Yes, I am a Feminist

Feminism: A term more commonly used than understood. There is a lot of debate going over this for several years now and I see a lot of people use this as a cuss word these days as they feel feminists are just annoying women who dislike men and probably want to become men themselves.

Today I am busting 10 such myths surrounding Feminists.

(In this article, “I” represents every feminist.)

1. Myth: I hate men
   Fact: Feminists aren't a bunch of people who sit together and bitch about men.  I, like almost every other person, have several men in my life whom I love and respect. So, I  only dislike people (regardless of gender) who resist equality.
   
   
2. Myth: I believe women are superior creatures
   Fact: A true feminist believes in complete gender equality - male, female, transgender. Classifying me as a Goddess won't help me as I clearly know that women are not Goddesses but simple human beings like their male counterparts. I do not want a pedestal for women. What I demand, is equality!
   
   
3. Myth: I only wear "short clothes" or dress like a man.
   Fact: Actually, I simply wear what I want to wear and fight for every person's right to do the same. Therefore, I also support a man who wants to wear a dress or a skirt.

4. Myth: I am gay
   Fact: Being a feminist does not make me a gay person but it does make me a person who clearly knows that being gay is not a choice or an abnormality. It makes me a person who knows that when any two people, regardless of their gender, religion, or race come together in love - it is beautiful.
   
   
5. Myth: I will never marry.
   Fact: Marriage, unlike love, is a choice and it is MY choice. Hence, I will not marry when my neighbours or relatives want me to. I will only marry if and when I want to.
   
   
6. Myth: I will never cook or clean or take care of the house.
   Fact: I will cook, clean and scrub as much as my partner does. I am a member of the house and I will fulfill my duties to the best of my ability but I will also make sure that the duties are not assigned on the basis of my gender. Familial duties need to be divided among the members depending on their age and ability and not their gender.
   
   
7. Myth: If I am a true feminist, I should go work with an NGO
   Fact: Supporting basic human rights does not mean that one necessarily has to join an NGO or become a selfless volunteer. Although it is a very noble thing to do, not everyone has the luxury or the guts to do so with unpaid loans and bills to be taken care of. However, as a feminist, I do stand up against gender inequality at home, at work and among friends and I encourage other women to do the same.
   
   
8. Myth: I too am a sexist as I use the term "Femini-st".
   Fact: The word is popularly used only because there is a huge social divide between the genders currently. Since, the condition of women is so plightful at present, the term is simply used as a tool to spread awareness and to encourage women to stand up for themselves. I hope that the day would soon come, when this terminology is not needed at all.
   
   
9. Myth: If I am a feminist, I am a woman.
   Fact: Anyone who demands equal rights for every gender is a feminist. I am fortunate to know many male feminists who fight for equal rights for every gender and I am unfortunate to know a good number of females who resist equality.
   
   
10. Myth: I rant about the same “equality” and “rights” thing over and over again.
    Fact: I wouldn't need to... if  you would have listened the first time!

Follow my blog with Bloglovin

The Silenced Freedom of Speech

Two recent events prompted me to write this as a continuation to my last post. Though inherently identical, incidentally, one took place in the east and the other in far west. One took place in a developing country with a central, countrywide ubiquitous judicial system and the other in a developed country with varying state laws. One occurred in a country which is still considered orthodox and conservative in various ways and the other in a country which is supposedly more liberal and reformed.

What was it that was so despicably identical globally despite all disparities of language, tradition, culture, economics, demographics and so on?

 

The first incident (not chronologically) was in India. The withdrawal of the book “The Hindus: An Alternative History” by the publishers, Penguin Books India.

The book was pulled by the well reputed and internationally acclaimed publication house after a long legal battle that began when a Hindu nationalist group filed a suit against the publisher, claiming the book deprecated and trivialized Hindu religion and comprised “deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.”
                 
                   The publishers have been globally criticized for their decision, specially by writers like Arundhati Roy, William Dalrymple, Neil Gaiman, and Hari Kunzru, as well as organizations like the National Book Critics Circle and the global community of writers PEN International.

                    Though it may be agreed that the publisher's decision was not a brave one, it is also noticeable that there must be a reason why an arguably inconsequential religious group could shake up a publishing giant. Penguin Books has subtly indicated that it is not happy with its own halfhearted and hesitant decision regarding the book. It says:

 

"it is increasingly difficult for any Indian publisher to uphold international standards of free expression without deliberately placing itself outside the law."  

 

                      This brings forth the question of why such dilapidated religious laws are still existent in a secular republic which result in diminishing literary freedom.

 

Why is it so easy for any random group to have its way with every whim and fancy?

 

Why is the Indian reader considered so unintelligent that he can not decide which books he should read and take influence from?

 

Why have autonomous religious and political bodies with half baked ideas become censors for literature and other media? 

                       

                        Not having read the book in discussion yet, I can not comment if it is a worthy read or not. Critical reviews of the book seem mixed and the theme has not yet roused my interest. Therefore I do not have much information regarding the treatment of the subject matter by the author Wendy Doniger. I also do not know if there is a representation or misrepresentation of the said religion in the book.

                       
                        Despite not having any interest in any religion by any means, I still am very well aware that religion is so huge in itself that a mere book, even if it is incoherent or trivializing (not quoted with reference to the book in question) can not offend a religion.

 

Therefore, people who make the most hue and cry are the ones who do not understand the purpose and magnanimity of religion.

No religion requires such insufferable torch bearers to go on dictating appropriateness of speech and vision.
                       
