On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Ravi Bellur <[email protected]> wrote:
> I must admit in my time here I am somewhat surprised at the bullshit women
> have to put up with here, and that they seem to put up with it. If they want
> this to end they need to fight back (metaphorically through many channels:
> political, legal, community, self-defense, etc.). It can be done and there
> will be conscientious people who may happen to have a Y chromosome who will
> help, on principle.

Men do support the women in their lives but that support may not
extend to "all" women in the public sphere. The support also does not
necessarily translate into a "women-friendly" policy/action in a
public level. I see a difference, as in, she could be self-sufficient,
educated (or less), emancipated (or not), independent, free thinking
individual but her immediate family and friends would be her only
source of support.  While a man who might be protective of women in
his family and want them to be free, etc...  he would hardly feel
guilty while assaulting a female stranger and care less about helping
her or extending the similar freedom he takes for granted and enjoys.


> I'm still trying to comprehend on what basis single women in an apartment
> can be so nefariously dangerous. I don't think I get it (it being the
> specious reason that these landlords believe).

Here, society (at large) views women differently and as far as public
spaces go, the lack of a support system (no 911 , legal and health
support systems or anti-abuse laws) is glaring. She does have it tough
as change is easier imagined than implemented. Partly because in the
last decade some changes have been very rapid and made inroads (even
into rural India)... the influx of foreign channels, aspirational
changes, growth in economy, some legal changes in inheritance laws
(and also those like : not insisting on giving a fathers name to the
child in school, women can retain their last name, single (never
married) women adoption facilities, ...), etc.

The biggest and most visible change was women being allowed to go to
school and University (and hence being  allowed to travel distance to
pursue a career and financial independence), something the earlier
generation of women and her grandmother's generation never got. Hence,
women are *expected* to be grateful for that freedom and yet *taught*
that her final destiny is still marriage (and kids) and creating a
good home.  I doubt if culture or tradition has anything to do with it
as different people interpret the word "family" differently.

My unscientific analysis is, the pressure just upped for women with
each generation wherein, while there is newer changes, there is no
reduction in the expectations or responsibilities (or housework) she
does. These have increased and the demand for a "super woman" is even
more. The corresponding change of men handling house work or looking
after babies has not gone up.  While the social stigma for a divorcee
or a widow is less, her responsibilities towards family have not
reduced.  Here, Sita is oft cited as the epitome of a dutiful wife and
yet certain aspects of her life (refusal to prove her virtue
(agnipariksha) and choice of leaving her sons and her husband instead
of walking on fire) are rarely highlighted as virtuous and worthy of
following. The blinded one-track views and
"lets-discard-the-unpalatable-bits" of the cultural/traditional
brigade that uses mythology/religion to subjugate women is the scary
part.


> I come from a country where
> almost everyone has premarital sex (men AND women), and with mutiple
> partners in serial (sometimes in parallel for the kinky types) over time,
> before they get married. Plenty of dating. And we're prudes compared to the
> Europeans or Aussies. People make their choices of their free will with

Allow me to cite some differences. It may not be directly related and
yet "gender" is relevant in the sphere of things. While women (in the
US) have individual (sexual) freedom and are taught the same in school
and get a lot of help from a legal perspective in case of abuse, I
still wonder if she has it all !!  Purely from a gender perspective
(sans political agendas), it was strange to see the sexist (my fathers
words) attitude towards Hillary Clinton (would a coloured woman's
laughter have been called a cackle?) or the insistence of portraying
the perfect family (Sarah Palin?) at the helm.  It was strange to see
the higher standards a female leader was held to whilst a common woman
has complete personal freedom. The reverse is true in India where we
have men idolising and (literally) falling at the feet of women
leaders whose personal lives are anything but culturally traditional
as far as the usual definitions go.  This difference is inscrutable.

-- 
.

Reply via email to