विडम्बना : आम इंसान होने की

कितने राजा आये,

कितने शेहेनशाह गुज़रे,

पर वोह वही रहा

किले फ़तेह कर लिए जाए,

या बनवा लिये जाए ताज कई,

मरता वो ही है

वोह जिससे पूछा भी नहीं जाता की वोह किसकी तरफ है,

मरता वोह ही है

किले फ़तेह करने में , ताज बनाना में,

और मेहेंगाई में भी,

मरता वोह ही है

गलती कोई भी करे

पर हरज़ाना उसकी पूरी कौम को भरना पड़ता है

पर उसमे भी भरता वोह ही है…

वोह जिसका इन बातों से कोई लेना देना ही नहीं,

वोह जिसे सिर्फ अपनी रोज़ी-रोटी की चिंता होती है,

मरता वोही है, सिर्फ वोही.

मरता वो ही है,

और उसके निशान रेत पे बनते है,

फिर लहरों के साथ चले जाते है…

समाप्त: इस उम्मीद के साथ की कभी शायद उसे भी ज़िन्दगी मिले

Why women's day

After Valentine’s Day, Women’s day is most debated upon. The need for a special day to celebrate womanhood has been contemplated by a diverse group ranging from kurta-clad intellectuals to male chauvinists. This article would give an insight into the debate, an insight about the celebration in the contemporary world and would explore if there is really a need for a special day.

The intellectuals are not a homogenous group. Some argue that a special day is actually a contradiction to the feminist goal of equality. They would argue for a “man’s day”. This demand for a “man’s day” is popular among many, including male chauvinists. To this, some feminists would retaliate by saying that all other days are actually man’s day. They would argue that Women’s day is important for the ‘empowerment ‘ of women. It is the celebration of a memory of women uprising and success. It is a hope and it should be remembered and cherished.

Today, Women’s Day is celebrated through seminars, panel discussions and street marches organized by colleges and civil society organizations, mostly in cities. It is celebrated by beauty salons and shops through discounts. It is celebrated through sms messages and facebook statuses. So ofcourse, it is largely an urbane and elite concept. It is ironical as the history of this day goes back to the section of working class women. The nearest it goes rural is when All India Radio announces it in the two-minute news before every programme. I wouldn’t say that women in urban areas or of elite classes are liberated but they are definitely at a better position. But the rural/non-elite side is not the only reason why I, like most others, becomes critical of this day.

I am also very cynical of what I call “overfeminisation” which is the other extreme. Overfeminisation is the process by which the whole world becomes divided into feminism and male chauvinism or feminism and femininity and all other identities including the human self is dissolved. As I look around, I find 8^th march to be another process of overfeminisation by ‘intellectuals’ who decide to call themselves ‘feminists’. 8^th March would become the most important day in the calendar. All promises against male chauvinism and the gendered society will be made on this day. I would see people writing about how oppressed we(mostly urban elite women) have been, the sacrificed that we have always made and how we should put a stop to it. There would be cases of situational “sisterhood”. Celebrating Women’s day seems to be an obligation.

It all seems like Globalization to me – rich becoming richer and poor remaining unchanged or becoming poorer. Women who are already “liberated” go gaga over this day, proving to any tom, dick and harry about how important this day is, while the underprivileged and the more discriminated section remains unvisited, remembering this day because it might feature as a GK question(this is if they reach the stage for a GK quiz).

But the question remains… Is there a need for a Women’s day? I think there is. Women’s day is, according to me, a celebration of a memory of women’s uprising. It celebrates a spirit and it is important to keep that spirit alive. It is true that this concept is largely an elite and urbane concept but instead of wiping out this day, it is important that we take this spirit to the rural. It is also true that like other festivals, this day is also being commercialized but even in commercialization, the safeguard of the “spirit” is in our hands. Women’s day doesn’t have to be a big affair but it has to be an important affair. It marks a memory and gives a hope.

The time when children were innocent

As kids, we had a desire to speed up the growing part and become adults. Adulthood meant an escape from the boring homework, having a lot more freedom and the power to decide. Ofcourse, now as adults, we like to laugh on that silly desire. It was silly but it was a very innocent one. We were too innocent to understand what adulthood would really mean. How that “freedom” would mean very little in front of that ever-increasing tension. We realize it now but it seems that parents these days don’t.

Recently, I came across an article in a TOI supplement, Education Plus, dated 12^th January 2012, about preschoolers and little kids learning to cook, wash cars and doing computers. I anyway never understood the concept of pre-schooling as 14 years of schooling is torturous enough for kids but this came as a major shock to me. I wondered what has gone wrong with parenting these days.

