|
Here
are two statements that I came across in print on the same day a
couple of years ago.
The first: Not only do we [Indians] respect women, we also worship
them.
The second: [One factor] greatly responsible for the ferocity of
India’s [AIDS] epidemic is the shamefully oppressed state of
Indian women. The conditions of women in India are still amongst
the worst of any society in the world, certainly far worse than in
most African countries.
Now these assertions cannot both be true. Which do you think is
false, or at least has less truth in it? While you decide that,
I’ll tell you where I found them. The first is from an article
by Pramod Navalkar, once minister for cultural affairs in the Shiv
Sena/BJP coalition that ruled Maharashtra from 1995 to 1999. The
article explained certain measures Navalkar put in place while he
was minister. These are “curbs on obscenity” and “a check on
the westernised hungama in theatres”, which he claims
were a “misuse of the freedom of expression granted by the
Constitution.”
“Selling the female body”, wrote once-minister Navalkar, “is
not our culture.”
The second statement is from an alarming book: Siddharth Dube’s Sex,
Lies and AIDS. Five million Indians, Dube wrote in 2000, were
already infected with HIV, and two million had already died. By
2005, he estimated, there would be 40 million of us infected, with
substantial concentrations of those in large cities like Bombay
and Pune. How much is 40 million? Think about travelling at peak
hour in one of Bombay’s suburban trains. In 2005, about 15 of
those jammed into the compartment with you will be infected with
HIV. (The compartment, not the whole train).
Dube says the HIV/AIDS epidemic is “India’s greatest health
problem today, as well as a potent threat to our economic and
development prospects.” He also thinks it is inevitable that the
epidemic will spread to the “highest levels reached today in
Africa: one in three adults.” That’s 200 million Indians.
Think of what it means to know that every third man or woman you
see around you in India is infected with HIV.
Now there are several reasons Dube lists for this frightening
state we are in, for the more frightening prospect that’s ahead.
One of those reasons is what he calls “the terribly low status
of Indian women.” He discusses various indicators of this low
status, which I will not get into here. You should read the book
and see if it persuades you.
But what I couldn’t help doing then, and still do today, is
marvel at the gap between Dube’s and Navalkar’s assertions.
And in fact when I wrote an article about this two years ago, I
was flooded with angry responses that echoed Navalkar. “Indians
put women on a pedestal,” one wrote. “Is there any Western
country that does that?”
I don’t know, nor do I particularly care. But of late, I’ve
been thinking of Dube, Navalkar and women in India and the West.
Partly, this is because of the experience of a young friend of
mine. An architecture student in England, she’s in Bombay for a
few months as an apprentice with a well-known city architect. Her
first month was a series of ever more appalling incidents. Men hit
on her nearly every day. Some sat, practically, on her in buses,
shifting closer as she tried to edge away. On the street, other
men propositioned and chased after her. A rickshaw driver actually
reached back and tried to fondle her. A well-known model, married
with a child, actually followed her in his car, got out and rode
up in the lift with her to the landing outside her flat, leaving
her alone only when he heard voices inside. On the Bandra seafront
for a walk with a friend, she heard young women – her age,
dressed like her – shouting “bitch!” at her.
I listen to these experiences with growing horror and impotent
anger. I feel for her, of course. I also cannot help asking myself
where that famous “worship” is.
The other reason I’ve been thinking about these issues is the
recent news about India’s child sex ratio (CSR), defined as the
number of Indian girls for every thousand boys (age zero to six).
From 945 in 1991, India’s CSR has slid to 927 in 2001. That’s
bad enough. But worse is that the steepest declines have come in
prosperous areas like Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat
and Navalkar’s own Bombay, some of which have fewer than 800
girls for every 1000 boys.
The simple reason for these dismal facts is also familiar: the
strong Indian preference for sons, and what that preference makes
too many Indians do.
A recent booklet released by Sushma Swaraj, Minister of Health,
comments: “[O]ne of the significant contributors to the adverse
child sex ratio in India is the practice of elimination of female
foetuses.” It also quotes a mother saying: “The girl child is
killed by putting a sand bag on her face or by throttling her ...
It is not a rare phenomenon; it happens without any hindrance.”
So much for respect and worship.
One response to that article I mentioned I wrote came from a
woman. “We women don’t want to be worshipped,” she wrote.
“We don’t want to be on anyone’s pedestal. Just treat us
like human beings, that’s enough.”
Words fit to be put on a pedestal themselves. Then again, maybe
not.
|
