It is the Question of Our Social Mentality

Mrinal Pande in her informative article in Ravivari Jansatta dated 17^th Feb. 2013 referred to traditional Indian mentality governing our attitude towards various aspects of our life. Of late many incidents took place which showed that even in this era of globalization and liberalization when many traditions are giving way to so- called modern norms the typical traditional Indian mentality of inequality and exploitation still reins our attitude to life.

One such incident was the brutal rape and murder of a young women on 16^th Dec. 2012 which shook the capital and the members of civil society were on the roads of capital city Delhi braving police lathis and water canons. But what were we demanding –security from the patriarchal state. We were not asking the State create such conditions which would enable the women to enjoy the Right to Equality enshrined in the Fundamental Rights chapter of our Constitution. Implementation of Right to Equality for women implies that men have to exercise restrain on themselves. In our present days patriarchal set up men think it is their monopoly to move around in any form anywhere and any hour of day and night. Women have to be so called ‘properly clad’ and properly escorted and at the top of it has to venture out during earthly hours only. Therefore, when security was demanded politicians of all hues and shades, religious leaders and even the leaders of the so called cultural organizations came out with their outdated patriarchal comments and sermons that women should mind their limits. The Prime Minister, the Home Minister, supported the demand saying that the prevailing unsafe environment was their concern too. After all both of them were the poor fathers (each having three daughters ). Even in that tense environment nobody took affront to this remark. We all know fathers of three sons do not project themselves as hapless beings. The moral of the story is that we might criticize patriarchy .But we have not shed our patriarchal attitudes.

Secondly it is our traditional mindset to pay back in the same coin. Naturally securing justice according to this mentality the killers should get killed, not creating such environment that in future innocent persons do not loose their life and liberty without any rime and reason. Therefore, the  spokespersons of the movement were demanding new law prescribing death sentence for rape knowing fully well that no law could be applied with retrospective effect. There were enough reports showing omissions and commissions in the implementation of existing laws that gave free hand to the perpetrators of crime. But there was no pressure on the authorities to get the officers responsible for these omissions and commissions punished. They were not made accountable inspite of Verma Commission’s strictures on Delhi Police. Now the whole attentions is on Verma Commissions Report for which the autonomous women’s movement is congratulating itself and the ordinance issued by the Government.

In the traditional Indian society we have the culture of treating some as more equal than others. This was fully reflected here. The anger was on perpetrators of crime  and lower level police functionaries. It was being repeatedly asserted that they come from the same background therefore anti women.(There is enough data to prove that at higher level too insensitivity towards women is rampant.) The difficult conditions in which these lower level police functionaries operate was not their concern. The higher level officers who have all the facilities, and powers were not made accountable for the failures of the lower level ones. One got an impression that it were the poor rural or migrant who made the environment for women unsafe not the alienation of city life.

Another incident which  showed how deep rooted was caste in the Indian mindset was the observation made by Prof. Ashish Nandi at Jaipur literary festival. It is interesting to note that  nobody not even Prof. Nandi justified the words he used. But all of his supporters were trying to cover up in the name of freedom of expression. At the same time protesters were being told that they could not grasp the seriousness and originality of Prof. Nandi’s  ideas.  In this way they were trying to divert the attention from the main issue whether Prof. Nandi  

violated the Act enacted to prevent atrocities on SCs and STs. In the process they completely ignored Article 17 of our Constitution abolishes untouchability. They were by their  arguments indirectly re-enforcing it. Finally Supreme Court advised Prof Nandi to be careful in future. But the supporters still did not give in and continued their defense of Prof. Nandi. In this whole exercise they forgot untouchability . To make this fundamental Right  a reality for the SCs using castist language has been made illegal. How can rights of untouchables get priority over upper castes right to freedom of expression is a moot question. Luckily  the Supreme Court Prof. Nandi not to hurt the feelings of people by his utterances.