Friday, 15 February 2013

Valentine's Day 2013

It is either a very happy relationship or a very unhappy one when dates do not matter anymore. Luckily, Vipul and I fall in the first category. We routinely forget our wedding anniversary. Once when Vipul told someone a wrong wedding date, I quickly 'corrected' him - with another, equally wrong date! Every year, both moms remind us enthusiastically of the marriage date, sigh at our seeming apathy, and ask us to celebrate it In some way. As people who eat take-away more often than one reasonably should, we celebrate by cooking at home. We've been a bit better with birthdays, but just about. Naturally, any other anniversaries or dates don't even stand a chance. Here is a sample, from yesterday.

Me: ( from the kitchen) what date is it today?

Vipul: (from the living room) it's the 13. (After a pause) no, it's Valentine's day today. It's the 14th.

Me: Then the yogurt has expired. I hope you didn't use it to marinate the food."

Sunday, 10 February 2013

Delhi, December 2012.

The gang rape of a young woman in Delhi in December elicited some very regressive views. Most of the reactions of bureaucrats, politicians and socio-religious leaders were insensitive or plain inane, such as the suggestion that the perpetrators of the gangrape in Delhi would have stopped had the victim only addressed them as bhaiyaa. In such a mindless climate, the media had a field day; all they needed to do was ask a suitably prominent public figure to react to the case, and then step back and berate them from a morally high standpoint as the person in question proceeded to make a fool of himself or herself.

This also allowed the media to escape any sort of soul searching. Most news reports sensationalise sexual crime, and extensively cover Bollywood violence and sexual innuendo. I don't want to single out any one media outlet, but newspaper websites that regularly carry content like "5 signs she wants sex tonight", "B town babes this week - hot or not?" contribute to the sexualisation of a culture. Arguments about responsibility tend to run thus "we all grow up in the same media environment, and not everyone of us is a rapist or a killer." This is true, and that is why there is a difference between culpability and responsibility. While those who perpetrate the crime are the ones deserving of punishment, none of us lives in a vacuum. And this is not only about the media or about Bollywood, sexist though they both are. It is also about power, and what is possible in what context. When people see other people get away with rape, murder and whatnot, it emboldens them to act on their worst impulses.

I have been following Tehelka's coverage of Delhi's rape case(s), though at times I read the headlines and skip the article. I avoid them only to lessen my nightmares. I do agree with Ajaz Ashraf's piece that this particular incident resonated strongly with people because of the familiarity of its social and geographical markers. As a student in Delhi, watching a movie at a PVR complex and catching a bus home is routine. Most of us would heave a sigh of relief if we got a private, air conditioned bus "aaj baithke jaane milega", "aaj dhakke nahi khane padenge".

Another searing piece was an interview with a woman who had been raped, an article that I could not read in its entirety. What I will not forget, however, is how she went to AIIMS for the physical checkup, and as they were waiting to see the doctor, the nurse shouted "Kiska rape hua hai? Andar chalo". I can picture the nurse, who is probably a good woman, ordinary, overworked and underpaid, who has become desensitised and utterly unthinking in the routine course. It requires sensitivity and thought to figure out who could be the victim, walk up to them, talk to them in a low voice, and spare them the gawking glances of the entire corridor. If such behaviour is not innate, it could perhaps be enforced through training. What I want to highlight is that it is not only "men", condemned in blanket terms, who need to be sensitised and their mindset changed, but society as a whole. There is nothing wrong with people wanting the government to make public space safe, but they have to be equally willing to introspect, and think of the variety of ways in which women are made to feel uncomfortable and unsafe, day to day, in familial spaces and outside.

An aspect that struck me strongly - perhaps because I currently live abroad - is the way in which the international coverage of the case has cast it as a conflict between modernity and tradition in India, such as this story in the Wall Street Journal, an informal survey of Delhi men on what causes rape, which insists on the 'Western influence' narrative. As an explanation for the event, it is simplistic at best and downright insidious at worst. The point is not the argument "rape happens because Indian men cannot deal with 'their' women who have become too 'bold' because of Western influence" itself, but the purpose that the argument serves in this setting. It allows for the perpetuation of the idea that the rest of the world, or the non- west, is traditional, and that Western influence is a liberating force that meets conflict at every turn, but will, like the true hero, emerge victorious in the end. There is no place in such a narrative for plurality or difference. What about rapes that happen in New York? They will be castigated in many different ways, but the narrative of 'modernity v/s tradition' will never make an appearance. All of Amercia is modern, you see, each and every inch of it. In such a vision of the world, any violence, sexual or otherwise, in the Western world, is just itself, whereas in the non-western world it is a reaction to Western influence, to modernity and what not. If we accept that human beings are complex creatures, let us also accept that there are many reasons for rape - misogyny, abuse, power, lack of power, sadism, opportunity and so on and so forth - and resistance to modernity may be one of them, but cannot be the single most important factor.

