Last week marked the International Women's Day. Rather, International Working Women's Day, to use the term it started out as. Today, all kinds of folks fall over each other to mark the date, from conservatives to feminists, and everyone in between.
Anyone who believes in equality and fairness cannot be opposed to such celebrations. In fact, a lot more is needed, as our generation (and the immediate earlier one) goes about re-negotiating the social contract between the genders. The Bengaluru-based doctor Anil Abraham has this good light-hearted (?) look at Women's Day, which puts across things very poignantly.
It begins with him saying: "I wished... Kamala. Happy Women's Day. She said, 'What is happy about it?'" He then goes on to make some very sharp points, all in the guise of humour. See http://alturl.com/zi3ih
Dig at male attitudes,
female expectations
In doing so, he takes a dig at both male attitudes and also women's expectations. This, on this day which has got so much traction in our times, that it even figures in the radio headlines, which, as always, are dominated by Prime Minister Modi doing or saying something.
Yet, every once in a way, one gets the feeling that something's wrong. That the debate is going somewhat astray, targeting questionable windmills, and even running amok with its goals. From a supporter of feminism in my teens, I am now at a position of being deeply conflicted. While still a votary for equality and an end to discrimination in whatever form, one feels the debate is simply being overstated, exaggerated and derailed.
Everything related to men (and their style of interactions) is treated as toxic masculinity. Masculinity is itself seen as inherently problematic. Differences in how women and men treat their career, hours worked, and the job types chosen are misinterpreted as the 'gender-pay gap'. There are one-sided views on domestic violence; harassment can go beyond plain physical violence.
Men's issues are mostly ignored, even while men are committing most of the suicides. There are legal double-standards favouring women, over divorce, child-custody and even criminal sentencing.
Patriarchy blamed
for everything
'Patriarchy' is quickly blamed for anything and everything. A quick online search will tell you this: Patriarchy is hypothetical social system in which the father or a male elder has absolute authority over the family group (Britannica).
Historically, the term patriarchy has been used to refer to autocratic rule by the male head of a family; however, since the late 20th century it has also been used to refer to social systems in which power is primarily held by adult men (Wikipedia).
If you contest the issue, then you could face charges of mansplaining, manspreading, himpathy, toxic masculinity, womxn, the male gaze, resting bitch face (after all, it's sexist to expect women to always appear pleasant), microagressions, period privilege, bropropriating. The best of the lot is perhaps Feminist Glaciology.
You might wonder if you're falling for a hoax here, but search online for an academic paper arguing that studying glaciers should include feminist perspectives, to avoid 'masculine biases'.
On International Women's Day, in one discussion online, a woman explained a case of sexual harassment, and asked men what they were doing to halt this. Obviously, there are serious issues which women still face, and these cannot be swept under the carpet. However, to blame half the planet of the population, because of the misbehaviour and transgressions of a few, is both grossly misleading and unfair.
Shift in the focus
of feminism
At the end of the day, women do face a lot of issues. Men too have a responsibility in fixing these. All of us have our sisters, mothers, daughters and wives; anything going wrong anywhere should be of concern.
However, a lot of water has flown down the Mandovi since the 1970s, when the issue was not even acknowledged. Today, the boot is on the other foot. The case is simply too overstated and one-sided.
Feminism focuses on urban and middle-class women. The privilege of powerful men is pointed to, while large swathes of the less-affluent, less-powerful males is conveniently overlooked. As women get a greater share of power in society (this is true in education, the job market, and many places except politics and the corporate world), one has to see how they use their new-found power and influence.
While 'patriarchies' have been roundedly criticised, will 'matriarchies' be any better? How do Western concepts get translated into the concerns of women in India? Above all, can women campaigners raise their issues without overdoing the adversarial rhetoric that often marks this debate? Today, many online campaigners note that imbalances in power are about power. Not gender. An affluent woman would surely be more powerful than a dozen or more down-and-out males.
Men themselves
feeling powerless
Women, like any section of society which feels or is disempowered, needs everyone's support. But, if they blame others while attempting to get this, it's unlikely to work.
The worst hit are men who might themselves feel powerless, for any number of reasons. Or, those who have a record of being fairly well behaved, but are somehow judged as guilty merely on account of their gender. This happened during the 'Me Too' campaign. If not careful, we are not far away from "All Men Are Rapists" arguments.
In our college days, quite a few of us men would be quick to empathise with women's campaigners, and even feminists. We subscribed to magazines like MANUSHI (long before its founder-editor Madhu Kishwar did an about turn, and turned into a complete Modi acolyte). Today, you find a number of women who would have nothing to do with feminism. That tells us something.
