Desicritics

Security Tips From Delhi Police - Don't Cook "Smelly" Food!

Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:01:20 EDT

This is disturbing at so many levels that I don't know where to begin. The Delhi police has printed a booklet titled Security Tips for Northeast Students/Visitors in Delhi , which among other things, advises them to cover up to avoid being raped and not cook their 'smelly' food so there is 'no ruckus in the neighborhood'.

Firstly, there is the issue of "othering". As many are pointing out, why on earth are people from the north-eastern states being singled out for this helpful advice? The comments about food and the insinuation that they dress in revealing clothes are totally unnecessary and indicative of attitudes that are, frankly, frightening. The fact that the police think like this essentially means that if there is a 'ruckus' in the neighbourhood, they will blame somebody for cooking what they want in their own house! Food habits are intensely personal and closely tied up with cultural identity and if people cannot eat what they want in their own house, we may as well trash all notions of being a multi-cultural, secular country.

Secondly, for heaven's sake, how long are women going to be told to 'cover up' to avoid 'inviting' rape? Delhi has a dismal record as the most unsafe city in the country for women. As usual, instead of addressing the perpetrators and doing more to make the streets safer, the focus is being shifted to the women. Don't wear revealing clothes. Don't go on dates. Don't party late. Don't walk the streets. What next? Should we just wear veils and stay at home since between the beastly tendencies of men (which they can't control, apparently) and the hoary patriarchal attitudes of our legal and political institutions (not to mention, plain inefficiency), we are bound to get screwed (literally or otherwise)?

I'm sure we're all very grateful for the father figure-ly advice but it would be nice if the police stopped printing paternalistic pamphlets and got down to some actual work.

Link via Anjulika.

What Women Want

Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:05:01 EDT

I recently visited some villages on the India-Bhutan border and was particularly struck by the women of a particular settlement. They seemed strong, proud, free and independent - in ways that could put us city gals to shame. I thought they were eminently story-worthy. But the idea didn't fly with the editor of a popular women's magazine. All village women are content, industrious and easy-going, she said. What's so special about that? True enough. And this is a magazine I like reading, so I'm reading too much into it.

But I can't remember the last time a women's magazine gave an insight into the lives of women who live differently from its readers. Unless of course the difference is shocking or titillating in some way. Magazines can't really be blamed for providing what the readers want, I suppose. Which brings me to the question - what does the reader of women's magazines, i.e the average educated, urban woman want to read about?

If one looks at most of the women's magazines that do brisk business, the answer seems to be beauty, fashion, cookery, some gossip, sex tips, more fashion, more beauty. This then is the sum of a generation's interests, preoccupations and priorities. Fair enough.

Except that I strongly suspect that not all women want just this. They make do because really, what are the choices? In the West, the reaction to the excessive focus on beauty was Gloria Steinem's Ms Magazine, which proudly and firmly proclaims even today that they do not carry articles on "fashion, beauty, fitness, travel, food or of a 'self-help' variety". Slowly, a number of other magazines aimed at women who want to read something other than "Ten Sexy Outfits to Wow Your Client" sprang up.

So far, in India, there is no such move. Is it because Indian women clearly do not want to read about anything other than what is on offer? Or because we are conditioned to accepting what's dished out in this as in most other aspects of life? Or because those who want something different avoid the monthly subscriptions and trawl the Internet instead?

I don't particularly subscribe to the either-or mentality myself. I believe that feminist and fashionista don't have to be at opposite ends of the spectrum. You can be both. Or neither. Or a host of other things altogether. Why is it that the media doesn't recognize this? What's wrong with having a magazine that combines current affairs and cookery, politics and nail polish, summer dresses and serious literature? Why this need to pigeonhole women into neat, little boxes as if to tell us - here, this is where you belong. Now, fit in nicely.

What I'd like to know is what women really want. If you could pick and choose to make your own magazine, what would you choose?

Sexism, Threats and Internet Purdah

Wed, 9 May 2007 11:36:26 EDT

About two months ago, eminent tech blogger Kathy Sierra decided to stop blogging because of the horrific death threat comments she received, many of them explicitly sexual and violent. Last month, Jessica Valenti from Feministing talked about how the web became a sexists' paradise in her column at the Guardian. She mentioned her own experience with sexism in the blogosphere as well.

All of this leads me to wonder when this is going to catch up with us here in India. So far, women bloggers have been relatively safe because the blogosphere is dominated by a handful of left leaning liberals, many of whom decry bigotry at every opportunity. Not too far in the future, this may change. More people are becoming Internet-savvy. More people want a voice. More people are learning that blogging is an easy way to get one.

Feminism already has its share of urgent opposers in the blogosphere, some of whom hang out at Desicritics quite frequently. It may be only a matter of time before the rabid paranoia and misogynist hatred displayed against Kathy Sierra catches up with us here.

Even now, even without the threat of explicit sex or violence, many women bloggers tend to write under pseudonyms and refrain from using pictures. I don't have any statistics on the exact numbers of male bloggers who use their real identities either but I have a hunch that there are probably more. In her column, Jessica points out:

Some argue that the increased visibility afforded people by the internet - who doesn't have a blog, MySpace page, or Flickr account these days? - means that harassment should be expected, even acceptable.

and later,

"I think there's a tendency to put the blame on the victims of stalking, harassment or even sexual violence when the victim is a woman - and especially when she's a woman who has made herself public," says (Jill) Filipovic. "Public space has traditionally been reserved for men, and women are supposed to be quiet."

Ah, the old, timeless, tired argument. By showing themselves, being themselves, women are somehow 'asking for it'. The circumstances change; the specifics vary. The fundamentals remain the same. If you put your picture on Orkut, you are asking for a hundred hormonal boys to bombard your page with requests for friendship. If you use a real picture for your blog, you are asking to be judged on the basis of how you look instead of what you say. No wonder so many women feel that it's easier to hide. It's easier to lie. It is easier to choose purdah.

Some time last year, a rumour started doing the rounds about social networking sites. Posting your picture on the profile page was apparently dangerous because it could be stolen, tweaked and used by pornographic websites. Overnight, all my colleagues replaced their sunshiny, smiling photos with pictures of cartoon characters, flowers, birds, and faces edited to show just the eyes. Clever, yes. Creative even. Mostly, just afraid.

Undoubtedly, some people just don't want to be known because they like their privacy and this is their right. But I suspect that many women are uncomfortable with displaying their real identity--and certainly, with displaying their photographs--on the blogosphere because they are afraid of exactly the things that Kathy and Jessica have had to deal with: censure, criticism, judgment, sexual objectification and threats.

I have felt the fear too. I used to vacillate between posting my real picture and not posting anything at all until I started treading the middle path--using PhotoShop effects to obscure the features. Recently, the pictures have got clearer, truer.

Merely being oneself, showing one's true face in a public space cannot be, is not, an act of indiscretion or self-indulgence or exhibitionism. It's just somebody saying 'this is me', 'this is who I am'. It's important to remember that, no matter what space we are in. Even if it is just the Internet.