Women Liberation – An alternative viewpoint
We do not always realize that an opinion we carry, with all the conviction with which we carry it, may not be our opinion at all. Has it ever occurred to you that what you say may not be the outpouring of your real innate ideas? Has it occurred to you that the ideals you carry may not necessarily have been yours at all? What if the ideals are an import? Is there the slightest possibility that an opinion we think is a well-informed one could have come out not of critical examination but from a blind adhering to a thought which we assume to have emerged out of critical thinking? If a statement is thrown at us, or in the market, are we to lap it up as Gospel truth or shall we pause and ask of the grounds on which the statements are made? Adler and Doler write, “The packaging of intellectual positions and views is one of the most active enterprises of some of the best minds of our day. The viewer of television, the listener to radio, the reader of magazines, is presented with a whole complex of elements – all the way from ingenious rhetoric to carefully selected data and statistics – to make it easy for him to “make up his own mind” with the minimum of difficulty and effort. But the packaging is often done so effectively that the viewer, listener, or reader does not make up his own mind at all. Instead, he inserts a packaged opinion into his mind, somewhat like inserting a cassette into a cassette player. He then pushes a button and “plays back” the opinion whenever it seems appropriate to do so.”
Are we sure that we are expounding our own opinions and not just repeating what could be a lie told again and again and loudly? Why are we to assume that a successful woman is one who has entered STEM and emerged a doctor or an engineer? Upon what grounds are we to say that a lady who is an entrepreneur is more successful and liberated than a woman who raised a doctor or an entrepreneur? How do we decide what to attribute success to? Is a lady whose husband earns for her really “jobless”? She has nothing to do in her life? If she does not have an employer her life is over? In what way is cooking and washing like a queen (or a king depending upon who is doing it), any way lesser in dignity than working like a collie or vice versa? Why are we to think that a lady “working” outside the house in the marketplace is in any way liberated while the lady “working” inside the home is not? What is liberation? For whom? From what? Is liberation taking more clothes off or taking more clothes on? Is liberation earning money? Is it called earning money only when it is credited inside your bank account? Would it be called earning money if it were a family member that was crediting the account? Is earning money the end? What is the purpose of earning money? What is work? Is a working lady doing something different than a non-working lady? Can a non-working lady even exist? Can there actually be any existence without any work? What is the aim of life? Is it going out to work, to become doctors, engineers, lawyers?
I am not here to answer any of these questions. If you have answers to all of these, more power to your intellect. What I am here to say and defend is the apparent indefensible. I am here to tell the side of the “conservative” or the “patriarch”. Did you have a chance in your life to listen to one? Or are all your stories about this side of the spectrum told by the “liberal” and “feminist”? Do you know about what the “conservative” or the “patriarch” says only from what the “liberal” and the “feminist” say about what he says? Does it not surprise you that you are yet to hear this side of the story, the story of women liberation in a quite different sense of the term?
Kashmiri society is by far a very progressive society. It presents to large extent equality of opportunity for girls and women (not imposing on them the equality of outcome), not shying away from the fact that there is always room for improvement. Is there a system where there is no room for improvement? Is the west sitting idle since it “liberated” its women? Kashmiri women, those who choose to, are working as teachers, doctors, homemakers, cooks, maids, lawyers, washers, peons, nurses, and many are idle and that is equally good. Has it occurred to you that idle by choice is much more empowering than working out of compulsion? And also, what are equal rights? What are rights? What is equality? Is equality possible? Is equality desirable? Does equality last? Are men equal? Do they all have equal rights? Do all women have equal rights? What is freedom? Is my mom free? In my family, the three males would round and again ask the one woman (my mother) not to put on burkha for she would sweat profusely, Mom would invariably choose to wear one and continue to do so, “choose” being the keyword. Did you jump to the conclusion that the society has brainwashed her into such submission? She went to tour North India when many girls would not even attend schools, she tells us those stories. 2018 and enter another lady in our house, my brother’s wife. She doesn’t wear burkha, no one asks her to, not even my “brainwashed” mom, but when she does, she wears the Afghani one and all of us men, and the one “conservative” woman get berserk about why she would choose it over the beautiful fiza burkha. But then she takes it on and moves like an asthaan, is she liberated or is she chained into slavery?
Let society be free and let girls and women and boys and men choose what they want to choose and that must include a choice of not having a choice at all. A right to choose not to choose. The women who wish to be “free” in the western sense of the term should have that right to be, which they almost certainly have; if they face any threat of physical violence, which many do, those threats must go. But how do we stop crime? Is it a crime that is a necessary result of “patriarchal” thinking? Or can we say it is a result of artificially created narrative stripping man of his manliness and women of their womanliness? If a woman adopting a certain way of life is her choice, by what measure is it not the choice of the society to have a view of with her, the way it wishes without resorting to violence of any kind. There are members in society who would prefer in marriage a lady “modern” in outlook, hair straightened, Lorealised and VLCCeed looks, she must be “working” as well. I am personally one of those, would prefer marrying someone who earns while I cook and wash. But do women not have any wishes of their own? Do they want just any other guy? Join a dating website or roam around and see for yourself who is choosier in selecting a partner, men or women. And no one is to be blamed for being choosy for there are men who are choosy and there are women who are not. And also, there are men who look for Burkha-clad women in marriage. Are the women who look towards bearded old-school guys to be considered in any way less liberated? Why is it that we must consider the woman speaking on the podium to be liberated and not the woman who prefers to remain silent? If women wish to be free in the eastern sense of the term, they must have the choice of doing so.