I remember how our parents would talk about their ‘golden’ childhood and would totally discard our idea of ‘fun’ in childhood. My mother had a serious disapproval for Cartoon Network and my computer buddies, Dave and Aladdin. They would talk about their vacations back in the villages and the “real” fun, as they used to put it. Every vacation, I was forced to engage in some ‘fun’ activity like dance, music or playing casio. We all grew up being compared with a neighborhood kid or a cousin. This was our childhood. We were more ‘privileged’ than our previous generation but the next and the current generation have a lot more, like cellphones before college, facebook accounts much before their teen years, the obsession with branded and fashionable clothes, in short, an over-exposure!

Now, I think that we were so much better-off. And I don’t feel any kind of happiness as I write this. I feel really sad that what they are losing out on what happens to be what kids are famous for i.e. innocence. Now, when I think of my childhood, I review all the mistakes that I ever made. Some of them were stupid and others, quite serious, yet I don’t feel any remorse because I was innocent. I was not trained enough to see all aspects of things. I realized and learned from my mistakes only with time. I learned all that, at the right age. I was ignorant, immature and imperfect. It was only with time that I started shedding some of them. I now feel that growing up is so beautiful. And as I realize this, I feel sad for these kids.

It’s not their age to learn how to cook or how to wash a car. Why do they need to do that? Are they being expected to be independent? I see kids in reality shows trying to express emotions which they are not even supposed to understand and I have nothing but pity for them. Why are they being expected to behave like adults? Most of the times, the judges don’t seem to know how to talk to kids. They end up discouraging the kids. But Why? Why are kids supposed to be perfect today! They are expected to sing their throats out, dance till their legs give away and express emotions which are way-ahead than their ages. So we have a preteen TV actress playing the role of a wife(not child bride) on a popular TV show. Is there a dearth of better actresses, I wondered. What was the need for playing with the psychological mind-set of the young actress?

I see preschoolers having their ears pierced and I wonder the need. I remember having the ear-piercing done when I was in third standard. I fail to understand why things are growing so fast.

I don’t think one can blame the kids! The questions should be directed to their parents, their guardians and these schools. What are they playing at? The World is moving on very fast… there is an upsurge in technology and one needs to be updated but not at the cost of destroying the beautiful child-like innocence. Why are we exposing them to a world for which they are not yet ready? Why are they taking away from their own kids what they cherish the most… the “golden” childhood? Why are the parents in such a hurry?

The schools consider this as a step to better ‘prepare’ the students. They are ‘preparing’ the students for what? This competitive world? The world is definitely become ‘meaner’ day by day and the competition is a reality. But this does not mean that we end up producing miniature adults, rather than kids. And all this is only worsening the competition. The schools may claim “innovative” methods to make learning “fun” but actually, it is indulging into a lot of “learning” for the kids, with these “extra-curricular” activities. The “Extra-curricular” activities which sometimes also include personality development, a concept which again I fail to accept for kids. If immaturity is bad, so is over-maturity.

Why cant we just let them be themselves… and enjoy their innocent childhood which they will cherish later in their lives, when they will ultimately struggle in this notorious, demonic world? Why cant we let kids be kids again?

I don't know if i am a feminist

I grew up playing with My bright-eyed Susan,

I grew up with My kitchen set,

Grew up buying clothes for My Barbie,

Wearing colourful frocks myself,

I grew up trying on my mother’s make-up

And with the scolding for the same,

I grew up admiring the gorgeous and always helpless heroines,

Grew up with secretly idolizing them,

Tried adopting the painful heels,

Subscribed to ask Pooja, Linda, Cathy.

But then one day,

The lightning of “liberation” stuck.

All this objectifies us, they alleged,

Makeup for male gaze,

Skirts for their fantasy.

My floaters replaced all other footwear,

Earlier the world was between feminine and masculine,

Now it was between feminine and feminist.

My friend’s bangles became a disputed issue,

A ‘girly’ voice became a target,

If earlier if it was all white,

Now it was all black,

Still no shades of grey.

And It was also internalized now…

And my mind was now a seat of conflict.

My mind, my conscience restricted me now,

Restricted me to follow the “restrictions”.

In breaking the “glass ceiling”,

I constructed a new one.

In ‘exploring’ myself,

I lost myself.

But now I wish to really break ‘free’.

And the ‘freedom’ may consist of

Going ‘back’ or moving ‘forward’,

May be full of contradictions,

Of hypocrisies and of confusions.

But then will this be ‘feminism’ I wonder?

But should I really care, if it is not, I wonder again.

Whether “WOMAN” has “MAN” in it

Or “MAN” comes from “WOMAN”,

It is ultimately we who shall decide

And this power of decision is Feminism,

Or atleast it is, according to me.

Rationality v/s Human emotions

The debate on the abolition of the ‘barbaric’ death penalty accompanies the “masala chai” these days. The sudden popularity is because UN has now declared it to be one of its never-ending missions to abolish this ‘draconian’ law . So now everyone everywhere seems to be discussing this ‘cruel’ law which exists only in few countries including India.

