By E Dhar
The article: ‘The essence of gender injustice” by Fabian Lyngdoh (ST 01/06/2013), is a typical male-centric view of womanhood. I completely disagree with the writer’s views on modern women. Without offening anyone I must point out several errors within the article for it seems to favour (unintentionally, I hope) misogynic views. And neither do I want women to think that all men agree with the article. Firstly, the author uses traditions from various religions to show differences between men and women. We are aware that there are clear differences between the sexes as far as biology is concerned, I don’t understand what led the author to believe that women are “more precious than men in the reproductive process”. Is the worth of a woman only decided by how many offspring she bears? What about those women who are sterile then and thus unable to bear any children? It is this thought that enforces the belief that women are no better off than cattle to reproduce and replenish the human population. I believe than both men and women are human beings first and every person (man, woman or the third sex) is equally precious.
Further I am vexed by the author’s assumption that “women empowerment is now necessary because reproduction is partly irrelevant in an over- populated world”, as though women’s rights are dependent on the number of humans walking up and down the earth. Women’s rights have grown not because of over-population but because of the sacrifices and determination of brave people (Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Gandhi included) who recognized the injustices being meted out to the other half of mankind. I also find the author’s views that “the so called patriarchal era was not an era of oppression of women” grossly erroneous. No self thinking person should glorify the past in such a manner. Weren’t Indian widows burnt to death with their dead husbands just over a century ago? Didn’t the cruel system of dowry originate in the past? Is the author not aware of child marriage, female infanticide, domestic violence, rape, etc. or does he believe that these are all “modern” problems?
The author also points out that in this day and age, “a woman should not misconceive that to be empowered is to behave like a man or to escape from natural concerns that men have towards women”. He criticizes the notion that a woman does not need a man to survive the odds of life. By this he implies that a traditional woman is weak, meek and constantly needs to protected by the brave and strong man and should “stick to the man she loves and honours for safety and comfort (in case world war III breaks out)”. He even mentions the tragedy of the Titanic to get his point across. But I have read enough history to know his assertions are mistaken and I will refute them one by one.
If the author has some historical knowledge, then he should know that almost all wars and violence is started by men. He accuses mothers of eating their children’s flesh during the Jewish persecution, but it is in fact mostly men who perpetuated the act as documented by World War records. It is men who march to loot, murder and rape innocents in the desire to conquer. This brutality still goes on in Congo and Somalia. In fact, thousands of women have been raped and butchered by soldiers meant to protect them. And the ongoing Syrian conflict shows how savage men like Bashar-al Assad can be. Furthermore, seventy percent of Indian women are victims of domestic violence. One of the many strange conclusions that can be drawn from Mr. Lyngdoh’s article suggests that women need the protection of men to be protected from other men. But who will protect women from their own male “loved ones”?
Lets now look at what women have accomplished throughout the history of the world. The male is usually preferred to a female to become king. Yet, queens are just as capable of kings in ruling empires and certainly less brutish. How many women leaders are as ruthless as Hitler, Ivan the Terrible, Genghis Khan, Vlad the Impaler, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot and Kim Jong Un? In fact the kingdoms that have been ruled by women were usually peaceful and prosperous during that period. The reigns of Queen Elizabeth of England, Catherine the Great of Russia, Pharaoh Hatshepsup of Egypt were all considered to be the “Golden Age” by scholars. Today, Germany is one of the most (if not the most) powerful nations in Europe. And who is the current president? Angela Merkel, a woman.
Regarding a women’s resolve to defend her countrymen, I give the example of Tomyris, the Queen of the Scythian people, who defended her empire against the Persian King Cyrus the Great in 530 B.C. She not only won but Cyrus himself lost his head. Queen Ahhotep I of Egypt was another powerful queen. She successfully defended Thebes from rebellion and united Egypt under her rule. And can we forget Rani Lakshmibai who fought against the British to the death? Today, we have women soldiers who defend their country with equal valour as men.
Regarding contributions to humanity, how many know that the black civil rights movement in America was actually ignited by a woman, Rosa Parks? Florence Nightingale’s dedication in treating her patients earned her a place in history. Madam Curie discovered radiation and received a Nobel Prize. It would take me forever to describe all the contributions of women like Mother Teresa, Aung San Suu Kyi, Sarojini Naidu, Annie Besant, Mary Phelps Jacobs and so many more. Now, someone might argue that there are more men than women who made significant contributions to society. Yet one has to keep in mind that almost all women in the past, were considered to be less intelligent, less capable and had no other purpose than to become wives, baby factories and taking care of the kids. Even to this day, massive discrimination towards women goes on. That the people I’ve mentioned above were able to overcome such hurdles is a marvellous feat in itself.
And what of the millions of single mothers today who work hard to ensure that their children have a decent future? Or the daughters who support their ailing parents? Has the author read the recent news of Arunima Sinha, who became the first female amputee to conquer Mount Everest on a prosthetic leg? Time and again we hear in the media of women sacrificing their lives for their loved ones. Thus the author’s view that women would cower in fear and forget their freedom and dignity just to get men’s protection is preposterous. I don’t therefore, don’t understand why women are considered the weaker sex when it is proven that it is the will and character of the person, not gender, that shapes their destiny.
Lastly, I would like to highlight the position of women in the modern world. Yes, we have made great strides in making a fairer society but we’re still far off from reaching the goal; the goal of ensuring equal rights, equal opportunity and equal status for all people. Mr. Lyngdoh mentions that women today are treated as sexual objects and shown as such in the media. I concur. What he fails to mention is that women today are also looked on as free beings capable enough to decide their own future. There are more women working now than ever before. We make decisions based not on societal compulsion but on self determination. Also, aren’t men just as exploited visually as females? Does anyone deny that there are pictures and films that show a topless Shah Rukh Khan, Hrithik Roshan, Salman Khan, John Abraham and other actors? Heck, the movie franchise “Twilight” even showcases good-looking men and their bodies. And I have also wondered why traditionalists complain and gossip about others’ lifestyles. What a person does with his/her life is a personal decision. What would I gain by interfering in others’ lives other than exposing myself as a nosy person? If a woman decides to be single or not to have children, then it is her choice, not anyone else’s problem.
Mr. Lyngdoh’s views lean on the past ideas of society. But I prefer this era over the past. I would rather live in an Age of Reason than in an Age of Tradition. Yes, it is necessary to learn about our ancestors’ lives, yet we should not see them as infallible and perfect. They were flawed just like the rest of us. Our present age is the culmination of billions of past experiences of our ancestors. And through those experiences we change and better ourselves. What was moral then is immoral now, what was immoral then is moral now. Slavery, wars, religious intolerance, superstitions, sexism, etc. are seen are loathsome by most of humanity today. Let us not then regress back to past customs and stereotypes when dealing with human lives. Let every rule be examined and scrutinized. In short, keep the system that works and abandon the system that doesn’t. Only then gender justice can move forward.