Kashmiri women should come forward by their own personal will and contribute in whatever way they can, or whatever they want to, which does not necessarily have to be doctors and engineers or the outspoken self-proclaimed neo-nazi feminists. Your contribution choice which includes the right not to contribute at all. Our womenfolk can contribute by homemaking, it is a very tough job which we men are almost incapable of doing without the able helping hands of our women. You can contribute by working outside houses, you can contribute through whichever way YOU want, not what western feminism or eastern conservatism chooses for you. Go and live free lives and that freedom does not necessarily have to be enforced freedom, let it be chosen, let you choose to be a slave or a master, be a master in the eastern sense of the term or a master in the western sense. Let you not be fooled into the mastery by the overwhelming media discourse. You have not been told liberation is in the mind, not in the body, you are a slave till you think you are a slave and by that token most of those who consider themselves “liberated” are nothing but “slaves” and more power to them for they are so by what they think is a free choice (which I think it is not). You are told that you are liberated if your body becomes a delight for millions of eyes and you are enslaved if it is the delight of just one pair of eyes. You are told that you are liberated when your voice is heard by millions and not just the selected few around you. You are told that when you display your embellishments you are free. I tell you that there is another way of looking at the same story. You are liberated from the hounding eyes of millions into the freedom of the unjudging garment of two eyes. There are not millions hearing you, but there are a few listening to you and that is by far more liberating. Let you not bark at millions but speak to a few and that is also a choice which no one but you should have the right the make. And you have every right to yield that choice.
Men yield choices, as sons to parents, as boyfriends to girlfriends, like fathers to children, as husbands to wives. Men do not necessarily choose what they wish to do and be, they are also driven by many hands, some visible some invisible. Let not the woman think that it is just their gender which is “enslaved” for to think of yourself to be a slave is to be one. We are all “enslaved”, is not the chain which you have been told is around your feet also around the hand of the man who is claimed to be holding it? Is not a chain holding two and not just one? There is no Woman’s day, for every day is a woman’s day for every man’s and every woman’s life revolves around only women, careers come a distant second. Every day on this planet is a woman’s day! Even though I may be ridiculed by many, did you notice even this writeup revolves around women!
15 Comments
hazaardastaan
And the mic drops at “ You are liberated from the hounding eyes of millions into the freedom of the unjudging garment of two eyes.”
Sull Kaak
So what do you say?
hazaardastaan
I would say, “jis din unke burke ko koi haath lagane ayega, hum beech main deewar banke khade honge.”
Sull Kaak
This article was that moment.
hazaardastaan
I know.
P.s…second most carefully written article of yours for me; first being HTRAB part 1.
Sull Kaak
Ti aam ne samjhiy
irtika
I don’t know how right or wrong I might sound but I personally have witnessed house making women being taunted and treated unequally to those who work outside their houses and most commonly being told” TUM DIN BHAR KARTI HE KYA HO, GHAR PAR HE TOH HOTI HO”, and also to mention the terrible and heartbreaking comparison been made between the two! In such circumstances no women would ever feel liberated in being a house maker.
Sull Kaak
“TUM DIN BHAR KARTI HE KYA HO, GHAR PAR HE TOH HOTI HO” – This line of thought is the product of exactly the same thought which we wish to present an alternative view to. I believe that looking down upon certain types of works as “no work” is something which we have been fed by a certain idealogy, both conservatives and modernists have fallen for the trap.
When Feminists offer a solution that women should leave home and work outside claiming that to be their liberation, they present a solution to a problem they created themselves. In doing so they force, though not physically, women (and few men) into believing that liberation is ONLY in a particular way of life. When a woman takes that road thinking she is free, she realizes down the road that she is a different kind of slave now.
