Thursday, February 26, 2009

The right to exist in public spaces

I have been following the recent events in Karnataka (the attacks on women in Mangalore and the resultant discussions) with alarm and dismay. Perhaps because it hits closer to home and the realization that I may have easily been one of the women who were attacked is not a pleasant one. Although, I must admit that seeing the number of protests and campaigns against these self appointed "moral police" i.e whackjobs has been immensely satisfying. But the news today about 3 women being harassed and attacked for the ridiculous reason of wearing "western" clothes really pushed my buttons.

I've observed that discussions about this issue usually gets derailed with statements about what women should and shouldn't wear, whether western culture is a good thing or not, whether "pub culture" is good or not, whether women should drink or not and so forth. When the crux of the matter is really about women's right to exist in public spaces without the fear of violence. What is really at stake is not my right to wear jeans or to consume alcohol, but my right to be out on the street and in public without looking over my shoulder or clutching a can of pepper spray.

Let me explain that a little further. Let us for a moment assume that wearing "western" clothes is a bad thing. Let us next assume that punishing people committing this grave crime is justified. Why then should not we not assault men wearing shirt and pants? Is that not "western" attire? Should we not force all men to wear dhoti which is the traditional Indian attire? While we are at it, men who bathe in public should be harassed and beaten up because they are exposing too much skin. Also, men going to pubs should be called names, slapped and dragged by their hair, and if thats not possible, then at least by their shirts.

My point is that none of these reasons are logical. Any human being with even half a brain would see that. What these numbskulls are really saying is that any woman in a public space is fair game for violence and assault and the reason is really just an excuse.

I had a wacky thought. Instead of all these crappy "father's day" and "mother's day", which are just gimmicks for stores like Archies to make sales, lets celebrate something meaningful. Lets celebrate "women's right to be in public" day. For 24 hours, every year, only women would be allowed to be out in public and not men. Any man who is seen outside will be harassed, assaulted, beaten or murdered and it would be perfectly legal. That would be like a breath of fresh air! We'll see how that goes and maybe extend it for more days every year! What say?

2 Comments:

Blogger Arvind said...

Totally agree!

What's really shocking is the there are idiots asking where these campaigners were when women were being attacked earlier.

You've hit the nail on the head, even if you didn't intend to, when you say : "Perhaps because it hits closer to home and the realization that I may have easily been one of the women who were attacked is not a pleasant one"

>>Also, men going to pubs should be called names, slapped and dragged by their hair, and if thats not possible, then at least by their shirts.
Not just pubs. Why don't they target the wine shops selling illicit arrack?

It's really sad to hear things like "there are far more important issues to protest against". Assuming that's true, why should it not apply to the violent goons?

3:50 AM  
Blogger Anu said...

@Arvind,

I think the whole "there are more important issues" argument is only used to distract. I wouldn't pay much attention to it.

If there are people saying that there are other issues that women face that are more important, then I have this to say to that. All the issues that women face are interconnected. The only way we can combat them is by dismantling the patriarchy. And one of the ways of doing it is by fighting for our basic rights, like the right to public places. It doesn't serve anyone's purpose if we are going to argue about which issue to concentrate on. Instead, we should fight a concerted fight against the patriarchy.

As for where the campaigners were, they were always there. They have always been there ever since the patriarchy existed. Its just that after the recent attacks, the campaigners have grown in strength and number. And thats a good thing right?

10:25 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home