The proponents of “Human Rights” argue about how it is cruel to take someone’s right to life away. There are others who feel that punishment is given to reform someone. Capital punishment kills the ‘hope’ of reform. Some others argue, “an eye for an eye makes everyone blind”. They all, uninously, agree for a life imprisonment.

When I talk about how AFSPA has violated basic civil liberties like right to life, people argue how it is an ‘unnecessary evil’. “Without AFSPA, Kashmir and the north-east states will seccede so its important for the army to step in”, they argue. AFSPA is also important, according to them, because these states share an international border.

Naxals blowing up trains, blasts in crowded markets, communal riots…their source of ‘anger’ is explored. The ‘intellectuals’ analyze what must have ‘compelled’ the ‘grieved’ classes to have gone the violent way. They prove how the violence was reactionary and in a way, do end up ‘justifying’ violence.

The intellectuals view an issue with different lenses…there exists different schools of interpretation. The intellectuals are supposed to be having a broader outlook, unlike the narrow-minded commoners. But sometimes, in their outlook, the human angle is underplayed. It’s the battle between rationality and human emotions, for them.

On the debate concerning capital punishment, the grounds are human rights. They argue that criminals should not be killed because it infringes upon the basic civil liberties. But then are the human rights meant only for criminals? They had also taken away someone’s right to life. What about that? They say, punishment is meant for reform. I think there is a need for a reality-check. This may still hold some truth, to an extent, for small criminals but I wonder if mass-murderers, serial rapists and especially terrorists can ever be reformed!

People justify the draconian law of AFSPA(Armed Forces Special Powers Act) which has led to extra-judicial killings, illegal detentions, fake encounters, rapes and torture of the civilian population in AFSPA-affected regions in India. They argue how it is important for keeping the people ‘together’. Without AFSPA, they will go out of the Indian union. I wonder if they would share the same belief if they would have personally experienced or had a relative subjected to such a rule. It is scandalizing to even imagine the situation but which is a reality in J&K and North-Eastern states.

The human emotion of grief, loss is unimportant. In their debates, the ‘Intellectuals’ do not talk about the human perspective. They do not talk about their sufferings. I, sometimes, feel that maybe they can no longer understand it. Paradoxically, Marx had defined Ideology as “something which misinterprets reality”.

Sometimes I feel that the common people are stuck in between, with the oppressors above and the intellectuals below. 

I now realize what Rousseau had said, “The ‘uncivilized’ man is much more humane than a ‘civilized’ man”.

why women don't protest

I remember how we had dared to cheat during our board examination because there were boys in our class. Ofcourse, this is not a very good example to give but it reflects social reality. Expected to be honest is not gender discrimination but cheating requires guts and ‘team spirit’. Women are gutsy…ofcourse or else we would have been frozen in time and would have been still exchanged for a commodity. And yes they can and have united themselves as in during the feminist waves but the question then is of “how much”. Why is it that I find more women rebelling against the idea of feminism than men? Why is it that the ideas of the patriarchy are disseminated by women? Why is there no ‘womanhood’, ‘sisterhood’?

Simon De Beauvoir, author of the phenomenal “The Second Sex”, wrote “unlike other discriminated groups, women are not organized into a community. There is no women community. Women never use “we” for themselves”.

Sadly, I do agree with her. I am not talking about “girl power”, “the girl thing” here. Being a woman, I know that a woman gels better and deeper with a woman, than a man. Female bonding is deep…its beautiful. They say, even if a woman does not say anything, other women are able to understand what she is going through. Yes, I agree. They do understand but they don’t speak up. So why they don’t women stand for another woman? A better question is…why don’t they realize their own power?

I claim to find the answer in their nurture. We are nurtured to live in a shell. We are ‘moulded’ in that way. We are given dolls to play with but actually, we learn from them. We grow up imitating them. We have to be pretty, adorable and voiceless. A doll always has a very serene expression… a smile on her face. We never come across a sad-looking doll ever. So a woman also has to learn to be serene, calm no matter what happens to her. She has to accept the discrimination, injustice, brutality as her destiny. This is what is taught to her. She accepts it with pride as they say, only women have the power to suffer, to ‘sacrifice’. Women are wild, they say. They have to be ‘tamed’ , ‘controlled’. So our freedom is controlled. It is not just the freedom of mobility but also the freedom to raise our voice, to question, to make decisions and to dream.

We also grow up with the notion of ‘survival of the prettiest’. We have been taught to compete. So the beauty, the appeal of a woman is judged more by a woman, than a man. So if a guy finds a girl pretty or appealing, his friend will list out ten points that this girl have missed out on. We are made the ‘guardians’ of the culture. We have been taught to keep a check on each other. So you have women disapproving of another woman who has ‘dared’ to ‘venture out’. Because, this is how we are nurtured. We are expected to realize our womanhood only to uphold the discrimination so we unite and tell them to act like ‘women’. That’s our job.