If both are dubbed to be slavery then which one to choose? I believe that question is to be answered by answering the question on the purpose of Life. If the purpose of life is to join a corporate or to make money, then whatever means help you achieve that should and ought to be taken. If that ain’t the purpose of life, which I believe it isn’t, then we have to choose the one which helps that purpose.
fgsjr2015
My mother (to four of us) was a homemaker, but my father considered it to not be a real job, since it did not earn her a paycheck; and he’d let her know it.
m7gupta
Yes.The key word of course is “Choice” . It may be and should be seen as women liberation if the choices they make are their personal and individual choices and not the consequences of patriarchal , societal and religious norms and values instilled and conditioned in them right from the moment (and even before that ) they land on this planet . Permission to select form Pre decided list of alternatives can not be and should not be seen as their ‘ own choice ‘
Sull Kaak
An individual has to have the right to make a choice, while society at large has to have a choice to have an opinion on the choices the individual makes. An individual gone berserk, into seeking whatever it wishes at the cost of other individuals and the society, can safely be prophesied would not go on, for there is a moral law, to whatever extent it may be denied, in this world which has application both to individuals and societies. You cannot go on violating these laws in the name of your personal freedom, yet enjoy the benefits of security and law the society provides.
m7gupta
Absolutely ! Where is the disagreement to what’s being said above.
The problem arises when the society (that has to have the choice to have an opinion on the choices that individuals make) discriminates in giving its opinion on the basis of that individual’s gender.
When you say you would prefer to be a home maker ,cook and do other household chores and be a stay home dad looking after the kids..will you make this a choice. Can you ? What is the opinion this society will have on this choice you make for yourself. Likewise for women too there are so many such situation where society will think differently.
Sull Kaak
The “discrimination” society shows is the exercise of its choice. The discrimination in specific cases is gender-specific while overall it is gender-neutral, what I mean is that it may discriminate with respect to a particular gender in a particular case, it will discriminate against the other gender in some other case. Society does not necessarily have to be gender-neutral, and how can it be, gender is a part of society, it is a necessary ingredient.
If I choose to make the choice of being the stay home dad, I will make the choice if I have to (and that is determined by the strength of my will), at the same time I don’t deny the society to carry a particular opinion about me and my likes. It has to have an opinion, for if it is too fluid it loses its character every day. If it loses its character every day it fails to perform its function and it derails into anarchy. Society has to resist changes, resist not through threats of physical violence but through moral persuasion. It has to have a view, it can’t turn the other side and let individuals take up the reigns and dictate terms. Even if it does allow that, that too has to go through this process of movie beneath the prowling (or protecting as you wish to see it) eyes of the society.
m7gupta
Friend I will just say three things here
1 Any discrimination done on the basis of sex , caste or gender (whether by society or any
individual) is an evil
(in our world where a small act like a bride driving the groom to his home and leading the Bharat also becomes a sensational news and attracts brickbats from various pockets of society I don’t think womenfolk need somebody’s approval to get such tiny moments of joy and happiness in their lives which are so non threatening and in no way harmful to anyone)
2 Good you said (about your choice ) exactly what women are doing . I’m happy there are women who are making their choices and giving the society it’s freedom to have its opinion I’m happy there exist women who are being the change they want to see around them .I’m happy we have such women around us who can stand for themselves
3 Physical violence is a BIg NO. .Moral persuasion is already happening when we see both the genders-have started talking / acting on these issues amicably .
fgsjr2015
“Men yield choices, as sons to parents, as boyfriends to girlfriends, like fathers to children, as husbands to wives. Men do not necessarily choose what they wish to do and be, they are also driven by many hands, some visible some invisible. Let not the woman think that it is just their gender which is “enslaved” for to think of yourself to be a slave is to be one. We are all ‘enslaved’ …”
________
I sometimes wonder whether general male violence, philandering, sexism and controlling behavior toward girls/women is related to the same constraining societal idealization of the ‘real man’ (albeit perhaps more subtly than in the past)?: He is stiff-upper-lip physically and emotionally strong, financially successful, confidently fights and wins, assertively solves problems, and exemplifies sexual prowess.
Perhaps we need to be careful what we wish for. After all, I recall that, shortly after Donald Trump was sworn-in as president, a 2016 survey of American women — conducted not long after his abundant misogyny was exposed to the world — revealed that a majority of respondents nonetheless found attractive his alpha-male great financial success and confidence.
And then there are the guys on the opposite end of that spectrum (which basically includes me). The author of The Highly Sensitive Man writes in Chapter 1 (2019, Tom Falkenstein, pgs.11-13) : “You only have to open a magazine or newspaper, turn on your TV, or open your browser to discover an ever-growing interest in stories about being a father, being a man, or how to balance a career with a family. Many of these articles have started talking about an apparent ‘crisis of masculinity.’
The headlines for these articles attempt to address male identity, but often fall into the trap of sounding ironic and sometimes even sarcastic and critical: ‘Men in Crisis: Time to Pull Yourselves Together,’ ‘The Weaker Sex,’ ‘Crisis in Masculinity: Who is the Stronger Sex?’ and ‘Search for Identity: Super-Dads or Vain Peacocks’ are just a few examples. They all seem to agree to some extent that there is a crisis. But reading these articles one gets the impression that no one really knows how to even start dealing with the problem, let alone what a solution to it might look like. One also gets the impression from these articles that we need to keep any genuine sympathy for these ‘poor men’ in check: the patriarchy is still just too dominant to allow ourselves that luxury … ”