By Deepa Majumdar
Drawing from the teachings on asceticism in all religious traditions, I strongly believe that the deep self is innately virginal and chaste in men and women alike … as St. Augustine of Hippo discovered when he finally overcame lust. The purpose of natural contemplation is to return us to this deep self, through the pursuit of self knowing. To help us reach this lofty goal, most cultures uphold traditions of modesty and chastity. After all, we clothe ourselves for a reason. In fact, it is only so long as we are not yet chaste that we clothe ourselves. Clothing is a veil that protects the body … not only from the elements, but also from prying eyes. And yet … the real veil is not the exterior fabric, sometimes forced on a woman. The real veil is the inner spiritual veil on the soul of a man or a woman, who reaches the hallowed state of chastity … a veil that stems the tide of the libido and confers continence. Without this inner veil, the exterior veil becomes a farce and an aphrodisiac. It is only in the state of true chastity, when we transcend gender, that we overcome the hatred that inevitably accompanies misogyny and reverse misogyny … For lust … rarely a solitary vice … always comes with hatred towards the object of lust.
Thus the present day feminist rhetoric about women’s “rights” to sexuality … while understandable, given the long history of puritanical control of women’s bodies … is nevertheless not justifiable, for it is morally untenable to have “rights” to lust or to any other vice. After all, we do not have “rights” to loot, nor “rights” to kidnap. Yet the carnal, in and of itself, is not a vice on par with looting or kidnapping. It becomes a vice, when practiced outside its proper context. But in its proper context (within a deep marital friendship) the carnal can be not only ethical, and an expression of a lower love, but can also be lust free and sacred. One sees this in the lives of saints who are born of unions that may be physical, but are nonetheless chaste. This form of chastity-within-the-carnal may be lower than pure chastity. But it is nevertheless a virtue. Marriage, in this sanctified sense, is a form of celibacy. But outside this context of marital friendship .. a relationship protected and preserved by a plethora of duties … the carnal can decay to pursuit of pleasure (bereft of duties) for pleasure’s sake … to inordinate lust, which in turn can lead to a range of moral problems … from rape and domestic violence … to mutual use and degradation of one other, infidelity, and loss of self. For the carnal sans friendship is a form of disrespect. Therefore sexual continence remains among the highest, perennial, universal virtues.
But how can the natural dignity that comes with continence be forced upon a person? How can chastity be coerced? No virtue can or should be coerced. Only a sovereign being can choose to be chaste. If men have become monks and hermits over the millennia, this is because they were, in the first place, “free” to be carnal. Learning from their mistakes, they understood that chastity was the remedy. But women have a different history. Forced in some sense to be passive recipients of masculine lust … which, in the extreme case, is rape … they can be traumatized in their sexual self. Sometimes they do not see their bodies as their own. Often they are ashamed of having any carnal feelings at all. More often than not, their carnal side is hidden and violent. Therefore, women must first be sovereign beings, if they are to practice self control. Before they can consciously practice sexual ethics (faithfulness, modesty) they must first be aware that the mere possession of the natural physical side cannot not rob them of virtue … that the physical hymen can never be a measure of their chastity … that modesty and chastity are mental states of character.
And yet, human history perhaps cannot afford to wait for women-as-a-whole to evolve to this stage of maturity. For the family is the most basic and sacred of all institutions … and it derives its stability from the virtues (especially bodily self-control) in the two parents. Marriage is therefore a form of celibacy, second only to the monastic state. Parenting becomes much more sage when the mother (in particular) and the father practice self-control with respect to the physical appetites. In some sense it is more important for the mother to be of sound character than the father … and this does not make me sexist. For the role of the mother is the fulcrum whereupon rests the moral fate of the child and therefore that of society as such. Indeed, the hand that rocks the cradle rocks society. When young mothers are abused, underfed, etc. society as a whole suffers through the consequences of the mother’s mental and physical states, on her child. Equally … when marriage becomes licentious and the moral character of the two parents (especially the mother) is compromised, society suffers as well, through the effects on the child. Nations rise not by the power of their GNP, but by the virtues of their citizens. Equally, nations fall when their citizens dissipate themselves in vices and the appetites. The family being the basic foundation stone of society, it is perhaps the most important institution ever. The fate of the nation rests to a large extent on the fate of the family. And the fate of the family hangs a great deal on the basic character of the mother. Therefore the powers of self-control and virtues in women are of utmost importance for the overall well being of society as a whole. I say this with the convictions of a lifetime of feminism. And yet, only a sovereign being can exercise free will and choose to be virtuous. An unfree being … a caged bird … a creature trained into docility, stripped of rights and bartered for dowry … such a being, whose basic human rights are thwarted, a being from whom duties are wrested without rights being accorded in exchange … such a being can never choose to be virtuous. And yet, despite patriarchy, there is perhaps one path to self-willed virtue in women … the route of motherhood.
The whole miracle of creation lies in this … that despite the deep gloom of patriarchy … virtuous women long for the experience of motherhood. Even women of unsound character long for motherhood. Women long for motherhood even in societies that harbor FGM, domestic violence, and bride burning. Coerced and reified motherhood, which is a breach of the human rights of young mothers, is therefore the greatest travesty ever of this brilliant principle … the fact that women long for motherhood … Before this scintillating principle … the reality that the longing for motherhood is alive in women, despite patriarchy … coerced motherhood is incriminating, redundant, degrading. Perhaps the Creator infused this blessed longing for motherhood in good women, as a means of redeeming humanity as a whole. The yearning to give birth certainly redeems the vile stench of patriarchy. Yet, even this longing requires moral vigilance. For when it degenerates to an appetite, women run the risk of committing untenable sins to have a child … from using their male partners, to feigning love to get married, to being jealous of existing mothers, etc.
I often wonder why the Creator permitted something as dangerous as the sexual revolution. Perhaps because She felt sorry for sex workers, rape survivors, and the victims of trafficking … all of whom are stigmatized by patriarchal societies. Today, the sexual revolution is the greatest threat ever to the stability of the family. Indeed, the family stands as a refuge from sexual misconduct. And yet … what are good family values and what is the true family? Surely not the hidebound patriarchal family, which can never be a true refuge from promiscuity. For the main refuge from sexual misconduct lies not only in the family, or in procreation … as the Catholic church asserts … but in the act of abiding, serious friendship between male and female. No marriage can last if it is built on the feeling of the moment. Therefore the act of romantic love is not a reliable foundation for marriage. But mutual duties, which become desirable in a serious friendship, constitute the foundation stone of long term marriage. Yet, even duties have to be chosen … as must love. The household dictator may command surface fealty … but not love. I sometimes wonder how lonely the Indian pampered son must be … all the more, if he is good hearted and a victim of his circumstances.
Modesty, chastity, love … these priceless virtues are wholly distorted in a traditional patriarchy.
(The first part of this article was published on Saturday, March 16, 2013)