The Generation Gap Between Indian Feminists Over the issue
of “me too”.
When the “me too” movement began in 2006, initiated by
Tarana Burke, and was popularized by Alyssa Milana on October 15, 2017, in support of the victims
of sexual predators, no one thought the movement would become a global one. Men
and women get raped, seduced and molested, and parents spend most of their
time, worrying about the eventualities of these, without turning the children,
in turn, into nervous zombies. How can one protect young people of the dangers
that lie in the world outside, how can one make sure that they don’t get
attacked in a hotel room, or a bus, or on the train, in the staircase, or in
the backyard, or the front porch? Or in the classroom?
Parents in India presumed that their own vigilance would be one way, and so, middle class kids got escorted
everywhere. Their parents waited for them at bus stops, and constantly, in the
mobile phone era, kept track of their movements, and gated them if they came
later than the prescribed hour. However, the trusted neighbor, the uncle who
dropped in for meals, the family friend, all evaded the eyes of the guardians.
The child would whisper the awful secret to a sibling, and they would be very
careful to avoid the prying hands of the adult relation of the inner circle.
They would never forget the trauma, the desire to run and hide, the desperate
urge to tell parents never to let that person into the house again, but they
could not…the intimacy was too close, the parents were dependent on that
person. His guile was too subtle, and he never got caught. Quite often, these
were men who were respected in their religious organisations, and had a wife
and children of their own, and rose to occupational positions of some worth. In
the white collar classes, these men were known to travel, own houses and cars,
including holiday homes and were occupationally respected.
The reason women never told their guardians was that they
would not be believed. The response would be ”Oh no, you misunderstood. He is a
sweet loving fellow! Doesn’t mean anything.” That is why, the predator
continued to fondle in private. Because no one really believed the victim. If
they had, then the entire known structure would collapse like a house of cards.
Between a child’s fear and a young women’s rage is a quantum
of emotion. The pederast remains a type of his own, may he rot in hell as long
as he lives.
The adult who molests a woman at work is not very different
from that friendly uncle or intrusive cousin.
So why did the feminists in India fall into two groups, and
ignore the warning signs that came with the notice that Raya Sarkar had asked
women to name predators, on whose behalf she would fight court cases? The very
fact that women came up to name a large number of academics is a statement of
great significance, as it is not easy to go public on questions of sexual
intimidation. These young women felt that they now had the backing which society gave them, that there was world-wide
attention being given to a pathological mode of interaction, and silence was
not an option.
Many of us as young women, whether married or not, had been ourselves subject to sexual advances. We
ignored them. The predator was insistent, and beguiling, while he used the cloak of the
family to protect himself. The wife was someone who did not understand him,
therefore the field was open for a new relationship. The guarded nature of this
liason was that it was made clear the man would never leave his family. Sexual
misconduct was not the question, as seduction requires two people to be in an
entranced relation. Ofcourse, the woman could not complain to university administration against a friend.
She had been invited or forced into a relationship, the terms were very clear.
The oppressiveness of the situation was more than evident, and yet, hierarchy,
youth, horror, disgust, fear, sorrow, incapability of release from a situation
which locked her in, made her the unwilling recipient of these advances. Although
she spoke to many friends, no one could help her to escape the familiar, the
contemptuous, the sense of being forced into emotional slavery in a secret
relationship. This dyadism is born of an intellectual dependence, of loving the
subject, or the discipline one studies
more than one’s life, of finding an intellectual soul mate, but a fearsome
one, older than one, with whom to share
ideas and work. This Heloise and Abelard type relationship, however, has no legitimacy, no core of love or
recognition, but intimate proximity in
terms of time and space holds the card. When the project is over, there is no
wrenching for the man, as his stakes are higher, he has to keep continually
moving. For the woman, it is the remembrance of something to which she was
drawn into, against her better judgment, because the more powerful one said,
“Enter here, of your own free will.”
Since these are relationships which are born of mutual
understanding of shared interests, and women are generally trained to be
subservient to powerful men, particularly if they are their teachers, not a
word reaches the rest of the world. Too much was at stake…careers, future
employment, and the possibility that in the end, freedom from the male
supervisor after submission of the theses, would be the only way that this captive
relationship would end.