There may be multiple reasons to rape, but the reason not to rape is perhaps simpler - respect for another human being as a human being. It is very difficult to not despair in the wake of such events, but as someone who has depended on the kindness of strangers, I want to end with the blog post 'this is also India'. Hopefully, there is still hope for us.

 

Monday, 7 January 2013

Reading Motherhood

2012's life-changing gift to Vipul and me was our daughter Shabdita, born at the end of the year. A friend asked me if I was now going to write blog posts on motherhood. "No", I'd said complacently. What I've realised, though, is that to not write about the things I'm thinking of, and instead write an 'objective' book or film review is playing at being a blogger rather than blogging. So that resolution, and that complacency, goes out of the window as I write this post.

Ever since we got Shabdita home from the hospital, I've been incessantly reading in whatever little spare time I've had. Reading books, magazine and journal articles, Internet articles and forum posts, blogposts and debate pieces - all on parenting, or usually, on mothering. As I navigate my way through an ocean of information, I realise that parenting, like everything else in the world, is a socio-political and ideolgocial minefield. And just like everything else in the world, the various shades of conflict within it acquire greater resonance as you enter the spectrum.

One of the earliest books I read was The Mask of Motherhood: How Becoming a Mother Changes Everything and Why We Pretend It Doesn't by Susan Maushart. It is available in India here. Greedily, hungrily, I devoured the book page after page. The argument of the book is as follows: motherhood changes everything, in that one's life, after becoming a mother, becomes devoted to the care of a tiny creature that is intially entirely dependent on you for everything. This is invisible labour, in that you can spend an entire day looking after your little one, and many such days like that, and have very little to show for them. Susan is not saying that this is wrong. Most mothers do this out of love. This love involves a loss, that of one's sense of self. What Susan does point out, however, is that this loss of self is undervalued and downplayed by all participants in the process, including the mother. As women talk less about it, most new mothers have to resolve their emotional ambivalnces out for themselves, keep reinventing the wheel, as it were.

Current discursive framing of motherhood conceptualises it as 'one more option that you have', which will not, in any essential way, affect the tenor of your life. You will go on, you will manage everything, and if you can't, then this is because of some individual failure on your part - lack of organisation, lack of time management skills and so on. What this does is that it leaves women (and some men) on a treadmill, running all the time to stay in the same place. I too was part of this rhetorical framing. During my pregnancy, I worked harder at my workplace than I have ever done in my life, just to show myself that motherhood would not change me. I rarely talked about my pregnancy, even with my closest friends, because I did not want to become that woman who could only talk about her pregnancy or her kids. Rarely does anyone say "What I am currently doing is valuable, challenging, exhilarating, frustrating and absolutely exhausting. I do it while majorly sleep deprived, with little ability to focus on anything else, and everything else I do is an achievement that I should be applauded for". Instead, we drive ourselves to do more and berate ourselves for all that we cannot do. To catch up with work, for instance. To write blogs :)

There are also arguments in the book that I disagree with. For example, Susan argues that women of earlier generations expected less from their lives, and so the loss of self did not bother them as much as it does us. This seems to me to be a facile argument. It also marks the book's ambivalence towards feminism. On the one hand, feminism is applauded for having made a lot more choices available to women, and on the other hand, it is critiqued for how hollow these choices turn out to be. I have seen variations of this argument crop up with reference to feminism very often. I feel that this kind of circularity leads us nowhere. Our choices are framed by our being in our world, as they have been and always will be. Feminism is one way of making certain arguments and fighting for certain positions. I believe strongly in some of those positions, and that is why I would call myself a feminist. I will not accept that feminism, and by extension, the choices it offers, are outside social construction, outside human discursive practices.

The good thing about social construction is that we too are small builders in there somewhere, and we can help construct and reconstruct our feminisms. I want to take on motherhood and do it in a feminist way, for myself. I will not stay silent about it and let other women keep reinventing the wheel. I will talk to you about it, as long as you want to listen.



Friday, 9 November 2012