Albert Thyrniang
On July 25, last the most undeveloped South West Khasi Hills district made news regarding the revered Khasi cultural dress, Jainsem. There was a news report in this paper that St. Xavier’s Higher Secondary School in Umoid near Mawkyrwat, South West Khasi Hills has introduced the Jainsem for its girl students as uniform, thereby making the ‘deemed’ college the first educational institution to have done so. The objective is to instil a sense of identity and love for the Khasi culture. The management clarified that boys are not made to wear cultural dress on the designated days as it is too expensive.
The report was proudly shared on social media platforms by enthusiastic men who praised the school for the initiative and for being an example for others to emulate. The sharing was becoming viral until cold water was thrown and spokes put in its wheels. When this writer saw it on Facebook, he was incidentally travelling to the district. He too shared on the popular platform with a criticism saying the decision to make only girls wear cultural dress is quite disturbing. Should not girls participate in games and sports and co-curricular activities? Should not girls play football, basketball or other games? Is it convenient for girls to play in the Jainsem?
In addition to the practical inconveniences, this is gender discrimination. It is an expression of inequality. It is, in fact, an imposition of culture on girls and women. This implies that women alone are to promote, preserve and conserve the Khasi culture. Why should it be so? This is an extension of the usual practice. In cultural, social and religious functions we see women come in cultural costumes while men turn up in trousers, shirt, ties and coats. No one expects them to wear the Jainspong and Jainboh. Is this not a cultural imposition on women? Is this not gender inequality and discrimination against women? Why should only women be custodians of culture? Women should reject and resist this cultural imposition on them.
My comment seemed to stun the supporters of the school’s ‘historic’ decision. There was one who almost issued a gag seemingly meaning that no one has a right to criticise against such a noble initiative. No one is expected to oppose this honourable step with a praiseworthy objective. Without saying a word no one will agree that criticism should be alien to any culture. If criticism is shut down that society is unhealthy!
There was someone who pointed out that it’s only once a week. This argument is unconvincing. Does it mean that girls be limited, discouraged, and denied the opportunity to perform physical activities that boys do without any hindrance, once a week? Should girls be discriminated against once a week? We may not acknowledge it but that is what it actually means. In this light the discriminatory uniform could even be illegal.
Others opine that the introduction of ‘cultural uniform’ began with girls. For boys it might be later. But why do you begin with girls? Does anyone doubt that those girls will not wear Jainsem after their student life? Can anyone be even one per cent sure that the girls’ counterparts will ever be spotted with Jainspong and Jainboh? We know that when girls go outside their village, town, city, state or country, they make sure that they take along with them cultural dresses and use them when required? How many boys do likewise? Then who should be taught to love one’s culture? On whom is cultural identity being instilled?
Some others said that it is difficult for boys to wear traditional dresses? So then, when it is difficult forget about culture. Culture should be practised when easy and convenient. By the way, why and how do we take for granted that it is easy for girls and women to wear cultural dresses? If boys and men find it uncomfortable and inconvenient it could be so for girls and women too. Another one almost angrily asked, “Do you see boys in cultural dress in other states?” He is right. I have personally seen in Assam and elsewhere girls of primary and high school level being made to wear sari as uniform while boys are with shirts and trousers. Unpleasant, but this is actually subjugation of girls at the tender age in the name of promoting culture. We don’t mind it happening here as well.
In praxis men insist that women be the torch bearers of culture. It happens everywhere – in Nagaland, in Mizoram, in Arunachal, in all the indigenous pockets in the North East, in India and probably all over the world. Should the same be happening here in Khasi Hills at well? Should cultural imposition of culture on women alone take place here in Ri Khasi Jaintia too? Patriarchal mentality continues to thrive in this matrilineal society.
Now and then we see images of girls in Facebook, group Whatsapp, etc – one set with traditional dress and the other with modern dress like jeans and T-shirts. The poster/sender asks viewers to compare and judge the images. Why are only girls judged? Why are boys and men not judged? Do not males wear jeans and T-shirts? Why should girls with short hair styles and fashionable make-up not be appreciated while we don’t mind boys with the funkiest look of the European, American and African heroes?
One of the proud sharers of the news report was an influential NGO. It probably feels culture is limited to dress. South West Khasi Hills is arguably the most backward district in Meghalaya. The handful of hospitals in the district, health centres have hardly any doctors, nurses and medicines? These ‘Seng Bhalang’ don’t seem to care. The rampant teacher absenteeism in villages in the district does not seem to concern the ‘community NGOs’. The culture of negligence of duty is okay.
The South West Khasi Hills roads are a record of sorts. The Nongstoin-Mawkyrwat road, the Mawkyrwat-Nonghyllam road, the Mawkyrwat-Phlangdolun road, even the Shillong-Mawkyrwat road can compete with one another as the worst roads in the district. Roads in West Khasi Hills like the Nongstoin-Maweit road can join the contest. We have acquired a culture of accepting biased treatment from the government. We don’t mind travelling on rough, bumpy, muddy and dusty roads.
NGOs and pressure groups of the areas are actually obstacles for development. In 2016 a major road project from Weiloi to Rangblang was sanctioned. However, the much needed project was allegedly diverted elsewhere. A student union and other pressure groups protested ‘vehemently’ and threatened not to halt the agitation until the project was reinstated. Contrary to popular expectation the agitation was abruptly stopped without the demand being met. Suspiciously, the agitators were paid off to give up the demand. The protests were only a camouflage to fool the public that the organisation works for the welfare of the area.
Another two lane road from Nongstoin to Wahkaji was to be carried out by the centre. Materials were stocked and machinery readied. The same student body opposed its construction on suspicion that the centre could use the road for uranium mining. Stupidly, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC) refused to issue NOC. The pressure groups and KHADC have denied people of the area the right to travel more comfortably on the only lifeline to the outside world. They don’t mind seeing the sick, the unwell, and the pregnant women travelling on this horrible and pathetic road for up to eight hours before reaching a medical facility.
These insensitive, insensible, unconcerned and even anti-development, anti-people groups have proven that a deal was struck that instead of the two lane road 100 crore rupees would be spent to make it motorable. Where is that 100 crore? No repairs have been carried out. Did the opposing NGOs care that the road is repaired? That they work for common good is a joke!
One of the most regular travellers on this road are women who are petty traders. They travel on a weekly basis to and from Umdohlun market. Out of compulsion they may not be articulate but they badly want a better road to ease their hard work to sustain their families. We ignore their needs but we want them to don the Jainsem. Fine argument indeed!