I know I might receive some comments from my female counterparts calling me ‘traitor’, ‘betrayer’. I will be accused of conspiring against my own ‘community’ which does not really exist. But I don’t think I have done anything of what I might be accused of. I have dared to state the unfortunate reality. I have written this article to make them realize how society has forced us to conspire against each other…to be ‘betrayers’ to each other and has disapproved us to realize the power of our female bonding. We need to stand up...for ourselves and for each other. We need to realize what womanhood is really about. Women are ‘wild’ and so we have to be ‘tamed’, they say but in this wilderness, lies our liberation. We need to come out…we need to break the glass ceiling and for that, it has to be “we”.

Are there “Undeserving” females in your college?

Some years back when the girls had apparently scored better in maths than guys, the headlines read “even girls can do maths”…there was a very interesting FB status during the world cup inquiring if women could really understand cricket... there was this FB poll asking if the IQ of the girls was decreasing continuously… ofcourse, when you confront these people, they express surprise on not understanding the ‘joke’ and accuse us to be frustrated females. I am very used to this and had always ignored writing on this matter. But this had to come… and it came when someone talked about the ‘unfair’ women quota in some universities.

This article, however, is not a personal attack. This is an attempt to attack another common mentality or I should say illusion that people have. This article concerns itself primarily with the women quota which exists in JNU.

JNU needs no introduction…it is supposed to be the hub of the so-called intellectuals of this country. JNU also has one of the lowest fees and that’s another reason for the monstrous competition. Besides the standard SC, ST, OBC reservation…there are many other quotas as well. Among which is the women quota. The Women quota in JNU simply means a deduction of 5 marks which is just about 1%. The quota does not have an internal reservation. It is for women…irrespective of their locale. So apparently a lot of girls make it to JNU, every year. But is it only because of the quota? And is the quota unnecessary?

So apparently a lot of girls make it to JNU. The quota is held responsible. But is it that all the girls who are in JNU had 5 marks less than the required marks? Girls from the top institutions make it to JNU so are they actually that ‘undeserving’? That’s my point about the girls of the urban locale where supposedly the gender discrimination is minimal. Now let me talk about the girls of the small towns and rural locale. Opportunities are limited for them. Investment in the higher education for girls is still not very popular. Education in these regions is also not very competitive. So reservation for women is as important as reservation for the other long-discriminated sections of the society. It is not because girls are “less intelligent”… it’s because girls are “more discriminated against”.

I also remember this debate with a friend about the minimal female population in top engineering colleges. He argued how girls had less “logic”. Ofcourse, that’s another myth but I must admit I consider this better than “because girls think more with their heart, than brain”. Some days back someone tried arguing “scientifically” how women use the right side of their brain which is more creative so they are better in expression than “logic”. Men, on the other hand, are supposed to be using the left side of their brain which is more “logical”. My reaction to this so-called “scientific” crap has always begun with me expressing a great amount of surprise as inspite of being from a science background, they are unaware of the different schools of interpretation of facts which exist in science. So even in this very “objective” discipline, interpretation of the ‘objective’ facts is subjective.

Though there is a lot of confusion (different groups of scientists) about which side of the brain do women use, here I’ll try to argue by considering that women use the right-side of the brain. I am a female but I happen to be a left-hander and according to science, left-handers use the left side of their brain. Now left-handedness is supposed to be more common among males. But the famous left-handers are generally people associated with the “creative” domains. Any arguments? Also, I think it’s also a matter of how one defines “logic”. According to Hegel, logic is the essence of human thought. There can be no creativity without logic! Further, I would also talk about the sociology-biology debate which features in the study of evolution. It is believed that sociology or society can have an impact on our biology. The transition leading to human evolution took place when the apes due to societal tendencies preferred to settle on the land. So even if one ends up proving that some things are probably due to the nature and not nurture, one must remind himself/herself of the sociology-biology debate.

Let me come back to the issue of the engineering colleges. I think I’ll repeat my points about the societal set-up. If we analyze the regional background of people who generally make it to the top engineering colleges, we’ll find that majority of the people come from the lesser-developed regions. So for them, competition and making it to the top colleges is the only way-out. And in this endeavor, men are in the fore-front. Investment in a girl’s education is still not very widespread, it is negligible in these regions. Girls are recommended to go for the ‘soft’ subjects like history, political science etc. I also feel that the fact that girls can afford to neglect higher studies because of their later recruitment as homemakers may add to the laid-back attitude in these regions. Infact, there may be a lot of other reasons. But the source, as we have realized, is just one… the societal set-up.

So yes..the second gender may not be ‘deserving’ the quota but do they deserve this discrimination?