                        Hence, as a reader and an adult citizen with an independent, fully functional cerebrum of my own, even I am highly "offended" when a group of random people unlawfully edict what I should read/write/watch/speak. If I can elect the government of my country, I can very well decide what I want to read or pass.

                         If someone feels genuinely hurt by a piece of literature, that person has the full liberty to defend and propagate his/her own ideas by bringing forth another, better piece of literature. That would be the recourse of the sensible -

Fight the ink with ink and the pen with pen.

 

After all, the country progresses by creating the new and not by destroying the old.

 

 

The second incident which I feel was even worse, was witnessed in US over an innocent bowl of cereals.

In their advertisement a little girl goes asking her mother if the said cereals were good for heart. The mother answers in affirmative describing some nutrients mentioned on the box. In the next scene the girl's father who was sleeping on the couch gets up with the cereal poured all over his chest. Apparently, the daughter has taken her mother's words literally and emptied the cereal box over her dad's chest to keep his heart healthy.

So, one would assume that the general reaction to the advertisement would be.."awwwwww..cute!!" Or.."hey..that's funny!!" Or.."well.. its just another cereal commercial."

However, it seems the most popular reactions to the advertisement were "****" & "#@$!$%#" & beep-beep!

 

You wonder why? So did I, until I saw the comments posted on its youtube video. The hateful comments suggested in the foulest language possible that the family shown in the commercial was multi-racial which was somehow "disturbing".

 

                           The words used to denounce this harmless commercial were blatantly racist, abusive and abhorrent. These commenters who apparently were born atleast 200 years back, continued increasing in numbers over the Internet, demanding that the cereal company must retract the commercial. Although the cereal company did not withdraw the ad, eventually, the comments got so vulgar that the comment section on youtube for this video was disabled.

                            It was absolutely shocking to see such atrocious display of racism in a country which is considered very liberal by global standards. However, this was not the first episode of such kind in this country. There have been sporadic bursts of negative energy from such ignorant sections of the population time and again. 

Hence, it is evident that unwanted censorship of media based on racism, religionism, regionalism and hoodlumism is still persistent in developed and underdeveloped parts of the world alike.

                             Clearly, it all comes down to the fact that globally, it is the ignorant fraction of population which has become the governing authority for speech and a regular reader/viewer/writer/creator has no say in it whatsoever. The freedom of speech or expression is now a myth for most of us and fighting for literary and social liberation is a long and tiresome struggle.

What should we do? Give up or keep the battle going?

The answer lies in the question- 'What do YOU say?'

 

Disease Diagnosis - The Indian "Offence Fever"

The Disease: "Offence Fever"

Scientific Name: Offencium Pyrexia

This disease which is effecting 1 in every 10 Indians has become a cause of national concern. A huge chunk of population is suffering from this disease and the rest of us are suffering due to this disease. The patients suffering from this disease become schizophrenic and believe they are in an era where it has become fashionably intellectual to get offended in general. Hence, they feel obligated to meticulously search for things that can be qualified as "offensive". The patients are in pain and hence make it their job to be a pain for other people as well. The disease is communicable and spreads rapidly due to low IQ, joblessness and excessive interference in the lives of other people.

Symptoms:

1. Patients become paranoid and start hallucinating about being the official censors for everything that they see or hear.
2. Patients often engage in vandalism of public property. They burn down theatres, burn down posters, burn down cars, trains ,houses...well, basically anything that is flammable.
   
3. Patients suffer from amnesia and forget completely that they have the choice of not seeing, doing or hearing the content which seems “offensive” to them.
4. Patients generally refrain from talking or even thinking about any important issues such as children welfare, anti corruption, anti rape laws and rant only about issues like who should wear what and who should marry whom.
5. Chronic patients go to parties and beat up women, engage in honor killings, assume gay sex is unnatural and even believe that clothes and eatables (e.g. chowmein) provoke rapists!! At this stage the disease is generally incurable and highly contagious. Hence the patient should be dealt with sympathy and quarantined.

Analysis:

Myth	Fact
Patients suffer from pain when the disease attacks the brain tissues associated with religious, political, cultural or patriarchal sentiments .	Patients generally have no brains to be attacked. The pain is actually due to over stuffing of the empty skull with unnecessary information & gossip about other people.
Movies, internet and books are the vectors for this disease.	Stupidity and ignorance are the vectors for this disease.
Literacy is the vaccine for the disease.	Education is the vaccine for the disease.

Education pertains to reading and understanding the printed or spoken words with an open mind whereas literacy pertains to just reading the words.

Prevention:

As discussed above, the disease is extremely serious and not at all rare but the following practices may keep you safe.

Dos

1. Read, read, read and understand what you read.  
2. Respect the rights of others and also stand up for your rights in the right manner.
    

Don'ts

1. Do not read, watch or hear any irrelevant content that may offend you. (If the content is relevant and is genuinely harmful to the society, do something constructive about it instead of burning things down .)
2. Do not argue with chronic patients as you may suffer severe and irreversible brain damage.

Disclaimer: It is noticeable that as the times are moving ahead, the line of tolerance for us Indians is shifting backwards. The internet, the press, books, speeches, movies, plays, neighbours, relatives, clothes, food, somehow have all become medias that "offend" some or the other person. Hence, I solemnly declare that the above article is not meant to offend any human of any religion, gender, race or colour in any part of the world or space.

Please do let me know your views and home remedies against this disease!!

 

 

image courtsey: www.thehindu.com