeed. In this way, this is not a protest but this is a celebration of how people can be mobilized using the media, social networking sites and other traditional media forms.

A well directed programme is like a well produced movie. One has to follow the crowd. No one will have the courage to say that the movie is not well made when those others we are in contact with will say it is excellent. The anti-corruption movement I fear is also such. We can either say that it is a super duper hit or we can risk being made out into un-patriotic, submissive, stupid and slavish people. Now who would want that? I always like off beat movies and in this case too I feel this is too mainline Bollywood style and therefore likely to be lapped up by the affordable masses.

Watch the door sign…Please do not disturb???

All of us value our privacy and the quality time we get to spend with our families. Many would silently wish for a sign on their door which says ‘do not disturb.’ Nothing wrong with that I guess. After all we are all working on tight schedules aren’t we? I won’t move to question this but would rather look at the word disturb.

In a culture where we are expected to be near to perfect, being disturbed and not-too-perfect then is not acceptable (to whom is another question!!!). I have distinct memories of being castigated and asked to ‘gather up my act’ and ‘get on with it.’ This state of life underwent a change when a teacher of theology once told me that it is okay to be disturbed as it means that we still have a heart inside us which reacts to what we hear and see. The teacher said that it is thus perfectly normal to ‘feel like shit’, to ‘be ashamed of oneself’, ‘to cry’, as it reflects the humanness inside us coming to terms with what is happening.

The other day I happened to watch a Hindi movie ‘Bombay’, on T.V. It was not planned, an accident I would say. The initial part of watching was nostalgic because I remembered the first time I watched the movie in a theatre when I was in college. But the nostalgia was immediately replaced by a deep and profound grief in what I saw. The violence and death in Mumbai after the Babri Masjid demolition in 1992 disturbed me no end. I felt overwhelmed and sat in my seat not knowing how to react to what I was watching. I was crying inside but the ‘please do not disturb’ attitude froze the tears as they came out.

We have to come to terms with the word ‘disturb.’ Is it okay to be disturbed? Does disturbance lead to something? Should we ignore the disturbing things in our country and hope it will go away? Is education disturbing one’s state of mind or conforming to established and traditional understandings?