But we do have cases of young women holding older male
professors to ransome. No sex is to be had out of these relations, except the
cuddling and handholding, and expense account configurations which are typical
of such liaisons. The elderly professor has already finished with procreation
and is now looking for a comfort zone in which he can continue his productive
work. Out comes the whip, from the female’s unisex belt, and what follows is the mirage of false promises, and the
transcendental space of continual ‘making
up’. Society is aware of this, but turns a blind eye. Female agency, youth and
ambition all combine, but once the work is completed, and middle age with its
slowness and calming sensibilities has set in, the woman looks for marriage. This
is the institution which she herself had lewdly reviled while entering
knowingly into a relationship which promised gratification and knowledge.
The older generation of feminists, who have been victims
themselves at some point or the other, only wish that the younger women who
have lined up to point accusing fingers
at other women’s husbands, would be specific. There is a point they are making.
Give it in writing, not to Raya, but to the authorities, they all nobly
proclaim, though as radicals they have no real belief in their institutions,
seeing it all as enforced red tape today.
Here, it must be remembered that these older feminists came out with some
significant achievements. The Vishaka Guidelines in 1997, which laid down norms
for women in the workplace, essentially drew from a long and interesting
sojourn in seminar rooms in JNU, the leaders of which were Ayesha Kidwai and
Aniya Loomba, two of the scribes of the
deliberations being Karuna Chanana and Zoya Hasan. Men and women joined in
these meetings, which led to the
recommendations of the GSCASH or Gender Sensitivity Against Sexual Harassment.
It is this institution which has been disbanded by the present Vice Chancellor
of the JNU, who owes his meteoric rise to RSS allegiance.
Essentially, older
professionally stable feminists, which includes males sympathetic to feminism, are
saying that, “You cannot name a person as predatory, unless you do it
institutionally, and wait for due process.” There are friends they have in the
list, who are part of their circle, people whom they trust and know, and they
cannot imagine that such people would be vile or sexually pathological. Because
they themselves, are strong women, who if touched, against their will, verbally assaulted, molested or raped, would
immediately go to the authorities, they believe that this list, projects names
with the intent to ruin reputations, and might well be the result of unrequited
love by the student. There is no dialogue possible between the powerful
feminists, and the angry young women out there, because finally, the women who
have signed up with Raya are saying that they were treated badly, in positions
of mutual trust and are ready to go to court. Why would they say that, except
that they have been wounded severely in the dirty touching game, and are
willing to pay the costs of their speech acts, including the publicity and the
exclusion that quickly follows, when women own up to having sexual relations,
whether willingly or unwillingly?
Society, we believe, has mechanisms of legal redressal, for those who are innocent,
and those who are depraved. The truth is that, statistically, the women who
have been molested, usually have to
leave the work place, and the men continue to be gainfully occupied. When the
men are named, they tend to say that it was a mistake on their part, and they
should be allowed to go on sabbatical. So the system gives them a reward for
their omission. As for the woman she never forgets how she was humiliated,
abused, scorned, and pushed aside. If we had a system where men admitted their
mistake, and were willing to be cross examined, the bases of the benefit of
doubt may be placed, after the statements are compared. Was it a mistake, (like, falling in love with a student), or was
it intentioned as lascivious behavior, or worse, rape? Alas, the fact is that,
the male professor always confirms his innocence, in the face of the weeping
student, who has visited his apartment at night, because she was summoned by
him. When men and women professors as elders protect the predator, it is an
offence by law.
This generation of young women say that they want to take
names, and don’t care for the consequences of their carefully considered action, because a 24
year old lawyer called Raya Sarkar is offering them a chance to have their
trauma told in court. So be it.
Susan Visvanathan is Professor of Sociology at JNU, and is
the Professional Excellence Award Fellow at Department of Sociology, Central
European University, Budapest for 2018. She is the author of Adi Sankara and
Other Stories, Papyrus Press, 2017.
